When would it be over? A sneak attack that is ...

[geetrue]

What if Russia did the dirty deed?

You know finally launched an all out sneak attack on North America (meaning the good ole USA).

Firing first they wouldn't fool around, all known nuclear weapon stoarage sites would be targeted, Missouri for the B-2's on the ground, Montana for the B-1's.

Alaska, because how close they are to Russia. Washington state and Georgia for the homeports of many submarines that could fire from port if they had too.

Too many targets to discuss ... the real question to any war started in this manner (sneak attack) would be simply this:

When would it be over?

[AVGWarhawk]

I think all would have about 30 minutes to say goodbye to their loved ones and goodbye to this big mud ball well call Earth.

[Digital_Trucker]

Not until the last button had been pushed, and frankly I don't want to be around for it to be over. Just put me at ground zero for the first one.

[Oberon]

http://www.wiredprairie.us/journal/images/DefconStyle2_new.jpg

[Dowly]

Well, at first I'd watch telly for a few days for news of it. Then, when all seems to be lost for US, I'd call Happy Times;"Hey mate, you bring the weapons, I bring the beer?" and the war would be over in few hours. :p

[August]

The war (and everything else I guess) would be over about 1 nanosecond after our retaliatory strike landed.

After all they can target all the land bases they want, but that won't do squat to stop our missile subs from launching.

There's a reason why the cold war never went hot. Mutually Assured Destruction. It's more than just words...

[Platapus]

Well given where I work, I probably would not know we were attacked. Just suddenly....nothing.

At least I won't suffer much. :nope:

[RickC Sniper]

Didn't we debate this question for about 40 years or more?

[UnderseaLcpl]

If we're going down we're taking you all with us!!!!!

[Skybird]

It would be over the moment it began. If both players are nuclear powers, the only winning move is not to play.

[UnderseaLcpl]

It would be over the moment it began. If both players are nuclear powers, the only winning move is not to play.

Just like tic-tac-toe!:D

[Foxtrot]

Russia and USA can nuke each other as much as they want.
Just leave Monaco alone!!!

[Jimbuna]

The war (and everything else I guess) would be over about 1 nanosecond after our retaliatory strike landed.

After all they can target all the land bases they want, but that won't do squat to stop our missile subs from launching.

There's a reason why the cold war never went hot. Mutually Assured Destruction. It's more than just words...

Agreed.....pretty nigh on impossible to track the underwater counterstrike.

[sergbuto]

One thing is for sure, Africa would enjoy the best fireworks in history :know:
...and will have an opportunity to see snow for the first time, I guess.

[Jimbuna]

Plenty of sandy beaches to holiday on.....in a thousand years or so :lol:

[Sailor Steve]

There's a reason why the cold war never went hot. Mutually Assured Destruction. It's more than just words...
Best point so far.

Pat Bagley, a political cartoonist here in Salt Lake, once published a book of cartoons titled We Survive World War Three and You Give Us Light Beer? One of his cartoons showed two guys opening the hatch from a bunker and peeking out at the devastation everywhere. The caption is "I think we won."

[Frame57]

Yep! You would have a landscape like Chuck Heston found in the movie Planet of the Apes. My luck would be that the apes would be liberal democrats.:D

[joegrundman]

Well that will never do. The Republicans must be aware of the chimp gap! Start conservative indoctrination of chimpanzees today!

[Schöneboom]

A select few will survive in the underground cities...

General "Buck" Turgidson: Doctor, you mentioned the ratio of ten women to each man. Now, wouldn't that necessitate the abandonment of the so-called monogamous sexual relationship, I mean, as far as men were concerned?

Dr. Strangelove: Regrettably, yes. But it is, you know, a sacrifice required for the future of the human race. I hasten to add that since each man will be required to do prodigious... service along these lines, the women will have to be selected for their sexual characteristics which will have to be of a highly stimulating nature.

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/6263/drstrangeloveek7.gif

[August]

Peter Sellers! :up:

[nikimcbee]

Didn't we debate this question for about 40 years or more?

