3 ms·
Here's an excerpt of McNamara's famous speech in San Francisco, 1967. > The cornerstone of our strategic policy continues to be to deter nuclear attack upon th
by danielvf 2y ago
Here's an excerpt of McNamara's famous speech in San Francisco, 1967.
> The cornerstone of our strategic policy continues to be to deter nuclear attack upon the United States or its allies. We do this by maintaining a highly reliable ability to inflict unacceptable damage upon any single aggressor or combination of aggressors at any time during the course of a strategic nuclear exchange, even after absorbing a surprise first strike. This can be defined as our assured-destruction capability.
> Security depends upon assuming a worst plausible case, and having the ability to cope with it. In that eventuality we must be able to absorb the total weight of nuclear attack on our country -- on our retaliatory forces, on our command and control apparatus, on our industrial capacity, on our cities, and on our population -- and still be capable of damaging the aggressor to the point that his society would be simply no longer viable in twentieth-century terms. That is what deterrence of nuclear aggression means. It means the certainty of suicide to the aggressor, not merely to his military forces, but to his society as a whole.
https://www.atomicarchive.com/resources/documents/deterrence/mcnamara-deterrence.html https://www.atomicarchive.com/resources/documents/deterrence...
----
McNamara used the term "assured destruction" over and over again it became a cornerstone of his policy. Later a civilian added an "M" to MAD, and the term caught on.
Here's an interview transcript from much later, in 1987:
INT: Much has been made during this period of the term 'MAD', Mutually Assured or..
RM: Yes..
INT: ......Destruction. Can you explain what was meant by that?
RM: It's not mad! (laugh) Mutual Assured Destruction is the foundation of deterrence.
RM: Today it's a derogative term , but those that denigrate it don't understand deterrence. If you want a stable nuclear world -- if that isn't an oxymoron -- , to rephrase it, to the degree one can achieve a stable nuclear world, it requires that each side be confident that it can deter the other.
- lostlogin 2y agoNuclear Folly, a book on the Cuban Missile Crisis by Serhii Plokhy makes and interesting point, the Nuclear Age came before the Information Age. The consequences of this were very nearly catastrophic, as the speed at which communication occurred was just so slow, with intel and news coming in so very very slowly. Discussions were being made in the dark and were outdated or based on outdated incorrect assumption. I think there was considerably more luck than we’d like in the ‘system’ we engineered.