Does this count as a plot hole?

SPOILER ALERT FOR ANYONE WHO STILL HASN'T SEEN IT


I know this is a Bond movie and it's not suppose to hold up to any kind of scrutiny, but I was just curious, did Stromberg need to steel a second submarine? It seems to me that the first sub had more than one ICBM on it, so he could have stolen one sub, launched one ICBM towards NYC, and then launched a second one toward Moscow, and that would have been the same thing, in his plan. The two nations would still attack each other, thinking one another did it. There was no need to steel a second sub for his plan to work.

Unless I am wrong?

If there are any Bond fans on here that still haven't seen The spy who loved me perhaps they are on the wrong forum?
Guess the writers/producers just wanted to add to the spectacle, the submarine hold built at pinewood was the largest film set ever built and i guess having two submarines made best use of it and added to the spectacle of the scene? but no i s'pose Stromberg could have carried out his dastardly deed with one submarine...flash bastard!

Stromberg stole one sub of each nationality to pit them against one another. Thus the strikes would totally look like the other side was striking first and thus his nefarious plot would instigate Armageddon. That's what he's going on about in his "how much? What ever do you mean Mr. Bond?" speech on the Liparus.
That line was written and intended as a shocker because for the first time 007 was up against someone completely insane and without reach.

So why did Blofeld bother hijacking both American and Russian Space capsules? He could have started WWIII with only one...oh, no, wait a minute, that's entirely different - wait, no it isn't.

hegottheboot wrote:

Stromberg stole one sub of each nationality to pit them against one another. Thus the strikes would totally look like the other side was striking first and thus his nefarious plot would instigate Armageddon. That's what he's going on about in his "how much? What ever do you mean Mr. Bond?" speech on the Liparus.
That line was written and intended as a shocker because for the first time 007 was up against someone completely insane and without reach.

But the thing is, how would they know which submarine an ICBM comes from? It's like you can tell after a nuclear explosion who made the bomb? So how would they know it was from an enemy sub compared to one of their own, which they mysteriously would have lost contact with?

ironpony wrote:

hegottheboot wrote:

Stromberg stole one sub of each nationality to pit them against one another. Thus the strikes would totally look like the other side was striking first and thus his nefarious plot would instigate Armageddon. That's what he's going on about in his "how much? What ever do you mean Mr. Bond?" speech on the Liparus.
That line was written and intended as a shocker because for the first time 007 was up against someone completely insane and without reach.

But the thing is, how would they know which submarine an ICBM comes from?  It's like you can tell after a nuclear explosion who made the bomb?  So how would they know it was from an enemy sub compared to one of their own, which they mysteriously would have lost contact with?

Just roll with it

Ironpony doesn't believe in 'just rolling with it', lol ... the original post of this thread even says that the Bonds 'don't hold up to any sort of scrutiny', but that doesn't stop him.

Does this count as a spoiler?