[NGTM-1R]

I am reading unclassified information on what my father once called "The Day Three Problem" and how it related to winning the Cold War. It's Day Three of a nuclear war. All land-based missiles and bombers have been destroyed or expended in attacks. Most, possibly all, surface ships have likewise been destroyed. There are no cities. Your communications networks are in ruins. The SSBNs still have missiles, though.

How do you give them target tasking and launch orders?

It's a form of uniquely American planned insanity and systems engineering; the Soviets never tried to answer The Day Three Problem apparently, and if they are to be believed the realization that we were actually serious about doing so contributed greatly to the sense that this was a bad job and they should get out of the fight while the ratio of dirt to black glass was still high.

[redsniper]

hmmmm, well didn't the subs carry pre-determined targets for just such an occasion?

[LordMelvin]

hmmmm, well didn't the subs carry pre-determined targets for just such an occasion?

]
They doubtlessly did, but since you've got enough icbms to glass every major Russian city, and enough bombers to glass every town and airfield unless they get shot down, how do you make sure that the subs are shooting their missiles at something that hasn't already been violently rendered glow-in-the-dark? How do General Ripper and the guys at SACNORAD buried the better part of a mile under the unpleasantly warm remains of the greater Denver Metropolitan Crater convey the information that pre-assigned attack plan Code 'R' will deliver optimum missile coverage to the remaining three un-bombed county seats, plus the airfield near the afghanistan border that was lucky enough to shoot down all the bombers assigned to it, and a nice array of power plants and factories as well? How freaked out am I to even be considering this ****?

Speaking of Nuclear Winter, I've just finished watching season one of Jericho. Why do I never find out about the good TV shows until they've been off the air for years?

[NGTM-1R]

hmmmm, well didn't the subs carry pre-determined targets for just such an occasion?

On Day Three, anything that was a predetermined target no longer exists. (They don't make it past Day Two. Most of them will not survive the first hour.) You're targeting armies in the field or nations getting uppity now that the super-powers are gone.

The one being tossed around in what I read was India deciding to go "lulz Gulf is mine naow kay?", but North Korea and in recent years the Ukraine are also highly possible Day Three targets.

This is sobering stuff. It's all very well-thought-out, very carefully prepared and researched, but at some point you realize you are discussing the effective annihilation of humanity and you start trying to reject it all as insane. It's not. But god do you wish it was.

[Snail]

I don't understand how the annihilation of humanity is justified/not insane in that scenario. Hasn't the world basically already ended? What's the point of ending it more at that point? It's like fulfilling a contract for someone you've already killed. You've made a promise but there's no need to keep it.

[Flipside]

The ascension of the Ordinary Man...

[NGTM-1R]

I don't understand how the annihilation of humanity is justified/not insane in that scenario. Hasn't the world basically already ended? What's the point of ending it more at that point? It's like fulfilling a contract for someone you've already killed. You've made a promise but there's no need to keep it.

The concept of MAD rests on the assurance that the launch orders will happen. If there is no execution, the system falls apart. Answering The Day Three Problem makes Day One vastly less likely by creating a situation in which no successful preemptive strike is possible. But, more to the point...

Winning and losing at this point are more than a little relative terms, but being able to win Day Three (in effect, still being able to issue orders to your remaining strike forces and having remaining strike forces) effectively negates Day One and Day Two as an option for your opponent, for any opponent. There's nothing in the cards for engineering a war between the superpowers now either. It will only buy you annihilation in nuclear fire.

This is MAD at it is most fundamental, its most important. Nobody has anything left to gain, not even the neutrals and the fifth-tier who'll never be targeted. Nobody with delusions of grandeur and one or two faithful men can start a nuclear war now, just as the major players cannot. Like all MAD, it's in the hope of never executing. This does not change the fact that to be effective, it must perform as advertised.

[Snail]

This reminds me of Anton Chigurh from No Country for Old Men.