Talk about old thread.:rotfl: I guess if you live within 30 miles of the blast zone, you've got problems. how fast could we mobilize? (I mean get the message out that the missles are on the way.

fortunatly i found this video that will save us all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_tKAg5KIuQ

[rifleman13]

Didn't we debate this question for about 40 years or more?
Talk about old thread.:rotfl: I guess if you live within 30 miles of the blast zone, you've got problems. how fast could we mobilize? (I mean get the message out that the missles are on the way.

fortunatly i found this video that will save us all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_tKAg5KIuQ
Yes, we can do that...:up:
But what about the radioactive fallout? :arrgh!:

[nikimcbee]

Didn't we debate this question for about 40 years or more?
Talk about old thread.:rotfl: I guess if you live within 30 miles of the blast zone, you've got problems. how fast could we mobilize? (I mean get the message out that the missles are on the way.

fortunatly i found this video that will save us all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_tKAg5KIuQ
Yes, we can do that...:up:
But what about the radioactive fallout? :arrgh!:

Where do you think they get pixie dust from?

[Task Force]

Couldnt the united states create a eletronic sheild that distroys the missels eletronic systems and have it go back where it came.:D If they are targeting sub bases, There is one in the city I live in not even 10 miles away.:o

[Skybird]

There's a reason why the cold war never went hot. Mutually Assured Destruction. It's more than just words...
Best point so far.

Pat Bagley, a political cartoonist here in Salt Lake, once published a book of cartoons titled We Survive World War Three and You Give Us Light Beer? One of his cartoons showed two guys opening the hatch from a bunker and peeking out at the devastation everywhere. The caption is "I think we won."

Reminds of an old Amiga game, named Nuclear War. In the end, there was an animation of a little dwarf men hopping around with the arms raised and yelling and dancing and shouting in extasy - with the surface of the earth being a dark grey smoldering ruin and everything flat and of ashes and black cold lava, and the tiny little man laughs "I won, I won!"

[Kapitan_Phillips]

It would be over the moment it began. If both players are nuclear powers, the only winning move is not to play.
Best. Movie. Ever.



Would you like to play a game? :88)

http://www.imsai.net/New-WOPR-1.jpg

[Digital_Trucker]

It would be over the moment it began. If both players are nuclear powers, the only winning move is not to play.
Best. Movie. Ever.



Would you like to play a game? :88)
<pic snipped to save bandwidth, and besides, it's right up there above me>

I can't see those words without hearing them in WOPRs "voice". The thought still sends chills up and down my spine that we're getting closer and closer to the world that movie portrayed (see the rat brain cell controlled robot thread).:hmm:

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Greetings, Professor Falken :smug::lol:

[joea]

Russia and USA can nuke each other as much as they want.
Just leave Monaco alone!!!

Hopefully, the problem is will fallout leave Monaco alone? :know:

[Frame57]

Well that will never do. The Republicans must be aware of the chimp gap! Start conservative indoctrination of chimpanzees today!I am thinking maybe the Replublicans were the Orangutans.

[Digital_Trucker]

Greetings, Professor Falken :smug::lol:

Stop it, you're scaring me:huh:

[Jimbuna]

http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/9324/falkenft1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/1672/wargameskt8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Digital_Trucker]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! I'm not going to be able to sleep tonight:damn:

[Jimbuna]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! I'm not going to be able to sleep tonight:damn:

Of course you will.

http://www.feebleminds-gifs.com/vampire-smiley%20face-88.gif

[Polak]

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1833364,00.html?xid=feed-cnn-topics

We are a bit closer, to seeing the big fireworks...
And the best thing of all is that I will have the best view of everyone here, since the missile installation will be built in my town.:-?

[Jimbuna]

Let us hope the missile system you get is accurate and reliable then :hmm:

[Digital_Trucker]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! I'm not going to be able to sleep tonight:damn:
Of course you will.

http://www.feebleminds-gifs.com/vampire-smiley%20face-88.gif
Oh, thanks, that helped a lot:p:D

As for the missile system, if I read it right, Russia is threatening to attack with missiles if an American anti-missile system is installed because America has nuclear weapons? Ok, so would they not attack if, say, we sold the anti-missile system to Barbados and they sold it to Poland?

[geetrue]

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1833364,00.html?xid=feed-cnn-topics

We are a bit closer, to seeing the big fireworks...
And the best thing of all is that I will have the best view of everyone here, since the missile installation will be built in my town.:-?

I was just thinking of you Polak what with Putin shaking his finger at Poland in the last couple of days. I hear Poland wants to go help Georgia ... odds are a bit lopsided. My prayers are with you.

