What decade would have been the least bad had there been a nuclear war?

What decade would have been the least bad had there been a nuclear war?


  • Total voters
    79
Between the West and the USSR?
1945-60 I know its 15 years, easier for math reasons
1961-70
1971-80
1980-90
 
Survivable for both sides to circa 1959-60; past that the USSR is going to be utterly destroyed. By 1972, any hope of either nation remaining intact as a geopolitical entity is pretty much gone. Europe is pretty much doomed sometime between 1955 and 1960. So, the earlier the better with little difference from the 1970s onward due to the sheer number of weapons and delivery systems making additional weapons redundant.
 
Survivable for both sides to circa 1959-60; past that the USSR is going to be utterly destroyed. By 1972, any hope of either nation remaining intact as a geopolitical entity is pretty much gone. Europe is pretty much doomed sometime between 1955 and 1960. So, the earlier the better with little difference from the 1970s onward due to the sheer number of weapons and delivery systems making additional weapons redundant.

I don't really think the soviets would survive a late 50s pounding
 
As you go earlier in time not only are there fewer nukes, but there are fewer long-range delivery systems. This means that had something like the Cuban Missile Crisis or the Korean War gone hot America at least would have come out fine, and Western Europe would at least be livable. The same is not true if Able Archer had gone hot.
 
I don't really think the soviets would survive a late 50s pounding

You may be right on that as I'm not sure on the dates during which the number of US strategic bombs and bombers soared. Could be a few years earlier than 1959. It was around 1960 when the US had its triad of missiles, bombers and subs first operational.
 
wow almost 100% in the first 15 years
Are you surprised,
slide_14.jpg
 
Top