4 ms·

I toured Stalin's secret bunker this summer in Moscow where USSR'S top generals held up during the entire Cuban Missile Crisis. This bunker was the control cent

I toured Stalin's secret bunker this summer in Moscow where USSR'S top generals held up during the entire Cuban Missile Crisis. This bunker was the control center for the Soviet's nuclear arsenal at the time. According to the guide, the top leaders debated back and forth whether to preemptively strike the United States. The entire thing was surreal - complete with a freighting nuclear attack simulation (America strikes first, of course) that included clips from Dr. Strangelove, genuine nuclear launch terminals and original bunker sirens going off. It was emotionally heavy realizing how close the end actually was. If you're ever in Moscow, go take the Bunker42 tour: http://www.bunker42.com/index.php?lang=en http://www.bunker42.com/index.php?lang=en

arethuza 12y ago
"the top leaders debated back and forth whether to preemptively strike the United States" At the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis the strategic balance between the US and the Soviets was very one sided - the US had the capability to completely destroy the Soviet Union whereas the Soviets only had a very small number of functioning strategic weapons systems. However, the Soviets could have done an incredible amount of damage to Western Europe with medium range missiles.
- pmoriarty 12y ago
  "Fifty years ago, the Cuban missile crisis brought the world to the brink of nuclear disaster. During the standoff, US President John F. Kennedy thought the chance of escalation to war was "between 1 in 3 and even," and what we have learned in later decades has done nothing to lengthen those odds. We now know, for example, that in addition to nuclear-armed ballistic missiles, the Soviet Union had deployed 100 tactical nuclear weapons to Cuba, and the local Soviet commander there could have launched these weapons without additional codes or commands from Moscow. The US air strike and invasion that were scheduled for the third week of the confrontation would likely have triggered a nuclear response against American ships and troops, and perhaps even Miami. The resulting war might have led to the deaths of 100 million Americans and over 100 million Russians." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis#Post-crisis_revelations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis#Post-cris...
  - arethuza 12y ago
    That's the only estimate I've ever seen that says that the damage the Soviets could have inflicted on the US was anything like as severe as what the US has planned for the Soviets. Of course, the US could have faced a lot of damage, but nothing like the complete annihilation that would have been visited on the Soviets and other socialist countries. The US consistently over-estimated the strategic threat the Soviets posed to the US for most of the Cold War - particularly the infamous "Bomber Gap" and the "Missile Gap": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomber_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomber_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap
acqq 12y ago
Not too long after Hiroshima some US decision makers actually proposed "pre-emptively" bombing the USSR with the nuclear bombs. Why? Well, the communists are dangerous, that's enough, better earlier than later(!) The idea was rejected with the apparent main argument that the US didn't have enough nuclear bombs to annihilate the whole USSR: too many soldiers would continue to fight! US eventually produced enough nuclear bombs to wipe out the whole USSR, but by that time the USSR managed to produce just enough nuclear bombs to make some damage to the US. (I don't have the links, if I remember I've read the above in the books or seen in some documentary. Somebody here maybe knows the exact names of the proponents.)
- a3n 12y ago
  John von Neumann, one of a handful of people most responsible for the existence of your job, proposed a pre-emptive strike. He needed fast digital computers to calculate bomb parameters and effects, so he helped invent them. http://www.the-tls.co.uk/tls/public/article1179883.ece http://www.the-tls.co.uk/tls/public/article1179883.ece quote: This unsettling scenario might be pre-empted by a more apocalyptic one: nuclear Armageddon. George Dyson’s Turing’s Cathedral [1] reveals how the computing torch was passed after 1945 from Turing (himself an excellent marathon runner) to John von Neumann (who preferred driving fast cars; Dyson observes that he bought “a new one at least once a year, whether he had wrecked the previous one or not”). While Turing may have been a victim of the Cold War, von Neumann was its champion, influencing the policy of Mutually Assured Destruction from his commanding positions at Princeton’s Institute for Advanced Study and the Atomic Energy Commission. Born to a wealthy family in Hungary in 1903, he experienced at first hand the Communist government that briefly came to power after the First World War, and became an ardent foe of Communism. He acknowledged that atomic weaponry was a “monster” but perceived it as the lesser of two evils, advocating a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the USSR. Hoping to create a hydrogen bomb, he needed a stored-program electronic computer, and in 1945 began to construct one at the Institute. [1] I highly recommend the reviewed book, Turing's Cathedral. Besides copious vintage tech porn, the social, political and personal background was surprising to me.
  - the_af 12y ago
harisamin 12y ago
That looks really interesting
Spooky23 12y ago
I worked with a guy who was part of the crew of an Atlas missile control center. I remember talking over drinks at his retirement party, and he recalled now pissed he was at the time that he didn't get to vaporize some Russians. I found that more disturbing than Dr. Strangelove.
- ninjaplease 12y ago
  What a surprise, an army guy turns out to be a despicable asshole.

