4 ms·

Another case involving a movie influencing Reagan, US policy and related to nuclear weapons is The Day After: > President Ronald Reagan watched the film severa

Another case involving a movie influencing Reagan, US policy and related to nuclear weapons is The Day After: > President Ronald Reagan watched the film several days before its screening, on November 5, 1983. He wrote in his diary that the film was "very effective and left me greatly depressed," and that it changed his mind on the prevailing policy on a "nuclear war". The film was also screened for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. A government advisor who attended the screening, a friend of Meyer's, told him "If you wanted to draw blood, you did it. Those guys sat there like they were turned to stone." Four years later, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty was signed and in Reagan's memoirs he drew a direct line from the film to the signing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Day_After#Effects_on_policymakers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Day_After#Effects_on_polic...

UncleSlacky 11y ago
"Threads" and "The War Game" were more realistic, IMO. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threads https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threads https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_Game https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_Game
- secfirstmd 11y ago
  Just talking to someone about "Threads" yesterday. IMHO the best "after the nuclear holocaust movie" (even more so than The Road), I think of all movies it was the one with the biggest immediate psychological impact on me (a rare thing)...I remember watching it and quite simply not wanting to get out of bed the next morning as I just felt a nuclear war was inevitable, we were all screwed anyway - and humanity sucked.
PhasmaFelis 11y ago
It is so terrifying that the guy with his finger on the nuclear button had given so little thought to nuclear policy that a movie could change his mind. He should have known everything The Day After had to teach before even taking office.
- PakG1 11y ago
  You could say that about so many subjects for which heads of state are responsible. It's not possible for candidates to be knowledgeable about everything. In this case, it's not possible for people without military or scientific backgrounds to really have a grasp on the magnitude of stuff. Heck, even those with military backgrounds couldn't fathom a lot of things, judging from the parent's quote on the reaction from the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
  - PhasmaFelis 11y ago
    > You could say that about so many subjects for which heads of state are responsible. It's not possible for candidates to be knowledgeable about everything. Certainly one man can't be well-versed on every little thing. But global thermonuclear war is not a little thing. It is, arguably, the biggest thing, especially for a man who effectively had the ability to end human civilization by his decisions. > In this case, it's not possible for people without military or scientific backgrounds to really have a grasp on the magnitude of stuff. This isn't about the physics and tactics of nuclear weapons, though. This is about the basic idea that nuclear war would be the greatest disaster in human history and should be avoided at any cost, which by Reagan's own admission is something he hadn't entirely grasped until he watched a movie about it. > Heck, even those with military backgrounds couldn't fathom a lot of things, judging from the parent's quote on the reaction from the Joint Chiefs of Staff. If the nation's top military personnel also hadn't previously grasped that nuclear war would be really bad, that makes the whole thing more terrifying, not less.
    - PakG1 11y ago
      I wasn't commenting on whether the idea of an ignorant candidate is terrifying. I was commenting on whether a fully knowledgeable candidate is feasible. Admittedly, it seems that you're talking about wisdom and capacity for empathy, while I was talking about knowledge of facts.
  - smacktoward 11y ago
    There is an excellent book, written at the height of the Cold War and now sadly out of print (http://www.amazon.com/The-Day-After-World-War/dp/0670258806 http://www.amazon.com/The-Day-After-World-War/dp/0670258806), that goes into great detail about lots of these types of questions. On the specific question of how to keep policymakers aware of the gravity of the nuclear decisions they could make, it notes there was a proposal floated at one point (half-jokingly, but only half) that the launch codes for American nuclear missiles, instead of being carried around in a briefcase, should instead be surgically implanted under the skin of one of the President's aides. That aide would then be responsible for carrying a butcher knife on their person at all times. Why? That way, for the President to be able to launch the missiles and kill millions of people, he'd have to be willing to kill one person with his own hands first.

UncleSlacky 11y ago

"Threads" and "The War Game" were more realistic, IMO. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threads https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threads https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_Game https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_Game

secfirstmd 11y ago
Just talking to someone about "Threads" yesterday. IMHO the best "after the nuclear holocaust movie" (even more so than The Road), I think of all movies it was the one with the biggest immediate psychological impact on me (a rare thing)...I remember watching it and quite simply not wanting to get out of bed the next morning as I just felt a nuclear war was inevitable, we were all screwed anyway - and humanity sucked.

PhasmaFelis 11y ago

It is so terrifying that the guy with his finger on the nuclear button had given so little thought to nuclear policy that a movie could change his mind. He should have known everything The Day After had to teach before even taking office.

PakG1 11y ago
You could say that about so many subjects for which heads of state are responsible. It's not possible for candidates to be knowledgeable about everything. In this case, it's not possible for people without military or scientific backgrounds to really have a grasp on the magnitude of stuff. Heck, even those with military backgrounds couldn't fathom a lot of things, judging from the parent's quote on the reaction from the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
- PhasmaFelis 11y ago
  > You could say that about so many subjects for which heads of state are responsible. It's not possible for candidates to be knowledgeable about everything. Certainly one man can't be well-versed on every little thing. But global thermonuclear war is not a little thing. It is, arguably, the biggest thing, especially for a man who effectively had the ability to end human civilization by his decisions. > In this case, it's not possible for people without military or scientific backgrounds to really have a grasp on the magnitude of stuff. This isn't about the physics and tactics of nuclear weapons, though. This is about the basic idea that nuclear war would be the greatest disaster in human history and should be avoided at any cost, which by Reagan's own admission is something he hadn't entirely grasped until he watched a movie about it. > Heck, even those with military backgrounds couldn't fathom a lot of things, judging from the parent's quote on the reaction from the Joint Chiefs of Staff. If the nation's top military personnel also hadn't previously grasped that nuclear war would be really bad, that makes the whole thing more terrifying, not less.
  - PakG1 11y ago
    I wasn't commenting on whether the idea of an ignorant candidate is terrifying. I was commenting on whether a fully knowledgeable candidate is feasible. Admittedly, it seems that you're talking about wisdom and capacity for empathy, while I was talking about knowledge of facts.
- smacktoward 11y ago
  There is an excellent book, written at the height of the Cold War and now sadly out of print (http://www.amazon.com/The-Day-After-World-War/dp/0670258806 http://www.amazon.com/The-Day-After-World-War/dp/0670258806), that goes into great detail about lots of these types of questions. On the specific question of how to keep policymakers aware of the gravity of the nuclear decisions they could make, it notes there was a proposal floated at one point (half-jokingly, but only half) that the launch codes for American nuclear missiles, instead of being carried around in a briefcase, should instead be surgically implanted under the skin of one of the President's aides. That aide would then be responsible for carrying a butcher knife on their person at all times. Why? That way, for the President to be able to launch the missiles and kill millions of people, he'd have to be willing to kill one person with his own hands first.