4 ms·
Why? These devices (and SADMs) literally saved West Germany from being overran by the Soviet Union. No other option would have prevented it. German officials _
by atemerev 8y ago
Why? These devices (and SADMs) literally saved West Germany from being overran by the Soviet Union. No other option would have prevented it.
German officials _insisted_ that tactical nuclear devices would have been deployed, even against American reservations at this time. They were right, in hindsight.
- bayesian_horse 8y agoRelying on nuclear contamination as deterrence to avoid the nuclear contamination of your country is inherently scary. Especially if the real decision makers live thousands of miles away. There has always been a resistance against American nuclear weapons in Germany. It just didn't play a big role up until fairly recently.
- 08-15 8y ago> Relying on nuclear contamination as deterrence to avoid the nuclear contamination of your country The idea was to rely on giant explosions to stop an invasion. This isn't deterrence, it's a very practical way to stop tanks, infantry, capital ships, etc. What would you prefer, soviet occupation or some radioactivity in some places? The answer from Greenpeace activists would clearly be "soviet occupation", and I'm not sure whether it's because they know next to nothing about radioactivity or because they like socialism.
- majewsky 8y agoMy parents and grandparents lived under Soviet occupation (in the GDR) for decades and they had a pretty good time, all things considered. So did millions others.
- 08-15 8y agoI lived under Soviet occupation (in the GDR) for 14 years, thank you very much. It was a relatively good time, compared to, let's say, the stone age.
- davrosthedalek 8y agoExcept for those who got shot when they tried to leave the country.
- majewsky 8y agoSure, not disputing that. But our current telling of history emphasizes the misery of those in the GDR that disagreed with the doctrine, at the expense of millions of people who got by just fine. I'm seeing a lot of resentment in East Germans against elites as a result of that.
- 08-15 8y agoThe two million people (out of 17 million) who worked for Miniluv (Ministerium für Staatssicherheit, known as Stasi, an oppressive secret service comparable to the earlier Gestapo) got by just fine.
- majewsky 8y agoI appreciate that you've stepped back a long way from your initial assertion that nuclear war is literally better than living in the GDR.
- bayesian_horse 8y agoThe GDR wasn't turned into a nuclear wasteland before occupation. It was also "only" devastated once by a world war, not twice, as would have been the case for Western Germany if it were to be occupied by Soviet forces again.
- dingaling 8y agoSADMs and Davy Crockett couldn't repulse a massed Soviet armoured thrust. They simply didn't have the yield and blast radius needed and were deployed in tiny numbers. This can be deduced by the neutron-protective lining applied to Soviet first-line tanks, they were expected to roll on through. Massed 155mm conventional artillery was NATO's mainstay response, with ATGMs to pick-off high-value targets like command tanks. Later MLRS and Assault Breaker were developed, again conventional solutions.
- atemerev 8y agoYes, Soviet strategy have adapted. However, “neutron-protective lining” didn’t properly work; however, tank armies formations were spead out to reduce the possible radiation damage. You are right, however; tactical nuclear weapons were deployed as a deterrent, not as a valid defense option.
- TheOtherHobbes 8y agoSoviet war plans have never been declassified, and the plans that have been - let's say - interpolated are just plain insane. They envisage massed Soviet tanks and infantry trying to blitzkrieg through the radioactive remains of Northern Europe on a suicide mission. A few low-yield tac nukes make no difference in this scenario, because the radioactive remains of NATO would still have been raining megatons on any attempted Soviet advance.