WI: During Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy Chooses Military Option

I don't think they would remotely that many.

The Soviet military has never been known for showing much individual initiative. And certainly would not regarding launching nuclear weapons.

Not to mention the questions over if most Soviet warheads would work or not. The U.S. found out that 75% of its Polaris warheads would not detonate. I would say that the Soviets had similar problems in the 1960s.
The Soviets had over 2800 tac nukes floating around from what I recall, Assuming the US destroys 90% and 75% of survivors won't work and 50% of those aren't launched that's still 30 nukes, and frankly I think those numbers are optimistic and the US will miss a lot more than 10% [the Soviets were masters of camouflage and misdirection and Satellite recon was in its infancy and aerial recon was very limited], and that when nukes are bursting on the horizon more officers will decide to launch while they still can

The USSR had 72 SLBMs as well and I think most would survive and launch once they hear radio reports of war

And remember the Americans suffer from failures as well which gives the Soviets more chances of weapons surviving
 
The USSR had 72 SLBMs as well and I think most would survive and launch once they hear radio reports of war

And remember the Americans suffer from failures as well which gives the Soviets more chances of weapons surviving

Read "Blind Man's Bluff".

The Soviets were having massive problems getting their SLBMs to even launch. Much less come remotely near the target well into the mid 1960s.

and in "The Two Day War", it is American nuclear weapons failures that allow the Soviets to nuke Washington D.C. in the first place.
 
Read "Blind Man's Bluff".

The Soviets were having massive problems getting their SLBMs to even launch. Much less come remotely near the target well into the mid 1960s.

and in "The Two Day War", it is American nuclear weapons failures that allow the Soviets to nuke Washington D.C. in the first place.
Remotely near target still puts them somewhere in the CONUS

And said problems still mean some launched, certainly more than one out of 72

And again said failures should affect the nukes intended Soviet forces in Europe as well, and allow some of the tactical and theater nuclear forces to survive long enough for a counter strike
 
Not necessarily.

But what of it.

I can tell you confidently that there is a staggeringly huge difference when a 100 kiloton warhead hits 20 miles from New York City instead of within a mile of New York City.
The CONUS is a very big target, it's hard to miss

A warhead that hits the CONUS, but nowhere near anything important is still a nuke that his the CONUS, while a warhead that doesn't launch is out of sight out of mind

If the US gets hit by a bunch of nukes, even if they miss anything important, will get more sympathy than on which doesn't get nuked, important for the post war world

My main gripe is how in both scenarios the US ends up a Pariah, when the USSR would have done things just as bad but not as successfully and the US has 20+% of global GDP
 
The CONUS is a very big target, it's hard to miss

A warhead that hits the CONUS, but nowhere near anything important is still a nuke that his the CONUS, while a warhead that doesn't launch is out of sight out of mind

If the US gets hit by a bunch of nukes, even if they miss anything important, will get more sympathy than on which doesn't get nuked, important for the post war world

My main gripe is how in both scenarios the US ends up a Pariah, when the USSR would have done things just as bad but not as successfully and the US has 20+% of global GDP

In both scenarios it comes down to the fact that after a nuclear exchange that

1) The United States still exists, even though damaged (worst case).

2) The Soviets have been virtually exterminated.

In fact IIRC, in "The Two Day War", foreigners start calling the U.S. nuclear strikes on the U.S.S.R. "The Second Holocaust".

I also think a number of nations near the U.S.S.R. were annoyed that fallout from U.S. weapons fell on their countries in places.

Plus the subsequent global famine from lowered food production.
 
ressurection day

In the book ressirection day Kennedy's hand was forced because of a general who decide to take matters into his own hands, after the U2 spyplane was shot down over Cuba. The general attacked the SAM sites that brought it down. After that their was no chance for a peacefully solution to the crisis.
 
In the book ressirection day Kennedy's hand was forced because of a general who decide to take matters into his own hands, after the U2 spyplane was shot down over Cuba. The general attacked the SAM sites that brought it down. After that their was no chance for a peacefully solution to the crisis.

General Ramsey Curtis (a very thinly disguised General Curtis Lemay, the famous early commander of SAC and before that the firebombing of Japan).
 
Going back to the original question I suspect yes it will wind up triggering WWIII because the Soviet commanders on the ground in Cuba had tactical nuclear missiles that they had full control over to respond to any invasion with; a fact that the US was not aware of until decades later.
 
Going back to the original question I suspect yes it will wind up triggering WWIII because the Soviet commanders on the ground in Cuba had tactical nuclear missiles that they had full control over to respond to any invasion with; a fact that the US was not aware of until decades later.

Actually while the Soviet commander in Cuba did have full authority to launch nuclear weapons. He did not actually KNOW he had that authority.

The Kremlin had issued that authority but because of abysmal communications between Moscow and Cuba he never knew he had full authority.

On the other hand, they had reservations back in Moscow and actually sent a new set of orders rescinding that authority.

IIRC, no one is quite sure which messages arrived first of if any of them did.
 
Top