Don't ya'll see what Putin is up to in a few more years? He wants all of Europe in his hands. In order to do this he has to defeat the USA and then coward the EU/Nato into doing things his way using Iran as a pawn.

The only way Putin can defeat the USA is a quick sneak attack, not a long planned one with chess mind the calculations that the USA would give up quickly under fear of more attacks from submarine and mobile launchers in the USSR.

Now Putin can rule the world that is left mainly Asia/Arabs/Europe who would all be in awe of what they did to the USA now left in smodering ruins. The world that was left would make treaties in a hurry.

Mr Puntin ex head of the KGB, fresh off of serving Russia as it's president for the last eight years and is now presently the premiere of Russia has raised his ugly head threating former nations aligned with his.

Watch Putin more than normal for signs of, "my balls are bigger than your balls' in his approach to protecting Russia from the west.

These are interesting times that try men's minds.

[Stealth Hunter]

Well, if a nuclear war does start... then I will commit suicide with my old revolver. I will not die of radiation poisoning.

[Platapus]

Well, if a nuclear war does start... then I will commit suicide with my old revolver. I will not die of radiation poisoning.


On the Beach?

The Book and the 1959 movie version, not the 2000 POS of course.

[joegrundman]

Don't ya'll see what Putin is up to in a few more years? He wants all of Europe in his hands. In order to do this he has to defeat the USA and then coward the EU/Nato into doing things his way using Iran as a pawn.

The only way Putin can defeat the USA is a quick sneak attack, not a long planned one with chess mind the calculations that the USA would give up quickly under fear of more attacks from submarine and mobile launchers in the USSR.

Now Putin can rule the world that is left mainly Asia/Arabs/Europe who would all be in awe of what they did to the USA now left in smodering ruins. The world that was left would make treaties in a hurry.



You know, geetrue, i wonder if this one of those apocalyptic fantasy things that some Christians seem to have strongly on their minds

Given you claim to have worked on boomers in the cold war, I'm surprised you hadn't realised, but the US has what is known as a second strike capability, and the ballistic missile submarines represent the key component of that capability.

The Russians/Soviets have/had the same capability

This is because both sides feared an unannounced first strike. What you call a sneak attack.

The existence of a comprehensive second strike capability was clearly advertised to the other side, because if the other side doesn't know about it, it does not function as a deterrence.

So this is the situation - Russia cannot capture Europe, as you suggest, without defeating the US - OK, i'm with you so far.

But the US cannot be destroyed in a nuclear first strike without Russia being destroyed in a second strike. Russia knows this.

Therefore russia will not attack the US in a first strike, and therefore Russia cannot capture all of Europe

Russia knows this, so therefore whatever Russia's aim is in this game, the eventual capture of Europe is not it.

I hope this makes you feel better:D

[Stealth Hunter]

Well, if a nuclear war does start... then I will commit suicide with my old revolver. I will not die of radiation poisoning.


On the Beach?

The Book and the 1959 movie version, not the 2000 POS of course.

THAT, sir, was a GREAT film. Best film of all time, IMO.

[Platapus]

Well, if a nuclear war does start... then I will commit suicide with my old revolver. I will not die of radiation poisoning.


On the Beach?

The Book and the 1959 movie version, not the 2000 POS of course.

THAT, sir, was a GREAT film. Best film of all time, IMO.

The 1959 version was one of the few movies I have ever watched that when it ended, my family just sat there quietly thinking... saying nothing for a few moments.

Wow what a story.... I wonder what I would do?

[geetrue]

You know, geetrue, i wonder if this one of those apocalyptic fantasy things that some Christians seem to have strongly on their minds

Given you claim to have worked on boomers in the cold war, I'm surprised you hadn't realised, but the US has what is known as a second strike capability, and the ballistic missile submarines represent the key component of that capability.

The Russians/Soviets have/had the same capability

This is because both sides feared an unannounced first strike. What you call a sneak attack.

The existence of a comprehensive second strike capability was clearly advertised to the other side, because if the other side doesn't know about it, it does not function as a deterrence.

So this is the situation - Russia cannot capture Europe, as you suggest, without defeating the US - OK, i'm with you so far.

But the US cannot be destroyed in a nuclear first strike without Russia being destroyed in a second strike. Russia knows this.

Therefore russia will not attack the US in a first strike, and therefore Russia cannot capture all of Europe

Russia knows this, so therefore whatever Russia's aim is in this game, the eventual capture of Europe is not it.

