![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was wondering at about what point that the United States going to war with
the Soviet Union become an almost certain act of mutual destruction. I'm assuming it sometime in 1960's or 70's, since what I've seen of the Soviet nuclear capability before that point doesn't seem to be all that threatening. It looks like they would have been really bad for us Americans, but not unsurvivable. -- Goliath & Wildwing's Storage Room http://anatidae.homestead.com/ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
james_anatidae wrote:
I was wondering at about what point that the United States going to war with the Soviet Union become an almost certain act of mutual destruction. I'm assuming it sometime in 1960's or 70's, since what I've seen of the Soviet nuclear capability before that point doesn't seem to be all that threatening. It looks like they would have been really bad for us Americans, but not unsurvivable. For both sides, it became unthinkable when a first strike had little chance of knocking out the opponents nuclear strikeforce. As long as there was a realistic possiblity that a surprise attack could wipe out US or USSR strategic nuclear weapons, then I'm some on both sides gave it serious consideration. So I'd say MAD became a fact when both sides had deployed sufficient nuclear armed submarines able to roam the seas largely unseen and hence unstoppable in a first strike. -- Nik Simpson |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Nik Simpson" wrote in message ... james_anatidae wrote: I was wondering at about what point that the United States going to war with the Soviet Union become an almost certain act of mutual destruction. I'm assuming it sometime in 1960's or 70's, since what I've seen of the Soviet nuclear capability before that point doesn't seem to be all that threatening. It looks like they would have been really bad for us Americans, but not unsurvivable. For both sides, it became unthinkable when a first strike had little chance of knocking out the opponents nuclear strikeforce. As long as there was a realistic possiblity that a surprise attack could wipe out US or USSR strategic nuclear weapons, then I'm some on both sides gave it serious consideration. So I'd say MAD became a fact when both sides had deployed sufficient nuclear armed submarines able to roam the seas largely unseen and hence unstoppable in a first strike. Even before that the B-52's flying on alert ensured that the Soviets couldnt rely on a first strike knocking out the US strategic response. Keith ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Keith Willshaw wrote:
"Nik Simpson" wrote in message ... james_anatidae wrote: I was wondering at about what point that the United States going to war with the Soviet Union become an almost certain act of mutual destruction. I'm assuming it sometime in 1960's or 70's, since what I've seen of the Soviet nuclear capability before that point doesn't seem to be all that threatening. It looks like they would have been really bad for us Americans, but not unsurvivable. For both sides, it became unthinkable when a first strike had little chance of knocking out the opponents nuclear strikeforce. As long as there was a realistic possiblity that a surprise attack could wipe out US or USSR strategic nuclear weapons, then I'm some on both sides gave it serious consideration. So I'd say MAD became a fact when both sides had deployed sufficient nuclear armed submarines able to roam the seas largely unseen and hence unstoppable in a first strike. Even before that the B-52's flying on alert ensured that the Soviets couldnt rely on a first strike knocking out the US strategic response. AIR, the "dew line" was established to give us 20 minutes notice of inbound Soviet missiles, wasn't it? If so, I think the actual time when MAD became our joint policies would have been in the middle fifties, or perhaps even a little bit earlier, to coincide with our government having learned that the Soviets had stolen our nuclear secrets and were acting on them. George Z. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "George Z. Bush" wrote: AIR, the "dew line" was established to give us 20 minutes notice of inbound Soviet missiles, wasn't it? If so, I think the actual time when MAD became our joint policies would have been in the middle fifties, or perhaps even a little bit earlier, to coincide with our government having learned that the Soviets had stolen our nuclear secrets and were acting on them. George Z. The DEW line was for air-breathers (bombers in those days) now replaced by North Warning. BMEWS (Ballistic Missile Warning System) was the missile warning system based in Alaska, Greenland and the U.K. Dave |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dave Holford wrote:
"George Z. Bush" wrote: AIR, the "dew line" was established to give us 20 minutes notice of inbound Soviet missiles, wasn't it? If so, I think the actual time when MAD became our joint policies would have been in the middle fifties, or perhaps even a little bit earlier, to coincide with our government having learned that the Soviets had stolen our nuclear secrets and were acting on them. George Z. The DEW line was for air-breathers (bombers in those days) now replaced by North Warning. BMEWS (Ballistic Missile Warning System) was the missile warning system based in Alaska, Greenland and the U.K. Picky! Picky! So when did BMEWS become operational? We're trying to figure out when MAD became the joint policies of the US and the USSR. You got any input? George Z. Dave |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
