Of course 2 available methods is never more secure than 1. A state that wants a nuclear warhead, however would be foolish to vie for a new method. Polywell is proliferating, however, given a state with the technology to build Fusion Reactors and wants a substantial nuclear arsenal. It is comical to parlay that into "lets be dumb.... for our own security!"... then pretend our rejecting useful technologies adds to our security. The Al Gore method of security, is similar to the ostrich method.MSimon wrote:There has been considerable discussion of this topic here during the 2+ (is that all?) years this board has been here.New technologies only need to be a higher threshold of difficulty in making nuclear weapons, over the tried and true methods already established.
The general thought is that a BFR would make proliferation some easier. Building a BFR (once it is known to work) will be easier and less hazardous than building a fission nuke. And it turns on and turns off at the flick of a switch. So unlike a nuke you don't have to plan for continuous neutron flux while loading and unloading starting material. And 3 days (Xe poisoning) between restarts. And you don't have to worry about criticality accidents.
"I want 500 nuclear warheads dang it, or heads will roll. Where's that Polywell salesman?"