I hope this makes you feel better:D

True, I have the Book (that's what Muslims call the bible), but this is more along the lines, "what if".

What if Putin thought he could win a first strike war with the fear factor of another strike from Russia on the way if America didn't stand down ... they are on a ship building plan with their new oil wealth ... all of the players aren't on the field yet.

Yes, I am aware of America's second strike ability. I was part of that in the late 60's where we would recieve a message from the joint chiefs of staff to test our readiness. I often wondered if they really got out of bed to test our readiness or if they just came to work one morning and decided to push the "this is a test of all submarines on patrol", but anyway yes I know and thanks to the free public information on the internet and the freedom of our country anyone can pre-figure how many ships and aircraft and men the USA has ready at all times.

Just pretend were having coffee together, which I am right now having in the Pacfic Northwest, a good cup of Kona coffee in fact.

What would be left after a first strike capability?

What would be left after we launch against a first strike scenero?

Not much is my answer ... sure Russia would be hurting population wise, military wise I'm not too sure. They have those darn mobile ICBM launchers in reserve of which they probably wouldn't use on a first strike. They have submarines off the east and west coast within striking distance. Hell with a 4,500 mile range they can launch from port, reload and boogie out to sea before we could hit back.

The threat of more war is the fear factor and I hate to bring up this subject (just pretend I didn't), but who would be flying around in Airforce One? Who would have to make that decision to continue figting on or stand down?

You can prefigure a first strike target list just like I can ... all we have left are a few planes on the way to targets inside Russia with batteries of AM's waiting for them. FBM's are nice out at sea, but how many are in ports already demolished from a first strike.

The subs can't resupply themselves, right? We have orders to shoot a few missiles and then make a run for it in case they back track us.

We figured we had 15 minutes in the late 60's when we could only go 25 kts which is very noisey and costly to any listening devices nearby.

I fear a stand down order to protect what life is left in the USA. Colorado would be gone, ICBM's gone, air bases, naval ports, weapon storage places all gone. All US naval fleets are in easy range of the enemy near or on the way to the mother land of Russia.

Hence the question: When would a sneak attack war be over?"

Sure Russia would be hurting, but who in Russia would be left? Putin and his generals and his mind set.

Fear is the weapon of choice ... the weapon they use very well too.

Plus all of this is remote in just a few more years modern weapons would prevent a first strike by either nation.

Plus I liked Dr Strange Love with that guy jumping on the bomb in the B-52 and riding it down better than I did "On the Beach".

[Oberon]

Isn't a lot of it, particularly on the Russian side, automated? I know the Russkies have a Dead mans handle, it's possible the US has one too. I'd say that a retaliation was very likely.
Russia would launch a first strike to attempt to knock out silos and SAC airfields, SAC B-52s would scramble, depending on the lead up to the launch would depend on what readiness they were on, with a lot of US assets in Europe decommed it would be a very limited air based responsed.
ICBMs would launch, naturally, use them or lose them. The arc would cross and half an hour later mushrooms would start going up.
Now that's the military phase finished, military bases and command centers are gone or badly damaged, Kneecap is up with either the Pres or VP in. Then there's the slight pause and the leaders can negociate if they wish to prevent it from going to phase two which is what's left launching on cities, that's where the SLBMs and any airbourne SAC bombers come in IIRC. If the US backs down, then it ends there, and if they don't then a second wave of destruction occurs until both sides have nothing left to launch. THEN the war unofficially ends. Both sides will probably skirmish in the battlefield for a while, some tactical nukes being used, NATO will try to drive on Moscow or that mountain the Russkies have, and the Russkies will be trying to stop them, but many soldiers will have probably have had enough by then and tried to find a way home to see if their families are still alive. Then we're in On The Beach territory. :hmm:

[Jimbuna]

I'm starting to get the heebie geebies reading these last two posts :o

:lol:

[DeepIron]

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." ~ Albert EInstein

[OneToughHerring]

Not sure how long an all out nukefest would last, maybe days, maybe weeks. Most likely not months though. Kinda depends whose nuking who and is the other guy nuking back.

And generally about nukes, I know everyone is supposed to fear nukes etc. and that they are a kind of joker up the sleeve that some countries have. However lately I've started to think that most of the countries with the nuclear weapons might actually be more or less bluffing. They would not know what exactly would happen if they pushed those buttons. Maybe the missiles would blow up in their silos, who knows. The other guy might be able to shoot them down. Or the missiles wouldn't be that powerful in the end, the effects could be much more limited then they think etc.