[Kosh]

I am reading unclassified information on what my father once called "The Day Three Problem" and how it related to winning the Cold War. It's Day Three of a nuclear war. All land-based missiles and bombers have been destroyed or expended in attacks. Most, possibly all, surface ships have likewise been destroyed. There are no cities. Your communications networks are in ruins. The SSBNs still have missiles, though.

How do you give them target tasking and launch orders?

It's a form of uniquely American planned insanity and systems engineering; the Soviets never tried to answer The Day Three Problem apparently, and if they are to be believed the realization that we were actually serious about doing so contributed greatly to the sense that this was a bad job and they should get out of the fight while the ratio of dirt to black glass was still high.

If the Soviets didn't bother to plan past Day Two because there wouldn't be anything left that's worth fighting for, why did we?

[zookeeper]

I don't understand how the annihilation of humanity is justified/not insane in that scenario. Hasn't the world basically already ended? What's the point of ending it more at that point? It's like fulfilling a contract for someone you've already killed. You've made a promise but there's no need to keep it.

The concept of MAD rests on the assurance that the launch orders will happen. If there is no execution, the system falls apart. Answering The Day Three Problem makes Day One vastly less likely by creating a situation in which no successful preemptive strike is possible. But, more to the point...

Winning and losing at this point are more than a little relative terms, but being able to win Day Three (in effect, still being able to issue orders to your remaining strike forces and having remaining strike forces) effectively negates Day One and Day Two as an option for your opponent, for any opponent. There's nothing in the cards for engineering a war between the superpowers now either. It will only buy you annihilation in nuclear fire.

This is MAD at it is most fundamental, its most important. Nobody has anything left to gain, not even the neutrals and the fifth-tier who'll never be targeted. Nobody with delusions of grandeur and one or two faithful men can start a nuclear war now, just as the major players cannot. Like all MAD, it's in the hope of never executing. This does not change the fact that to be effective, it must perform as advertised.

Well, not really. To be effective everyone simply has to believe that it will perform as advertised, whereas continuing to perform if you find yourself at Day Two is pointless. Of course you might deny this in order to achieve the former, but that doesn't change the latter, which seems like a pretty self-evident fact.

[Mikes]

The MAD principle can also be used to great effect to strenghten relationships by exchanging embarassing pictures with your significant other.

[redsniper]

So we've got subs for the ocean, but on land we only have silos. We need something mobile on land too. A nuclear launch platform that can operate from any kind of terrain. It would render the concept of deterrence obsolete!

[Polpolion]

Sounds interesting. Any links to the stuff you've been reading, NGTM-1R, or has it been offline stuff?

[Kosh]

So we've got subs for the ocean, but on land we only have silos. We need something mobile on land too. A nuclear launch platform that can operate from any kind of terrain. It would render the concept of deterrence obsolete!

The Russians have a bunch of them.

[redsniper]

Well, I know they have those truck things. I was going for a MGS reference really...

[SpardaSon21]

It would have been a great reference if you had gotten it, Kosh.  Damn Vorlons...

[Nuke]

i dont really think a mad strategy would end all life on earth nor would i think that there would be zero survivors. it would suck for them, blotting out their sun and making their balls not work. but there will be people alive after the fact. so i think its an awesome strategy, and i think it would be awesome if we carried it out from time to time.

[Bobboau]

If the Soviets didn't bother to plan past Day Two because there wouldn't be anything left that's worth fighting for, why did we?

because we wanted the soviets to know that if they got to day two we would still be able to fight back, in other words, we wanted to make sure it was absolutely clear to them that they would completely lose if they started a war, that it was impossible to win, that way they wouldn't try to win, they would accept the stalemate.

[MP-Ryan]

Y'know, in all the history I've studied, I've still found the best explanation of the Cold War in general and MAD doctrine in particular is the film Dr. Strangelove.  One of my history profs recommended it to his students every year.

And it's hilarious as well as educational.

[Mobius]

the Soviets never tried to answer The Day Three Problem apparently

I hard believe that... do you have proof? They had so many subs spread everywhere, they must have foreseen a Day Three-like scenario, or anything like it.