Is the US better prepared for a nuclear blast today than it was 60 years ago?

[wired]

They care because Putin and his backers have made it clear that their intention is to reestablish the Soviet Empire to its greatest reaches. They claim the Baltics as part of Russia proper, and Poland and the other Warsaw Pact nations as integral parts of their rule.

If we are to take them to their word that Ukraine must always be part of Russia, then we must also take them to their word that they intend to rule the puppet nations they lost in the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Kind of reaching there. Care to elaborate on where Putin said he's putting the band back together or did you see that on Fox News?

As an aside , one of our friends just got back from St Petersburg where she's been stranded for about a month after going there to sell her apartment in the city. Couldn't get out because just about every other country has suspended incoming flights out of Russia not because "they don't let people leave" . That's ridiculous. In any case she remarked " Don't believe the news. , pretty much nothings changed" No extra war footing, no bread lines, no press gangs etc. Russia has developed a remarkably insular self sufficient economy in the last few years .

 

[Longwalkhome]

No

 

[OldBroad44]

Having lived in both Germany and Russia I'd say Russia is a very maternalistic country compared to Germany which is very Paternalistic. The Motherland, Mother Russia, Mat Rodina ( Mother Russia ) is the name of the European heartland of Russia. Children and adults alike have fond memories of their childhoods spent at Grandmas Dacha and the Babushka is held in the absolute highest regards. Grandpa hardly ever gets a mention possibly in large part to the fact he drank himself to death 30 years before Grandmas typically kick off. Girls grow up wanting to become their Grandmother. The men nominally run the country but the women rule the home. Its an extremely conservative country which comes as a surprise to those who think that commies are all somehow super liberal.

Germany on the other hand yeah, is completely different in that regard.

Note the people at the bottom of The Motherland Calls in Volgograd ( Stalingrad )

View attachment 1786520

If the Russian grandpa drank himself to death 30 years before grandma, he was probably drunk most of the time he was home while his own kids were growing up. Meaning he might have been held in contempt when at home. At the least not be the reliable one who held things together. In the era of the tzars, he might have been gone for years, drafted for a decade or more fighting various wars. Likewise after the revolution. Or in forced labor camps. Or never came back.

The Motherland Calls. Wow! Very moving. I knew about the battle of Stalingrad, but not about this monument. Had this been German, the statue would have been of a male. The statue of a female with sword raised is very different. It speaks of courage and fierceness of all men and women in defense of the motherland. And willingness to bear anything needed. Essentially defensive aggressiveness and resilience.

My own heritage is about half Scottish Highland/Irish/English and half German. From before when those culturally German consolidated into a German state. They were known as fierce warriors even in Roman days. A lot of American military officers and families come from lineages of German immigrants to this day. Eisenhower for example. And my own dad. There is a strong military tradition. A tradition of fierceness and aggressiveness. They fought as mercenaries all over. Aggressiveness for country, for its own sake or for pay. I think overall USA hasn't much military tradition though. And its hard to get Americans to fight unless we have been attacked on our own land. Usually our government seems to resort to tricking us into it via lies or false flag operations.

The Stars Spangler Banner, full of the sounds of battle, is about the joy of just seeing the flag survive through a night of bombardment by a much bigger more powerful force. Not about us going forth to conquer and carrying all before us. America the Beautiful is about the beauty of the land and the virtues of those who fought to settle it. Also not very militaristic. My favorite lines in any patriotic song are from Stars and Stripes Forever. "Its a beacon for those who share our dream of a new day without domination. Its the hope of peoples now oppressed and the symbol of their own emancipation." I think we have managed to live up to that image occasionally. Not, alas, routinely. But the songs job is to portray us at our best and give us an inspiration to grow in to. Here's one of my favorite renditions of Stars and Stripes forever that gives the words I quoted, a magnificent a capella rendition by The Vocal Majority.