Thing is, the so called balance of terror that nukes are supposed to bring is slowly beginning to erode. People are less and less afraid of them all the time. Hiroshima and Nagasaki happened a long time ago, or so people think. A country gets nukes and says "we will use them", eventually someone will say "well go ahead then". Also, under the guise of nukes being the ultimate weapon it makes the conventional weapons look tame and make their use more acceptable. 'Small, nuke-free wars' might take place more easily.

So I guess I'm saying that although nukes are supposed to bring a kind of sense of peace to the world their influence might actually be the opposite, they erode peoples desire for peace and make small conflicts more common etc. Total disarmament might be the key but so far no dice in that department.

[DeepIron]

Thing is, the so called balance of terror that nukes are supposed to bring is slowly beginning to erode. People are less and less afraid of them all the time.Well, I guess when one has lived under the threat of nuclear annihilation all their lives, the fear wears off somewhat...

What is scarier to me, is not nuclear war, it's a biological war...:shifty:

[geetrue]

Scares me too Deep Iron ... a threat from countries that have no airforce or nuclear navy or ICBM's I would think is the real threat from chemical/biological weapons.

USA and Russia both have these horrible weapons to be used for tactical use for the front lines when they are in danger of being run over, plus physiological warfare.

I have no way of knowing if warheads with these horrible weapons against mankind are already loaded and ready to go at a moments notice.

That's where my concerns come from. Would the USA use chemical/biological weapons if the enemy didn't use them first?

What if the nuclear sneak attack came first with a warning over the hot line that they will use chemical/biological weapons next if America doesn't lay down their arms?

I'm not talking John Wayne talk here, but practical talk ... it's not up to us anyway.

The call would be in the hands of the president or the vp with the latest information in his or her hands of cities and installations already destroyed.

I hope that day never comes, but if it does the commander in charge only has a few minutes to decide.
Fight on or stand down?

The deciscion is so great I think the powers that be in our country should make it ahead of time.
You don't even have to guess what Mr Putin would do if the USA struck first in a first strike ... Do you?


"If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out." – Will Rogers (1879-1935)

[Happy Times]

Putin isnt suicidal, he may have fantasies of being the new Peter the Great and some personality disorders, but im positive that starting a nuclear winter isnt a fantasy of his.

[geetrue]

Putin isnt suicidal, he may have fantasies of being the new Peter the Great and some personality disorders, but im positive that starting a nuclear winter isnt a fantasy of his.

Suicidal is a crazy thought too, uh?

What about these crazy thoughts:

Some of these are over a year old, but take a look at the inside of a mad man (so to speak)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1553593/Putin-in-nuclear-threat-against-Europe.html


President Vladimir Putin has sent a chilling message to world leaders on the eve of the GB summit with a threat to aim Russian nuclear missiles at European cities for the first time since the Cold War.
In comments that seemed calculated to cause consternation and division at Wednesday's meeting in Germany, the Russian leader said that American plans to erect a missile defence shield in Europe had left him with no choice but to retaliate.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-552759/Bush-supports-Nato-membership-bids-ex-Soviet-states-despite-Putins-anger.html

Russia is fiercely opposed to the eastward expansion of Nato. George Bush backs NATO membership of Ukraine and Georgia despite Putin's anger


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/comments/view?f=/c/a/2008/02/24/INJUV6IU3.DTL


It doesn't take much to rile Vladimir Putin, the irascible, autocratic Russian leader. But nothing the Bush administration has done in the last seven years has angered Putin more than the proposal to base anti-missile...


http://www.google.com/search?q=Putin%27s+anger&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7DKUS
Vladimir V. Putin transferred the customs service from the control of ... two of the senators now facing recall, causing Mr. Putin's anger. ...

[Happy Times]

Sure, his personality raises threats in certain situations. I would still consider Russian theories in geopolitics a bigger threat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Dugin

[OneToughHerring]

I think maybe Israel is a more likely candidate to use nukes than Russia. Hell, even the US might at one point think that rather then looking for volunteers it's cheaper to just nuke the Middle-East.

[Falkirion]

http://www.wiredprairie.us/journal/images/DefconStyle2_new.jpg
Ah DEFCON, Everybody dies. Great game.