You sound like Edward Teller (one of the architects of the fusion bomb. Disclaimer: I met the man through a mutual friend, regret never asking him about Dr. Strangelove — but it seemed a bit rude to do so.)
There was a time when a move like this might have made sense - but that ended when Stalin got a fusion weapon (I'd say 'had one developed', but it seems more like he had the design stolen - without getting into the guilt/innocence of the Rosenbergs).
Agreed that the US nuclear arsenal vastly overmatches the RF one, particularly given the likely lack of maintenance the RF stock has seen.
But consider what could happen if just one percent of the RF ICBMS are functional. Each of those is capable of carrying multiple warheads (MIRVs), each of those fusion. Now, given the probable lack of maintenance, most of them will not be able to start the fusion reaction, but some might - and an H-bomb minus the H is still an A-bomb. And 15 minutes is enough time for them to get most of their ICBMs in the air - the ones that work, anyway.
You're talking about taking out their launchers. You know they move them around? We've a bit more chance of getting them all than they have of getting all our Boomers, but it's still unlikely we get 100%. Teller was talking about a 'decapitation strike', removing Moscow and the Supreme Soviet from the map. The Sovs countered this with a system of signal rockets. Once those go up, there's no stopping the general launch. Dylan Combellick tells me that they're still using a system like this rather than a network that can re-route around damage (like Arpanet).
I'm reluctant to take a chance where the upside is that the RF is no longer a threat to Europe - which is going to happen by 2050 anyway given their demographics - and the downside is the destruction of a number of American and European cities and deaths ranging from tens of thousands to millions.
Just. think. it. through.