This is how the world ends......

The other day I was watching a what - if scenario movie about Russia and the US launching their nukes at each other after war broke out in Europe. The fear of immediate and assured annihilation prevented either side from actually detonating such a device in wartime.

Then, I wondered - what if the Soviets and the US had dedicated themselves to producing truly effective (read: truly lethal) viral and/or biological weapons? Suppose that they are able to utilize their respective bomber fleets to deliver said weapons to the desired target. Or they find a way to use a rocket as the delivery system.

Besides the catastrophic destruction caused by the nukes, there is the side effect of radiation fallout and nuclear winter. Suppose then that the Cold War goes hot towards the end of the '80s, as the Soviets try to stop the inevitable collapse. NATO uses their weapons to kill whole divisions of Russian and Warsaw Pact troops, and it escalates on both sides to the contamination of cities. Any better chance for survival than a nuke war?
 
Soviet strategic doctrine of the era called for the immediate usage of nuclear weapons in the event of any military conflict with NATO in Western Europe. They saw it as a method of minimizing casualties, since a first strike would neutralize a good chunk of NATO land forces, military facilities, and fixed defenses within hours, leaving huge gaps that Soviet armored thrusts could punch through and exploit.

The myth of a conventional WWIII is just that: a myth.
 
On the other hand, the Politbureau had a long sit-down with coffee but no biscuits (according to Suvurov) at some point during Andropov's regime (he had a greater insight into NATO planning by being a cunning bastard than anyone previously) and decided that massed "retaliation" was a really stupid idea when you were trying to "liberate" the "oppressed western masses" from capitalism. If word of preplanned immediate and unconditional use got out, Lenin's "useful fools" would become a bit uncomfortable and the arse would fall out of almost all of the peace movements across the democracies. The Soviets stopped their first strike nonsense in the early 1970s (during the Vietnam war and especially Yom Kippur) when they realised that NATO wasn't going to blink first, in spite of the USSR's best efforts to frighten everyone into submission.

After the failure of the piss poor "Get Carter" SALT treaties, the Soviets began to realise that they didn't have the hard cash to keep everything going solo and decided that a win by conventional forces backed by mass confusion and upheaval in the west would be better than wading through a nuclear charnel-house, pop: bugger-all, resources: less. Andropov got it right with upcoming quality and experience from Kruschev's day like Gromyko who knew his enemy and sacked the childish ideas of "they've got more than we have, let's get ours in first regardless" which we were still living with in the early 1980s when we wound our conventional forces down in order to get more American nuclear missiles into Europe (I'm not complaining-the Soviets were winning the hearts and minds sketch and we needed real fear).

I grew up in the last third of the Cold War and lived and served with many "old sweats" who had a suspiciously good idea of how it was all going to pan out, when nuclear weapons weren't a first choice for anyone. Both sides had thirty days before it all got "a bit silly" then whoever went first would be the loser. The vagiaries of a modern general conventional war in Europe were mental-Warpac thought they would have it easy in spite of sending dozens of enterprising non-Russian officers to the Arctic for using "too much initiative" when playing NATO during exercises, and NATO frowned on staff who played the nuclear game too early against Warpac breakthroughs.

I think we can safely say that when all the political and military options are exhausted, it's time for the weapons of last resort. Gen. Sir John Hackett got it about right as far as I knew in his "Untold Story" of the Third World War, bar a few odd moments regarding Ireland and Central America. Go back to "Threads". The best (worst?) scenario and timed perfectly. Everyone shitting their pants in Moscow AND Washington, especially when despite the film being based on an idea, it was actually spot on with planning for both sides at the time.

Nope, let's leave the timeline (not "scenario") where it is and wake up thankful that the most rigid ideology in the highest towers got us where we are today. That's probably why were' shagged now-we don't know who's going to do what next.
 
Then, I wondered - what if the Soviets and the US had dedicated themselves to producing truly effective (read: truly lethal) viral and/or biological weapons? Suppose that they are able to utilize their respective bomber fleets to deliver said weapons to the desired target. Or they find a way to use a rocket as the delivery system.



From Plague Wars by Tom Mangold and Jeff Goldberg.

Alibekov also confirmed that the Soviets were attempting at Vektor to genetically engineer entirely new life forms – super-viruses –, which, if successful, were intended to cause unimaginable consequences to the world’s population. These ‘doomsday’ viruses were combinations of the most deadly germs available – smallpox, Marburg, Ebola, VEE and Machupo. The grotesque ‘marriage’ would be between speed of infection and high-kill factor. The aim was to insert genes from one virus, like Ebola, into another, like smallpox, to create an even more lethal ‘chimera’ virus.

By 1990, Alibekov alleged, the Soviets had successfully created the first ‘chimera’ – by inserting genes from VEE (a brain virus, that causes a sever coma) into smallpox. Biopreparat spent several million dollars on this programme. Subsequent combinations under development included the insertions of Ebola and Marburg genes into smallpox.

Alibekov explained the Soviet delivery systems of BW agents, describing with precise detail the tactical aircraft with spray tanks; long-range strategic bombers carrying cluster bombs; strategic missiles with multiple warheads; and cruise missiles under development. In the event of an all-out war, he added, the biological agents used to strike strategic targets – like American and British cities – would not just comprise super-Plague and anthrax, but also viruses that cause serious epidemics, including smallpox and Marburg. Each city would be attacked with a cocktail of bacteria and viruses – at least three to five agents per attack – so the enemy activities would be fully disrupted within a couple of days; the civilian infrastructure would collapse and there would be few survivors. The will to continue the fighting would die with the people.
 
can nukes sterilize an area by causing the viruses to die (or just be destroyed thru mutation)?
 
Top