Political Crossfire Forums

[Scopek]

Imagine that you're in the cold war, and you're the president of the United States.

The Soviet Union just launched it's entire stock of nuclear weapons towards every major city in America. Knowing that your country's days are definately numbered, and that if you launch a counter attack it will only increase the odds of the end of humanity via nuclear winter.

Now, do you launch nuclear weapons back? Or is the possibility that humanity will survive if you dont counter attack more important?




I think it was a high school teacher of mine that originally asked that to one of my US History class, it can spark some interesting debates.

[JayDubya]

We're in the Cold War timeframe...

Assuming humanity survives, the USSR will be able to run rampant, unopposed across the globe.

The Soviets are capable of building more nuclear weapons and have shown the resolve to completely obliterate other nations.

Well, s**t, this is a catch-22 from hell isn't it. I'd say fire. If the predictions of nuclear winter are accurate, the Russians would have basically destroyed all life on the planet anyway. If the predictions are wrong, then the surviving nations shouldn't have to welcome the USSR as their new overlords.

[Fido]

Scopek wrote: Imagine that you're in the cold war, and you're the president of the United States.

The Soviet Union just launched it's entire stock of nuclear weapons towards every major city in America. Knowing that your country's days are definately numbered, and that if you launch a counter attack it will only increase the odds of the end of humanity via nuclear winter.

Now, do you launch nuclear weapons back? Or is the possibility that humanity will survive if you dont counter attack more important?




I think it was a high school teacher of mine that originally asked that to one of my US History class, it can spark some interesting debates.

I would launch a counter strike. Everyone has failed the lessons on humanities and relationship management, and there is going to be a physics lesson in about 15 minutes -and the Russians are invited. Then I would grab a lawn chair, my sunglasses, and some sunscreen and get a place in the rose garden. This is the end of my life, and the end of all I know; and thank god in heaven that I am sober, and not on life supports so I can enjoy every moment of it. Fido

[Nice Geod]

I don't think I would fire. I would much rather live under the U.S.S.R than be dead. The U.S.S.R would pass eventually, just like all governments do.

[cup2006Sens]

I would order every civilian and military aircraft in the country to immediately get in the air and fly towards South America and hope that more Americans survive. I would then address the world on TV and radio and tell everyone to get as far from cities and military bases as possible and that the Russians have launched a large nuclear attack against the USA and that we have chosen in the interests of humanity to not retaliate but that any who survive this day of infamy should strive to their dying day to hold those responsible to account for the most horrific act in human history.

Any of the military that survived the attack would regroup in the Andes or in Brazil or Australia and figure out how to take out the Soviets leadership without launching hundreds of nuclear weapons.

[JayDubya]

cup2006Sens wrote: I would order every civilian and military aircraft in the country to immediately get in the air and fly towards South America and hope that more Americans survive. I would then address the world on TV and radio and tell everyone to get as far from cities and military bases as possible and that the Russians have launched a large nuclear attack against the USA and that we have chosen in the interests of humanity to not retaliate but that any who survive this day of infamy should strive to their dying day to hold those responsible to account for the most horrific act in human history.

Any of the military that survived the attack would regroup in the Andes or in Brazil or Australia and figure out how to take out the Soviets leadership without launching hundreds of nuclear weapons.

Amusingly, given the frigid normative conditions in Russia, they would be the first to die from such an attack, as people huddled for warmth around the equator under a darkened sky.

Edit: Okay, I think I just unintentionally lied... that wasn't amusing at all. It's semi-poetic justice, but really nothing could stop them rolling over everything on their way to the equator.

Edit #2: That, or we could build tunnels, yes. And select lots of women based on favorable sexual characteristics...



* * *

Here's another good one, from Dr. Strangelove.

The Russian Doomsday Device in that film removed the question of retaliation - retaliation was automatic.

Unfortunately, it didn't do the Soviets any good because they didn't tell anyone they had it.

If nuclear war is stalemated only by the prospect that firing one at another nuclear power means nuclear retaliation, and thus, the high likelihood of Earth's total destruction and the end of humankind... perhaps the creation of such a device, insane as it is, makes an odd sort of logic.

[MLBrandow]

Obviously you fire back.

[Demonic Spoon]

MLBrandow wrote: Obviously you fire back.

Why? So you can kill billions of innocent people who had nothing to do with it?



I'd get the hell out of the US and tell everyone I know to GTFO too.

I would then sit back and watch as the Soviet government come toppling down as damn near everyone in the world turns on them.

[JayDubya]

Doesn't it only take like 30 minutes total for an ICBM to get from point A to point B? Once those things are fired, it's too late to do anything. How far do you think you can actually get in 30 minutes if EVERYONE in every major city in the U.S. panicked and was trying to escape?

