Cuban Missle Crisis Leads To Nuclear War

Wendell said:
I would think that the U.S. would do more damage to the USSR than the other way around...


I'm a bit confused :confused: I'm saying the USSR gets hit by about 500 nukes, whereas the USA only gets hit by about 100 nukes...
 
DMA said:
I'm a bit confused :confused: I'm saying the USSR gets hit by about 500 nukes, whereas the USA only gets hit by about 100 nukes...
I thought you said that the U.S. was hit by one-thousand nukes....
 
Wendell said:
I thought you said that the U.S. was hit by one-thousand nukes....


Nope, only one hundred for a nuclear war in 1962.

Completely different story come the next time things get tense between the two in 1973.
 
Wendell said:
Theoretically...


Well it depends how ready both sides are, but in the 10 years between the two crises we're talking a huge increase in nukes. The USA alone has 1 844 ICBMs in 1973, whilst the Soviets have 1 462.
 
DMA said:
Well it depends how ready both sides are, but in the 10 years between the two crises we're talking a huge increase in nukes. The USA alone has 1 844 ICBMs in 1973, whilst the Soviets have 1 462.
But if one obliterates the arsenal of the other....
 
Wendell said:
But if one obliterates the arsenal of the other....


That's a big IF & highly unlikely. In fact the Soviets were on a higher alert than the Americans during the Yom Kippur crisis. As a result, it's more likely that the Americans could get hit than the other way around. But even then I'd doubt that the Soviet attack would go unoticed, meaning Nixon would have time to order a counter attack.

Then there's the two nations SLBMs still to consider. The US had over 3 500 SLBM warheads. So that's enough to make the Soviets pay for any sneak attack. Similarly the Soviets had about 600 SLBMs. That's still enough to destroy much of the USA.
 
Top