• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Soviet officer who 'saved the world' by averting nuclear war dies aged 77

No, what he should have done was what he did. NOT present information that he was unsure of, potentially triggering the Kremlin to react in a self-defensive way. He waited and investigated. A good soldier gives his commanders ACCURATE information so they can act in an informed way. He had no duty to supply questionable information.

And no, the Kremlin certainly would have had reason to react in exactly the way that I suggested. This was 1983. The Cold War was pretty significant at the time.

Yes. The Cold war was pretty significant at that time and had been for over two decades by then. That is why it is so unrealistic to think the Kremlin would have acted heedlessly. These situations had all been analysed with respect to MAD and the consequences of error. It was well known that the greatest danger was human or technical errors and that that was absolutely the first thing to check. It would not have happend that the Kremlin would have gone to war before checking the Washington-Moscow Direct Communications Link installed for just this kind of situation. Why should they have in a situation like this? The number of rockets on the screen was too small to knock out their retaliation capabilities. There was absolutely no need for headless activity but every reason to get it right.
 
That is about as helpful as anything could be. Why, you even try the Godwin false argument to somehow make your point emotionally instead of doing the logic thing. That is very revealing and shows a total lack of ability to underlay your beliefs with real arguments. But that is often the case, when opinions are gained in swarm behavior mode.

Hitler is most appropriate here. It is exactly the same mindset. You might not like me invoking it, but it doesn't change the dynamic one bit.
 
One thing history teaches us is that we humans are capable of unimaginable acts of stupidity and evil. So, we humans can’t be trusted with nuclear weapons. Also, even if a nuclear free world sadly is a utopian idea it should be possible to drastic reduce the number of nukes.

That even if USA and Russia “only” had a couple of hundred nukes each, it would be enough of a deterrent. This could save tens if not hundreds of millions of lives if the worst happen and you had a full out nuclear war. Also, just handling and managing a stockpile of thousands of nukes leads to huge costs, problems and risks.

Air Force’s nuclear missile corps is struggling: Millennial missileers suffer from boredom, drug use, and low morale.

U.S.'''s Aging Nuclear Arsenal Faces Maintenance Challenges | Time.com
 
Back
Top Bottom