If it is that tricky, lets dismantle them in Iran and North Korea.

__________________
Neither am I the means to any end others may wish to accomplish. I am not a tool for their use. I am not a servant of their needs. I am not a bandage for their wounds. I am not a sacrifice on their altars. ... I owe nothing to my brothers, nor do I gather debts from them. I ask no one to live for me, nor do I live for others. I covet no mans soul, nor is my soul theirs to covet.

Ayn Rand, Anthem.

So we don't need anything extra to do what we were able to do 20 years ago

That's not exactly accurate. Even at 10,000 warheads per side, neither side could completely destroy the other. Unless scientists were right about the climate change from such an exchange being catastrophic.

But from a purely firepower standpoint, 10,000 nukes only takes care of about 75% of industrial and military targets. Most estimates I read in the 80s figured on 90% of industrial targets being destroyed, 40% of the population of the US and 20% of Russia's population killed, and 60% of the military assets on each side destroyed.

__________________
chicken butt