Britain is really interesting. Look at the patriotic song Rule Britannia. The chorus is "Rule Britannia! Britannia rule the waves! Britons never never never will be slaves!" The verses have changed over the years. Modern versions include a verse referring explicitly being able to bounce back stronger than ever from the beatings they took at the hands of the Germans in WWII. Here's a good modern version:

Interesting that while there is the claim to rule the waves, the song makes no claim to ruling over any land other than Britain. In fact, even at the height of its colonial powers, it was primarily a sea power. Both its survival as a free country and survival economically depended on the fact of being an island and having the best navy to protect its home and its trade. Certainly it occupied foreign land and built colonies. But its grip on most colonies was gentle compared with Spain or france. (America was so outraged when Britain tried to actually rule us not because they were doing anything outrageous by colonial norms but because we had been nearly totally self governing for 200 years.) The grip of the monarchs began to be challenged and restricted early in Britain. Maybe a country whose military strength is in its navy, not in massive standing armies, is not in as good a position to be totalitarian with its own population as those with huge standing armies. And there was enough freedom and rule of law and financial infrastructure to encourage corporations and to facilitate investing in stuff like the industrial revolution.

 

[OldBroad44]

Kind of reaching there. Care to elaborate on where Putin said he's putting the band back together or did you see that on Fox News?

As an aside , one of our friends just got back from St Petersburg where she's been stranded for about a month after going there to sell her apartment in the city. Couldn't get out because just about every other country has suspended incoming flights out of Russia not because "they don't let people leave" . That's ridiculous. In any case she remarked " Don't believe the news. , pretty much nothings changed" No extra war footing, no bread lines, no press gangs etc. Russia has developed a remarkably insular self sufficient economy in the last few years .

We already knew that Russia drafted people in the countryside, not in the big cities where it might set off riots.

 

[Cavedweller]

Britain is really interesting...

Interesting that while there is the claim to rule the waves, the song makes no claim to ruling over any land other than Britain. In fact, even at the height of its colonial powers, it was primarily a sea power. Both its survival as a free country and survival economically depended on the fact of being an island and having the best navy to protect its home and its trade. Certainly it occupied foreign land and built colonies. But its grip on most colonies was gentle compared with Spain or france.

Who are the most warlike people on earth? Most would probably say the Germans (Who was it who said "The victors write history"?).

Which country actually tried to conquer the world, and succeeded in conquering half of it? Hint: "The sun never sets on the British Empire."

Which country has either invaded or made war on 90% of the countries in existence today. Hint #1: see above. Hint #2: Not Germany.

The Arabs have a saying: "If 2 fish fight in the sea, the English are behind it."

 

[Provincial]

Kind of reaching there. Care to elaborate on where Putin said he's putting the band back together or did you see that on Fox News?

As an aside , one of our friends just got back from St Petersburg where she's been stranded for about a month after going there to sell her apartment in the city. Couldn't get out because just about every other country has suspended incoming flights out of Russia not because "they don't let people leave" . That's ridiculous. In any case she remarked " Don't believe the news. , pretty much nothings changed" No extra war footing, no bread lines, no press gangs etc. Russia has developed a remarkably insular self sufficient economy in the last few years .

Not reaching. Just pointing out what Putin said more than once. I don't speak or read Russian, so I have to rely on news, but not Fox, since I don't trust any one source.

On the other hand, you have to agree that Putin has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons, and those threats contained conditions that related to the areas I mentioned. His major backers have been more straightforward in making these threats.

You'll have to prove to me that Putin did not make those threats. If what you say is true, that should be easy.

 

[wired]

Not reaching. Just pointing out what Putin said more than once. I don't speak or read Russian, so I have to rely on news, but not Fox, since I don't trust any one source.

On the other hand, you have to agree that Putin has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons, and those threats contained conditions that related to the areas I mentioned. His major backers have been more straightforward in making these threats.

You'll have to prove to me that Putin did not make those threats. If what you say is true, that should be easy

I have to prove to you that Putin didn't say something? Is that how rules of debate work? . OK after a cursory google search I can find no evidence that Putin said that. I did find a few hundred mind readers who know what Putin wants to do but no evidence at all that Putin actually said anything like that. I did find where he said that was not their ambition. You were right, that was easy.