"George Z. Bush" writes: AIR, the "dew line" was established to give us 20 minutes notice of inbound Soviet missiles, wasn't it? If so, I think the actual time when MAD became our joint policies would have been in the middle fifties, or perhaps even a little bit earlier, to coincide with our government having learned that the Soviets had stolen our nuclear secrets and were acting on them. The DEW Line was the line of conventional radar stations roughly along the Arctic Circle. Not much good against ICBMs, but you'd get at least an hour's "heads up" for a Bison/Bear/B-52 type transonic bomber (and at least 2 hours vs. something like a Tu-4) reaching the boundaries of the Contigous Radar Cover that began with the Mid-Canada Line and ran all the way down to the U.S. Southern borders. They'd have to grind their way down for an equivalant length of time to have any worthwhile targets to hit - most of Candada's ppopulation, and thus anything worth hitting, is within 200 miles of the U.S. border. Once they hit the contiguous radar cover, theyre'd be enough tracking information to allow them to be intercepted by whatever NORAD had at the time. And there was an awful lot of NORAD, back then. When SAGE came along in the late '50s, it became almost impossible to saturate the defences, since the weak link - Human controllers sending voice commands to the Interceptors - wasn't as important. I wouldn't have wanted to in the Soviet Long Range Aviation, that's for sure. That's one of the things that pushed the Soviets toward ICBMs rather than somewhat bigger/faster winged aircraft (M-50 anyone?) that didn't have a much better chance against the defences than teh slower airplanes. BMEWS was the response to the threat of ICBMs coming over the Pole. But, in some ways, we were still further along than the Soviets wer in building and deploying useful ICBMs and SLBMs. Kruschev was great at showing off spactacular feats of missilery, and veiled, and not so veiled threats to use his missiles, but that wasn't backed up by what was in the field. Consider, if you will, that if the Soviets had had a viable ICBM or SLBM force in 1962, they wouldn't have tried putting the short-range missiles in Cuba. That whole business grew out of the Soviet's knowledge that they couldn't effectively strike. (Either First Strike or Second Strike) -- Pete Stickney A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures. -- Daniel Webster |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Peter Stickney wrote:
In article , "George Z. Bush" writes: AIR, the "dew line" was established to give us 20 minutes notice of inbound Soviet missiles, wasn't it? If so, I think the actual time when MAD became our joint policies would have been in the middle fifties, or perhaps even a little bit earlier, to coincide with our government having learned that the Soviets had stolen our nuclear secrets and were acting on them. The DEW Line was the line of conventional radar stations roughly along the Arctic Circle. Not much good against ICBMs, but you'd get at least an hour's "heads up" for a Bison/Bear/B-52 type transonic bomber (and at least 2 hours vs. something like a Tu-4) reaching the boundaries of the Contigous Radar Cover that began with the Mid-Canada Line and ran all the way down to the U.S. Southern borders. They'd have to grind their way down for an equivalant length of time to have any worthwhile targets to hit - most of Candada's ppopulation, and thus anything worth hitting, is within 200 miles of the U.S. border. Once they hit the contiguous radar cover, theyre'd be enough tracking information to allow them to be intercepted by whatever NORAD had at the time. And there was an awful lot of NORAD, back then. When SAGE came along in the late '50s, it became almost impossible to saturate the defences, since the weak link - Human controllers sending voice commands to the Interceptors - wasn't as important. I wouldn't have wanted to in the Soviet Long Range Aviation, that's for sure. That's one of the things that pushed the Soviets toward ICBMs rather than somewhat bigger/faster winged aircraft (M-50 anyone?) that didn't have a much better chance against the defences than teh slower airplanes. BMEWS was the response to the threat of ICBMs coming over the Pole. But, in some ways, we were still further along than the Soviets wer in building and deploying useful ICBMs and SLBMs. Kruschev was great at showing off spactacular feats of missilery, and veiled, and not so veiled threats to use his missiles, but that wasn't backed up by what was in the field. Consider, if you will, that if the Soviets had had a viable ICBM or SLBM force in 1962, they wouldn't have tried putting the short-range missiles in Cuba. That whole business grew out of the Soviet's knowledge that they couldn't effectively strike. (Either First Strike or Second Strike) That was all very interesting, and certainly did much to refresh flagging memories. However, it still didn't resolve the starting date for MAD, because it ignored the ongoing SAC airborne alerts and the nuclear armed subs roaming the oceans. I personally have the feeling that the MAD doctrine evolved from recognition of those SAC policies by the Soviets, which would place the date at or before construction of the DEW line. All guesswork on my part. What do you think? George Z. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"George Z. Bush" wrote in message ...
AIR, the "dew line" was established to give us 20 minutes notice of inbound Soviet missiles, wasn't it? If so, I think the actual time when MAD became our joint policies would have been in the middle fifties, or perhaps even a little bit earlier, to coincide with our government having learned that the Soviets had stolen our nuclear secrets and were acting on them. George Z. If you can point to an official statement from either the whitehouse or the kremlin that MAD was a "policy", I'd be very interested. My understanding, from it being beaten into my skull by someone in the US thinktank industry, is that MAD was NOT a policy, it was a highly abbraviated expression of the consequences of a large scale nuclear exchange. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|