arethuza 12y ago

"the top leaders debated back and forth whether to preemptively strike the United States" At the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis the strategic balance between the US and the Soviets was very one sided - the US had the capability to completely destroy the Soviet Union whereas the Soviets only had a very small number of functioning strategic weapons systems. However, the Soviets could have done an incredible amount of damage to Western Europe with medium range missiles.

pmoriarty 12y ago
"Fifty years ago, the Cuban missile crisis brought the world to the brink of nuclear disaster. During the standoff, US President John F. Kennedy thought the chance of escalation to war was "between 1 in 3 and even," and what we have learned in later decades has done nothing to lengthen those odds. We now know, for example, that in addition to nuclear-armed ballistic missiles, the Soviet Union had deployed 100 tactical nuclear weapons to Cuba, and the local Soviet commander there could have launched these weapons without additional codes or commands from Moscow. The US air strike and invasion that were scheduled for the third week of the confrontation would likely have triggered a nuclear response against American ships and troops, and perhaps even Miami. The resulting war might have led to the deaths of 100 million Americans and over 100 million Russians." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis#Post-crisis_revelations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis#Post-cris...
- arethuza 12y ago
  That's the only estimate I've ever seen that says that the damage the Soviets could have inflicted on the US was anything like as severe as what the US has planned for the Soviets. Of course, the US could have faced a lot of damage, but nothing like the complete annihilation that would have been visited on the Soviets and other socialist countries. The US consistently over-estimated the strategic threat the Soviets posed to the US for most of the Cold War - particularly the infamous "Bomber Gap" and the "Missile Gap": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomber_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomber_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap

acqq 12y ago

Not too long after Hiroshima some US decision makers actually proposed "pre-emptively" bombing the USSR with the nuclear bombs. Why? Well, the communists are dangerous, that's enough, better earlier than later(!) The idea was rejected with the apparent main argument that the US didn't have enough nuclear bombs to annihilate the whole USSR: too many soldiers would continue to fight! US eventually produced enough nuclear bombs to wipe out the whole USSR, but by that time the USSR managed to produce just enough nuclear bombs to make some damage to the US. (I don't have the links, if I remember I've read the above in the books or seen in some documentary. Somebody here maybe knows the exact names of the proponents.)

a3n 12y ago
John von Neumann, one of a handful of people most responsible for the existence of your job, proposed a pre-emptive strike. He needed fast digital computers to calculate bomb parameters and effects, so he helped invent them. http://www.the-tls.co.uk/tls/public/article1179883.ece http://www.the-tls.co.uk/tls/public/article1179883.ece quote: This unsettling scenario might be pre-empted by a more apocalyptic one: nuclear Armageddon. George Dyson’s Turing’s Cathedral [1] reveals how the computing torch was passed after 1945 from Turing (himself an excellent marathon runner) to John von Neumann (who preferred driving fast cars; Dyson observes that he bought “a new one at least once a year, whether he had wrecked the previous one or not”). While Turing may have been a victim of the Cold War, von Neumann was its champion, influencing the policy of Mutually Assured Destruction from his commanding positions at Princeton’s Institute for Advanced Study and the Atomic Energy Commission. Born to a wealthy family in Hungary in 1903, he experienced at first hand the Communist government that briefly came to power after the First World War, and became an ardent foe of Communism. He acknowledged that atomic weaponry was a “monster” but perceived it as the lesser of two evils, advocating a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the USSR. Hoping to create a hydrogen bomb, he needed a stored-program electronic computer, and in 1945 began to construct one at the Institute. [1] I highly recommend the reviewed book, Turing's Cathedral. Besides copious vintage tech porn, the social, political and personal background was surprising to me.
- the_af 12y ago

harisamin 12y ago

That looks really interesting

Spooky23 12y ago

I worked with a guy who was part of the crew of an Atlas missile control center. I remember talking over drinks at his retirement party, and he recalled now pissed he was at the time that he didn't get to vaporize some Russians. I found that more disturbing than Dr. Strangelove.

ninjaplease 12y ago
What a surprise, an army guy turns out to be a despicable asshole.