Cooperation with evil - nuclear weapons

[undead_rat]

Else, of course, the Soviet program for a nuclear weapon, mused on in 1940, started in 1942, aided by the successful Soviet espionage programs at Los Alamos (inter alia) featuring many star spies, (Klaus Fuchs: Morris Cohen, Allan Nunn May, and a cast of less than thousands, not to forget the junior over-achiever, Ted Hall), which had the Soviets up date on each step of the process, down to David Greenglass’ rough sketches of the implosion lens for the plutonium weapon, would have produced nothing and First Lightning would never have occurred, since the 5 year gap would have caused the Soviets to end their crusade for nuclear weapons, from boredom, instead of striving to overcome the raw materials problems and the labor shortage would never have been put into Beria’s hands, said problems plus the general state of Soviet industry, post war, being so similar to that of the US, in the war.

Life is so simple.

What I am suggesting is that the USA should have reserved its first use of the A-bomb for attacking Soviet nuclear facilities if the USSR had insisted on continuing with its own development of nuclear weapons.

 

[jfz178]

there is room in this world for only one nuclear armed power. Anthing else leads to the disaster of global nuclear war. The USA had its chance to become the world’s sole nuclear weapon state, but it wasted that chance by A-bombing Japan.

Disagree. I would say that that the US established itself as the sole nuclear power by bombing Japan. Where the US screwed up was not protecting its nuclear secrets. But now things have come full circle. We are not technically the sole nuclear power, but we are by far the dominant one. Our arsenal is so far advanced that no one could stand against us and they all know it. An exchange would be terrible, no doubt and we should avoid it at all costs. But it would not result in world-wide destruction. That is a myth popularized by the movies.

The US was right to bomb Japan. It is right to keep its nuclear arsenal. And regardless of your arguments, it will keep its nuclear arsenal. So you better start praying. Meanwhile, even though I have been trained on what these weapons can do and been hands on with them, I will sleep peacefully.

 

[undead_rat]

undead_rat:

there is room in this world for only one nuclear armed power. Anthing else leads to the disaster of global nuclear war. The USA had its chance to become the world’s sole nuclear weapon state, but it wasted that chance by A-bombing Japan.

Disagree. I would say that that the US established itself as the sole nuclear power by bombing Japan. Where the US screwed up was not protecting its nuclear secrets. But now things have come full circle. We are not technically the sole nuclear power, but we are by far the dominant one. Our arsenal is so far advanced that no one could stand against us and they all know it. An exchange would be terrible, no doubt and we should avoid it at all costs. But it would not result in world-wide destruction. That is a myth popularized by the movies.

The USA is not “by far the dominant” nuclear power. And the USA did not “succeed in establishing itself as the sole nuclear power by A-bombing Japan.” That idea is just silly. That A-bombing caused the USSR to double its own efforts while the backlash caused the USA’s development to languish.

The Russians have a powerful nuclear strategic force. It is too late to try to take out this force with a first strike. The USA should have used its advantage in having first possession of nuclear weapons to prevent the USSR from ever succeeding in their development. Now the cat is out of the bag and the only alternative to global nuclear war is unilateral nuclear disarmament.

 

[neophyte]

How does the context change the fact that Adm. William Leahy, President Truman’s Chief of Staff, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, and General Douglas MacArthur, Commander of US Army forces in the Pacific all said that Japan was ready to surrender?

That’s already been discussed.

 

[GKMotley]

Between the end of the war, and the advent of the LeMay era at SAC (that is, just about the time that lightening first struck), following the sacking of Kenney, we would have been hard pressed to nuc anything significant, both in terms of delivery systems (that is, silverplate modified B-29s) and actual weapons). Robert Ferrell’s little book HARRY S. TRUMAN AND THE COLD WAR REVISIONISTS (a Christmas present from me to me) touches briefly on the matter, which is really beyond the bounds of my hobby obsession (this particular one of my multitude of biblio-manias, that is). The Soviets were big boys in the world military arena The US had, as usual, gone back to quieter days. But I do like your Pattonish determination, and advocating a subject and charges against Truman, that is one of the significant threads in revisionism’s.tattered garment.

 

[GKMotley]

Alperovitz is the dean of revisionists. Ham is an amateur, prolix and padded.

Hasegawa is a middle of the road revisionist, who stays friends with Richard Frank.

Lifton/Mitchellis similar to Alperovitz, but less scholarly and thinner.

All of them are sitting cheek to jowl on the bookcase.

The subject of the bombs is an on-going controversy, and as in all on-going controversies, one needs to read around the subject from all angles, including the revisionaries. I do. And conclude (having an informed opinion), that Frank and his school is the winner.

You might add Sherwin’s A WORLD DESTROYED to your list of inadequate treatments of the subject. A short list of recommended titles on the side of the Angels is somewhere far above.

 

[GKMotley]

So do I. I have a relative still on active duty in the business.

 

[neophyte]

You might try reading:

The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb (New ed.)

by Gar Alperovitz

and

Hiroshima Nagasaki: The Real Story of the Atomic Bombings and Their Aftermath

by Paul Ham

and

Racing the Enemy: Stalin, Truman, and the Surrender of Japan by Tsuyoshi Hasegawa.

and

Hiroshima in America by Robert J. Lifton and Greg Mitchell.

Challenge accepted- I’m not afraid to be proven wrong. Which one would you suggest first?

How about you? You gonna study Downfall?

 

[GKMotley]

I’d say Alperovitz. He’s the originator of the classic revisionist attack on the conventional history, aiming mainly at the idea that the bombs were used to influence the Soviets, and that there were other, better ways to go about it all.

Hasegawa next. He disagrees with Alperovitz, on some points, and, as I said, stays friendly with Frank.

 

[neophyte]

I thought that it was your books that had an agenda.