"The USSR is no more. We can't bring the past back. And Russia doesn't need it anymore. We are not striving towards that," Putin said.



https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-says-russia-not-seeking-revive-soviet-union-2022-09-30/

Putin Says Russia “Not Striving” for Return of Soviet Union

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday that Russia was not striving to recreate the Soviet Union as he… - Sep. 30, 2022. By AFP

www.kyivpost.com

Did Putin threaten to use nuclear weapons to defend Russian Territory? Of course he did. The very existence of nuclear weapons is a tacit threat to potential invaders.

 

[Lazyfaire]

I believe that we citizens would be totally on our own. The military would be occupied with other things. Police, fire, and other emergency response would be quickly overwhelmed. Subdivisions would islands left stranded. I live outside of San Antonio Texas ('Military City'). There are 5 Air Force bases around the city. Pretty sure we would be at the bottom of a downward arc! I'll probably end up looking like a glow plug!

 

[GrayGoose]

With our woke LGBTQXYZ-friendly military today, the generals and commanders pushing gender-equity and inclusion instead of building and maintaining our military strengths, the once-great and mighty US has become a pathetic laughing stock of the world.

 

[Diamondback]

For the record, @OldBroad44 , source on my commentary re Russian nukes: A literal lifetime's study of them, having been groomed virtually from birth by an Old SAC Warhorse grandfather to be the next Curtis LeMay before my eyes failed me. And though there is no longer a SAC for me to be the tip of the spear for even if my body and my mind had done their part, I still keep close tabs on them even though their still-very-real threat pales next to the rapacious red dragon we've gotten WAY too complacent with. The dragon hungers, and we MUST slay it someday or we WILL be its lunch.

 

[OldBroad44]

For the record, @OldBroad44 , source on my commentary re Russian nukes: A literal lifetime's study of them, having been groomed virtually from birth by an Old SAC Warhorse grandfather to be the next Curtis LeMay before my eyes failed me. And though there is no longer a SAC for me to be the tip of the spear for even if my body and my mind had done their part, I still keep close tabs on them even though their still-very-real threat pales next to the rapacious red dragon we've gotten WAY too complacent with. The dragon hungers, and we MUST slay it someday or we WILL be its lunch.

Hello @Diamondback . Very interesting. Did you want to be the next Curtis LeMay before your eyes said otherwise? (Yeah. I know who he was and his role in the bombing strategy during WWII/Japan.) By that choice did your granddad mean just the head of the AF, or the guy who was responsible for firebombing Tokyo and dropping N bombs on cities that were not really primarily military targets? (Dont get me wrong. I'm among those who think these were the right choices and saved hundreds of thousands of both US and Japanese lives by ending the war earlier and without requiring a land invasion of Japan. And I also know the Nordstrom bomb sight never worked so we had no real precision bombing ability until way after WWII.)

Didn't know there was no SAC any more. What's the replacement? N bombs on subs? These days bombers carrying bombs would not provide platforms that were secret with respect to location, given everyone has radar and sattelites. Seems N bombs on subs would be the only alternative.

I've heard it said that Russia's stockpile of bombs is from wwII, and most probably wouldn't even work. Any thoughts about that? What about our own bombs? Has either US or Russia been building new N bombs?

 

[wired]

Hello @Diamondback . Very interesting. Did you want to be the next Curtis LeMay before your eyes said otherwise? (Yeah. I know who he was and his role in the bombing strategy during WWII/Japan.) By that choice did your granddad mean just the head of the AF, or the guy who was responsible for firebombing Tokyo and dropping N bombs on cities that were not really primarily military targets? (Dont get me wrong. I'm among those who think these were the right choices and saved hundreds of thousands of both US and Japanese lives by ending the war earlier and without requiring a land invasion of Japan. And I also know the Nordstrom bomb sight never worked so we had no real precision bombing ability until way after WWII.)

