What do We Know About Nuclear War -- Probably Much Less Than We Think We Do

There is much written about nuclear war from various perspectives including military, scientific, political, sociological, and ethical. I want to point out that all this writing and talking is theoretical. We have never had a nuclear war. Two atomic bombs were dropped on Japan. These ‘nuclear weapon’ devices captured the attention and imagination of the world. The atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima had an explosive yield of  18 thousand tons of TNT (18 KT)  and initial casualties estimated at 140,000 killed. The atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki had an explosive yield of 20 thousand tons of TNT (20 KT) and initial casualties estimated at 74,000 killed.

The Allied bomber fire-bombing of Hamburg Germany resulted in a disputed range of deaths from 43,000-153,000. The Allied bomber fire-bombing of Dresden Germany resulted in a range of deaths from 45,000-50,000. The US bomber fire-bombing of Tokyo resulted in a range of deaths from 100,00-130,000.

The death counts above do not include deaths which followed from radiation sickness. The yield and death numbers vary between sources, but the numbers presented above are representative of accepted values.

Two conclusions are obvious. Modern weapons make it possible to kill a lot of people in a single attack, be it with hundreds of planes or a single plane and one weapon in that attack. The more significant conclusion is that politicians stand ready to order the military to make an attack which will kill tens of thousands of people in an attack.

This brings us back to –  

What Do We Know About Nuclear War?

I argue we do not “know” anything about nuclear war. We know about nuclear weapons and the physics of how these weapons deliver a combination of blast, heat, and radiation to physical and human targets. There has never been a “nuclear war” in the sense of a massive strategic nuclear exchange between nuclear armed enemies.

We have studied the nuclear war idea extensively for over 70 years. Various ‘insights’ resulted in slogans like ‘the balance of terror’ or the formal concept of MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction). The latter was elevated to policy during the Cold War. Simply put, MAD is the idea that a full scale nuclear attack by one superpower on the other superpower would be responded to by a counterattack and both sides would be annihilated.

The analytic ‘speculation’ behind MAD is sound. The development of intercontinental missiles and sub launched missiles with high-yield warheads profoundly changed our world. A missile launched from Russia could impact a US target 25-29 minutes later. An SLBM (submarine launched ballistic missile) fired from a ballistic-missile sub hiding off the US coast could hit a US target in 4-5 minutes. An enemy missile with a very high-yield warhead (20-50 MT) in a high-altitude airburst could create an EMP (electromagnetic pulse) which would destroy virtually all systems in the US which depend on microelectronics – that is everything electronic.

INTERIM SUMMARY

The United States of America could be destroyed as a country and society in less than an hour from a full-scale nuclear attack by Russia.

Russia could be destroyed as a country and society in less than an hour from a full-scale nuclear attack by the US.

How does one execute a strategic nuclear attack?

A full-scale nuclear attack is an incredibility complex military operation. The US has a plan called the SIOP (Strategic Integrated Operations Plan). Phasing of a strategic nuclear attack has to consider the targeting priorities, weapons fratricide, and maximizing immediate effects.

The targeting priorities focus on eliminating enemy “counterforce” weapons. That is, destroying the weapons the enemy might use to counterattack you. Obviously there is a critical time window to take these enemy assets out before they can launch land-based, sub missiles, or bombers.

Fratricide concerns relate to the fact the powerful blast and radiation effects of nuclear weapon detonations could kill your own missiles before they hit enemy targets. Thus, the SIOP plans for geographic and time phasing of the missiles and bombs.

Maximizing immediate effects means, can you achieve surprise? What is the response time for the enemy to fire missiles once the enemy detects your attack? Where are the enemy ballistic missile subs? How do we avoid showing any preparedness to attack and thus alert the enemy? The Able Archer Exercise in the 1980s was misinterpreted by the Soviets as attack preparation and brought the US and USSR to the brink of nuclear war.

Now, a reality check in three areas.

Neither the US or Russia has a strategic defense against an ICBM and SLBM attack.

Neither the US or Russia has a civil defense program against an ICBM and SLBM attack.

The US declassified a closely-held classified document from 1963 which was the transcript of an “oral presentation” made to the President  by the National Security Council. The presentation discussed the threat to the US from a strategic nuclear war with Russia. The reality check is this document considered scenarios where the US would sustain casualties on the order of 63 million to 107 million dead and that does not include delayed radiation sickness deaths.

The 1963 assessment was based on smaller weapons inventories for both sides and smaller-yield weapons. The US populaton in 1963 for the casualty estimate was 195 million.

Given the increases in the number of weapons and missiles for both sides and the more powerful warheads, using our current population (2020) 331 million – an update on casualties for a 2022 strategic nuclear war would be over 107 million to 182 million dead and the infrastructure of the country is reduced to radioactive rubble. All this in less time than it takes to watch a movie.

We can revisit this topic as relating the Ukraine War and the Russia nuclear threats – and China – and Iran – and North Korea – based on reader interest.

Originally Published 08.04.2022. Re-published with Permission from www.GaryBowser.net.