And you thought that because you read Downfall, and so had proof that Frank misstates or cherry picks the data?

 

[jfz178]

You don’t know much about US nuclear capability. Russia has parity with numbers of warheads and even superiority in size of warheads. But their response time, reliability and accuracy sucks. Besides, as you said, they have no interest in taking us out. They also know the exchange would be bad for business. So we don’t really have to worry about them.

So who else you got who could take us on?

 

[GKMotley]

ALL books have an agenda.

 

[undead_rat]

Well, Russia does have what the US Navy calls a “black hole” electric submarine which cannot be tracked. This boat is capable of launching Russia’s stealth cruise nuclear armed missile. So US land-based nuclear strategic forces are vulnerable to a surprise attack. If the Russians ever gain the ability to track US ballistic missile submarines then they could conceivably win a nuclear war with a first strike.

You are right when you say that the Russians “have no interest in taking us out.” That’s been my point all along. But if Russia comes to believe that the USA is going to launch a nuclear first strike against them, then they might feel compelled to act pre-emptively.

If what appears to be a global nuclear war was not repeatedly described in our Holy Scriptures, then I would say. “Go on with business as usual.” But it is there, and the only possible action that the USA can take to avoid it is Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament.

 

[jfz178]

You are talking about the Kilo and the Lada class subs. People key in on their one advantage and ignore their significant limitations, especially in nuclear war. Some facts:

• They are not ballistic missile subs, they are attack subs. They do have some limited nuclear cruise missile capability.
• There is no such thing as an undetectable sub, just a harder to detect sub. Kilos get their spooky reputation because their props don’t cavitate, so they are hard to detect by listening systems. But they are made of metal, so they can be detected by droppable sonar buoys and magnetic anomaly detection.
• They are electric boats, not nuclear powered. That means they are comparatively very slow, can only make a comparatively smaller depth and have a short endurance, making them far short of a global force.
• Our subs many not be sonically silent, but there are reasons they are even harder to detect, namely that they are really fast, can make great depth and have long underwater endurances. It’s a big global ocean. Paradoxically, you can’t detect a sub unless you basically know the general area it is in to begin with. Our SOSUS nodes pick up most Russian subs as they leave port in the North Sea and each one is usually shadowed by a US or British attack sub.

A global nuclear war is only described in Scripture via your vivid imagination. I am happy with business as usual because I have the facts. You only have tin-foil hat theories.

 

[undead_rat]

Wiki reports that the Lada class has a range of over 7,000 nm and is equiped with 100mm anechoic tiles for sonar attenuation. Do these boats have the ability to approach within cruise missile range undetected? I would not bet against that possibility.
The the launch of a nuclear armed cruise misslie cannot be detected by satellite, and it is invisible to radar as it approaches its target. The only indication of a Russian first strike would be when the nukes detonated on US missile bases.

Of course the targeting of US SSBNs is very difficult if not impossible… Apparently the US command does not know the locations of these boats. That is something known only to the indiviual SSBN commanders. However, in warfare offense eventually trumps defense. I would bet that the Russians are wokring very hard on this problem.

BTW, I don’t wear a tin-foil hat, TY.

 

[jfz178]

I was in a P-3 anti-submarine warfare squadron in the reserves after I left active duty, so I know a bit about this. There are no Lada “boats.” There is ONE Lada, the St. Petersburg, with only five planned and two in production. Hardly a “world-ender.”

Sonar shields do not prevent magnetic anomaly detection. There are even techniques for passive satellite detection of disruptions of the sea surface caused by a sub hundreds of feet below. And a 7,000nm range is deceptive for a diesel/electric boat. They can’t stay underwater and hidden for 7,000 miles. They have to come up to snorkel depth to recharge fairly frequently. When they do, our satellites have them. That is where our nuke boats have an advantage. They can go much deeper for much longer.

And again you are arguing a threat from Russia, which you already said they are not interested in unless we attack them, which we wouldn’t.

I will just say that while most of the relevant facts are indeed on the internet, the wiki sources don’t give you the perspective that people have who have dealt with this problem. I consider my expertise somewhat dated, but I have great confidence in those who are working the problem today.

Sorry about the tin foil hat comment, but honestly, you are sounding very much like a conspiracy theorist.

 

[edwest211]

Not true. I was there during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. President Kennedy made it very clear that an attack on the US or Western Europe, would see swift retaliation against Russia. The Joint Chiefs were telling him that this was a perfect opportunity to take out Russia. After all, what were our recently deployed ICBMS ready for? This was an act of war! Funny, the CIA controlled the Bay of Pigs operation against Cuba to take it over in 1961. Maybe Russia was trying to protect its ally against further American ‘acts of war.’

And on to Vietnam. The Chinese Communists (ChiComs) tested their first atomic bomb in 1964. In 1965, the invasion of Vietnam begins. China was ready to send troops if the US invaded North Vietnam.

 

[MonteRCMS]

There is/was a television series about a Soviet spy ring that snuck into the United States.

Just found out about it recently.

google youtube soviet spies

Some say it is pretty realistic.

“The Americans”

google youtube The Americans

 

[jfz178]

There is/was a television series about a Soviet spy ring that snuck into the United States.

My wife loves that show! I have not gotten into it like she has, but I have watched it and it is pretty good. It also seems consistent with what I know about Soviet spying in the US. The concept was created by a former CIA officer, who is now one of the show’s writers. It is based on a real couple who were busted as Russian spies in 2010, so that kind of thing went on even after the Soviet Union.

 

[Rau]

The only evil in all this is an aggressor nation launching a first strike.

A nuclear strike in response to an aggressor (Japan comes to mind) would likely be immoral if used in a populated area. Nuclear weapons by virtue of the breadth of their destructive power tend to target innocent people making their use intrinsically evil.