Didn't know there was no SAC any more. What's the replacement? N bombs on subs? These days bombers carrying bombs would not provide platforms that were secret with respect to location, given everyone has radar and sattelites. Seems N bombs on subs would be the only alternative.

I've heard it said that Russia's stockpile of bombs is from wwII, and most probably wouldn't even work. Any thoughts about that? What about our own bombs? Has either US or Russia been building new N bombs?

Russia has been modernizing its nuclear armament's pretty heavily over the last decade. They have 5900 hundred or so as do we.

 

[Diamondback]

@OldBroad44 The specific context was as CINCSAC, just before CEL got kicked up to AF Chief of Staff... not particularly anything *I* wanted, but growing up in an aviation family I went with the path of least resistance - MY preference aside from them being long gone would have been flying F-106s for Air Defense Command, the birds and institution Grandpa ETS'ed wrenching on/for and the "shield" to SAC's "sword." SAC was disbanded soon after Desert Storm, pungent yellow rain eternally be upon GHWB and all his fellow "peace dividenders"--the bomber force was transferred into Air Combat Command (a TAC hostile takeover much like how the metastatic rectal carcinoma of McDonnell Douglas took over Boeing with Boeing's own money), Strategi Command was transferred to Navy with it gaining the B-52 force when ordered mobilized for a nuclear role. (Ugh, squids, worse than the TAC Pointynose Mafia.) Our primary deterrent is the handful of Ohios still carrying Tridents (most of the early boats are converted for Tomahawks and SEAL delivery) and right back to 1960s vintage Minuteman IIIs that are predictably placed and easy to Pearl Harbor. Between Grandpa relentlessly drilling me my first nine years before he died about the "opposing sides of the coin" of strategic bombardment and air defense, and while visiting relatives back east his brother similarly cramming me on the political systems, structures and tactics of the Third Reich in his belief that the evil he had confronted for Patton would rise again and it would fall on my generation's shoulders to send it back to Hell where it belongs... this perhaps also explains the pivot into becoming a military historian (since I was physically, optically and psychologically--high functioning autism misdiagnosed as ADHD and forcefed ritalin--unfit for any service, the next best thing is trying to ensure the stories of those who WERE in the line are told right) and part of the jadednes and cynicism. (The other part being firsthand experience growing up among the upper crust in my hometown and their accursed spawn--I credit everything good in me to Grandpa's veteran buddies and his Masonic lodge brothers taking me under their wing after he passed, the bad to my years in an ostensible "gifted-student program" that was more a refuge for the wealthy/politically connected in town who needed the optics of their kids being in public school but didn't want them mingling with the riffraff. I was there as a "test mill" to inflate average scores and maintain the illusion of their stated purpose.)

Most of our nuke work is reprocessing and remanufacturing, basically tuning up existing warheads into improved versions.

 

[Longwalkhome]

In grade school they sent us all home because of the Cuban missle crisis . Thinking back it was so we could die with our families Still we were far better prepared than today for the general public. These days they protect only government.

 

[Siglvr]

The leadership of Japan thought that getting control of Manchuria, China, and the islands of the Pacific Ocean was essential to the continued existence of Japan, and through their control of information, convinced the Japanese people that this was true.

Just because a totalitarian government convinces itself and its population that something is true, makes it true. Knowing that these beliefs are accepted doesn't mean the rest of the world has to go along. The real question is what the rest of the world is willing to do address the issue. It now sees Russia as a threat, and any resolution of the Ukraine conflict will incorporate that revised viewpoint.

What is commonly believed to be the truth about Japan then was anything but. What we have learned since is stunning. Reference the work by John Koster: "Operation Snow". The Russian NKVD (secret police) files released in the 1990s turned it upside down. I would suggest to you that what we believe is the truth on current issues may also be incorrect. We need to be wary of our assumptions.

 

[Cavedweller]

With our woke LGBTQXYZ-friendly military today, the generals and commanders pushing gender-equity and inclusion instead of building and maintaining our military strengths, the once-great and mighty US has become a pathetic laughing stock of the world.

