During the Cuban Missile Crisis both sides risked further escalation into a WW3. However, under MAD, Wikipedia says:
By the time of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, both the United States and the Soviet Union had developed the capability of launching a nuclear-tipped missile from a submerged submarine, which completed the "third leg" of the nuclear triad weapons strategy necessary to fully implement the MAD doctrine. Having a three-branched nuclear capability eliminated the possibility that an enemy could destroy all of a nation's nuclear forces in a first-strike attack; this, in turn, ensured the credible threat of a devastating retaliatory strike against the aggressor, increasing a nation's nuclear deterrence.
So all that risk of escalation that resulted in the Cuban Missile Crisis appears to have served no real purpose, strategically? Then why did they do it?
What does the triad have to do with the presence of missiles in Cuba? Are you saying that USSR was foolish to deploy missiles, or are you saying that USA was foolish to react to the deployment?
Both. MAD was already in place, so the presence (or absence) of missiles didn't make a difference. Certainly not enough to risk an actual war.