If you live in L.A., New York, Houston, etc, you may as well just get out the lawn chairs for your front row seat to the apocalypse.

The only people with any chance of surviving would be people in the rural, middle of nowhere far from any major cities, or people already in the air.

* * *

And yes, I'd hope that Moscow, Stalingrad (now Volgograd), and St. Petersburg were wiped off the map, too.

[Demonic Spoon]

Why? What's the purpose in annihilating innocents?

[Onevote]

Scopek wrote: Imagine that you're in the cold war, and you're the president of the United States.

The Soviet Union just launched it's entire stock of nuclear weapons towards every major city in America. Knowing that your country's days are definately numbered, and that if you launch a counter attack it will only increase the odds of the end of humanity via nuclear winter.

Now, do you launch nuclear weapons back? Or is the possibility that humanity will survive if you dont counter attack more important?




I think it was a high school teacher of mine that originally asked that to one of my US History class, it can spark some interesting debates. If they launch thier entire stock of war heads it's game over! I would launch in turn, we can all sort it out in front of St. Peter!

[whatchawant?]

Party in Air Force One. Cause we all know the show is over. If we launched, if they launched, alone either side's arsenal is enough to completely irradiate the globe. So I would be in Air Force one with about twenty strippers packed with Dom and good eats and we would party till the fuel ran out. It would be on like Donkey Kong man. Screw all that humanity crap im gonna service my ID till the end. Thats how you go man. What the hell would i be able to do if that happened? Nothin, aint nothin i can do against thousands of megatons crashing down. Just get me some ass and get a buzz and hope for a peaceful end.

[FinnMacCool]

I wouldn't launch a counter attack with missles. Doing that would just cause more civillian lives. Might as well just try and use our money to recover instead of using it to kill people.

[Joshua_Sinclair]

I wouldn't fire. Although both sides do have big arsenals. Their not big enough to cover the whole Earth in the blast radia. The only thing to come for the people in rural and suburban areas would be nuclear winter. Also if the USSR now Russia ruled the world they would eventually fall. People always do what is in there own intrest. Not for some ideal like communism or even for "mother russia." If it came down to it and you had a wife and kids would you (A.) Go agenst your own country to save your wife and kid(s) or other family. Or (B.) would you forget your family in the name of your country. I would chose option (A.) because there is no free United States without people that will stick up for whats in there own intrest. Thats basic capitalism.

[Ophelia]

It's just human to be egocentric and seek revenge.

You shoot me? I might as well shoot you back, I do not care what happens afterward, I won't be here to see it.

[The Comrade]

i don't think launching them or not launching them would really make a difference. russias nuclear stokpile was immense during the cold war so they pretty much ended the world themselves. i don't think our 24,000 warheads wouldn't really make a difference.

[Jufarius87]

the question is irrelevant...... not because it doesnt have profound moral and philosophical implications, but rather that if i were president there would have been a functioning missle defense system waiting to intercept nukes.....

however, given the options i would fire, i agree with the previous post that if the nuclear winter theory was true, we'd all be screwed anyways, however if it was not true, we'd might as well protect everyone else and screw the soviets while we still had the chance

[Lord_Drago]

This is a most interesting question...hmmm...i would fire only one missile strait into there heart...Moscow and hope civilization can survive the chaos that will ensue.

[LostSoul3412]

JayDubya wrote: Once those things are fired, it's too late to do anything.

What about the Star Wars program? :lol:

[Izzibeth]

an interesting thing i was told by a professor at one point is that actually, for about 15 minutes, we thought that had happened once. the computers glitched and our government was under the impression that Russia had launched all of its nuclear weapons at us. apparently, we were about 4 minutes away from getting the order from the President when it was found out to be a glitch in the system. and we were all saved. because the general reaction, apparently, is that all of our missiles would be launched as well. it's called Mutually Assured Destruction and it is the only reason why WMDs are not used.

(of course, now i have to look it up and see if it's true.. the whole russia glitch...cuz i forgot about it until now)



ah, here we go...

Quote: One of the more publicized U.S. false alarms took place in November 1979. A technician at NORAD -- the North American Air Defense Command -- accidentally placed a training tape into the main systems at NORAD's Cheyenne Mountain Complex in Colorado. That mistake made NORAD's early warning system computer think the United States was undergoing a massive Soviet missile attack -- and it responded by alerting NORAD officials.

Within minutes, they realized the error. The incident was one of five missile warning system failures that took place over an eight-month period between 1979 and 1980. It also prompted a government reassessment of NORAD and its operations.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/12/spotlight/