A friend recommended this book by Annie Jacobsen. Her fictionalized scenario of how a nuclear apocalypse might go down is well-researched, fascinating, and also terrifying. For those who might not be interested in reading her book, I will link a YT of her discussion with Lex Fridman in a second post. The beginning of that interview covers some of the ground in her book as well as her thoughts about what we should take from the information that is publicly available. Feel free to comment or recommend any thoughts, videos, books, foreign policy implications, etc. My own gut reaction thus far is that the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction is likely much more fragile of a deterrent than I would have liked to consider. Nuclear War by Annie Jacobsen: 9780593476093 | PenguinRandomHouse.com: Books “In Nuclear War: A Scenario, Annie Jacobsen gives us a vivid picture of what could happen if our nuclear guardians fail…Terrifying.”—Wall Street Journal There is only one scenario other than an asteroid strike that could end the world as we know it in a matter of hours: nuclear war. And one of the triggers for that war would be a nuclear missile inbound toward the United States. Every generation, a journalist has looked deep into the heart of the nuclear military establishment: the technologies, the safeguards, the plans, and the risks. These investigations are vital to how we understand the world we really live in—where one nuclear missile will beget one in return, and where the choreography of the world’s end requires massive decisions made on seconds’ notice with information that is only as good as the intelligence we have. Pulitzer Prize finalist Annie Jacobsen’s Nuclear War: A Scenario explores this ticking-clock scenario, based on dozens of exclusive new interviews with military and civilian experts who have built the weapons, have been privy to the response plans, and have been responsible for those decisions should they have needed to be made. Nuclear War: A Scenario examines the handful of minutes after a nuclear missile launch. It is essential reading, and unlike any other book in its depth and urgency.
Having not read the book (it looks interesting; I will try to), the only thin-slice problem with the scenario I see is the "one missile ignites nuclear war" scenario. If we see one missile inbound, from anywhere in the world, we will just shoot it down and then deliberate how to respond. If we fail to shoot down that one missile (very unlikely, but let's just say), then we will probably wait to let it hit before making any decisions on how to respond. The missile might be a dud or it might not even be armed with a nuclear warhead. If the missile gets through, hits its target, and was nuclear, there is still a lot of time to deliberate how to respond, no need to go massive retaliation unless other missiles start to come inbound. The only scenario where I think we need to respond massively without a lot of discussion is when we see a full nuclear attack in progress from multiple sources (ICBMs, bombers, and submarines). In that case, you absolutely have to hit back before those weapons take out our ability to respond and exercise command and control of forces in the field.
Good point. The book description about "a nuclear missile" (singular) is misleading because her hypothetical is that we have many of them incoming at once (courtesy of NK in her scenario). With respect to our intercept capabilities, she says that we have only 44 interceptors and even with those, we would only expect about a 50% success rate. Both of those numbers seem so low to me that I found them hard to believe; however, she seems to know what she's talking about. She also states, for example, that the exact number of our ICBM silos in America is public information while the NK nuclear arsenal is the most secretive. Of course, she can only speak about what she has dug up and pieced together or what people have been willing to talk to her about, but she seems well regarded as a journalist as far as I can tell. She says one of the most secretive areas are the details about the nuclear football. Will look forward to your thoughts if you get around to reading the book or watching the interview.
I generally agree with you that we would wait before one hit (and confirming it was nuclear) before responding. Part of the reason I said that the "how we got here" wasn't clean. Jeffrey Lewis had a far more plausible scenario in this book, with a limited exchange In this book (Annie Jacobsen's), the DPRK eventually sent more. She states, and I agree (relying on Jeffrey Lewis), that our chances of taking down are far less likely than you suggest. In this book, four interception attempts on the first missile failed. That's consistent with my understanding, again relying on Jeffrey Lewis. But then we retaliated against the DPRK over the ice, Russia misread that it was coming towards them and that there were more than we launched (at the DPRK), and so on.
We had to read that one this year in school. As an Army man, nuclear war is not something I like to think about too much, not only because it's horrifying (and it is) but also because the Army just does not play a role in it. But I agree. Interesting read.
Just in case you wanted to worry more (I think the Russians are unlikely), here is a thread from Jeffrey Lewis about Russia making a very public showing last week about starting a nuclear war. Maybe it was a ruse of Annie Jacobsen's publicist.
Great author. Read many, Lincoln at Gettysburg, Nixon Agonistes, Why I am a Catholic. Jesuit novitiate
Yeah I love his writing, one of the great American humanists for sure. The John Wayne book is really good too, especially if you are a movie buff.
Grab your ankles and kiss your ass goodbye and as Nikita K said: " the survivors will envy the dead" in the case of an all out nuclear war. Even a limited would get ugly for many reasons ( fallout, environment, economic, political). If it happens I hope I never know what hit me.
In the scenerio you describe, I will be hoping that one of those Hydrogen bomb missles strikes within 1 kilometer of my immediate vacinity. I'm pretty sure even the lower end yield nukes would turn me into a shadow on the concrete or at the very list dispatch me rather quickly. Surviving a massive exchange of missles between numerous, or even just two countries, is for the rugged individualist, those looking for a reddish tan, Georgia Bulldogs and of course Kim Kardashian. I'm afraid the survivors will have a fairly tough road to hoe. Considering I'm 65 and have a bad back, I'm taking a pass on that particular work. (Whats for Dinner Fred)? Fred - I think it's little Johnny, the neighbors kid.
Or, like nearly all ICBMs today, the missile contains multiple warheads. Hope we can shoot it down in the early phase, before all the warheads detach from the missile body.