 

[Provincial]

What is commonly believed to be the truth about Japan then was anything but. What we have learned since is stunning. Reference the work by John Koster: "Operation Snow". The Russian NKVD (secret police) files released in the 1990s turned it upside down. I would suggest to you that what we believe is the truth on current issues may also be incorrect. We need to be wary of our assumptions.

I suggest that you review the academic studies taken since the release of the Japanese official documents in the 1990's. The peace faction of Japan was trying to establish negotiations for a settlement through a Russia they believed to be neutral, but which really was maneuvering to invade and take large sections of Asia (and even northern islands of Japan proper), without getting any support from the pro-war (military) parts of the ruling council. It is all there in the Japanese records.

The Russian version also says that the Atomic Bombs didn't cause Japan to surrender. Japanese records refute that. I trust the Japanese version, since it comes straight from the horse's mouth.

 

[OldBroad44]

...
The Russian version also says that the Atomic Bombs didn't cause Japan to surrender. Japanese records refute that. I trust the Japanese version, since it comes straight from the horse's mouth.

Right. I've seen the English translation of Emperor Hirohito's radio address to the Japanese people asking them to accept what was beyond accepting. (He never used the word surrender.). He said something to the effect that the war had not gone as they would have wished. Then he explicitly spoke of the terrible new weapon.

I think Japan's having been nuked, especially having whole cities incinerated with one bomb, gave Hirohito and the Japanese people a way of saving face while surrendering. If there was a terrible new weapon different in kind from what any army or country had ever faced, then losing the war was unavoidable, and had nothing to do with the competence or courage of the Japanese warriors and the Japanese people. The horrible new weapon removed a good bit of the shame of defeat. Without it, and without the Emperor's unprecedented address, the Japanese people would have fought to the last man, woman, or child. With the bomb and the Emperor's guidance, the Japanese did accept what would otherwise have been unbearable. And turned their attention to trying to survive and recover from the defeat rather than try to commit mass suicide by fighting to the last man.

 

[duldej]

So much of the cold war was to promote CIA activity overseas, and in S America that I think the actual threat of nuclear war is nominal. The drills, the shelters, etc mainly served the financial interests of the bigwigs in the US, also GB. Profits were made at the expense of our comfort and sense of well being. A nuclear detonation would not be profitable, per se, and so would likely not happen.

What I do see as imminent is the same threat of communism, but now coming from an insidious CCP invasion, rather than the nuclear problem that the cold war brought us. Communism under a different wrapper.

 

[Sklz]

We've had 30 years to forget about it, now of a sudden it's an issue again. It never really went away insofar as the major powers were concerned. There were still the lesser players who were and are making noise, such as Iran and North Korea. Since the Soviet Union went away, we assumed adults were in charge there which has turned out to be an erroneous assumption.

The lesser players can't do as much damage as the larger ones. A nuke going off in one location where they are able to deliver to would be unfortunate for that community but not a national deal breaker. The big players have much greater delivery capability and once that were to get going, it would be what we dreaded during the (first) Cold War. Which the US was never really properly prepared for then. The only blast shelters extant were reserved for high political and military figures. Inadquate fallout shelters existed in urban areas. The focus was mainly on awareness, not significant survivability. Such initial preparations as were made during the Eisenhower administration fell by the wayside during the Vietnam era. After that, the government found other ways to spend vast sums of money such as social welfare programs.

These days, there isn't much political will (or money) for serious official preparation. It's kind of the "ostrich effect," bury your head in the sand and hope for the best.

In my case, I'm old and fairly fatalistic. Nuclear holocaust would be the end of my constellation of physical ailments. The lives for survivors of a major nuclear combat exchange would have lives forever changed in ways we can only now imagine.

The radiation sickness medications currently under discussion would not avail much comfort for concentrated populations anywhere near targeted regions. The pills might be of use in select areas of lower population against drifting fallout. Meaning, far from detonation sites. Like Chernobyl, where no bomb went off yet there was widespread fallout.

Beautifully said @gmerkt nowhere to hide from an unruly atom!