25 thoughts on “US Strategic Nuclear Policy — Part 4

  1. 34:45 idiot.. 1st of many we have him to thank for modern terrorism, crazy norks, etc.. and he still won’t shut up like presidents are supposed to do when they leave office. Nice guy though.. just wrong job.

  2. 13:05 Reagan was wiling to give up all nuclear weapons and share SDI technology with the soviets.. Gorby turned him down.. and leftists, anti-reaganists continue to this day continue to think he was a warmonger.

  3. I haven't kept count, but it seems to me that the mentions of the Rand Corporation while narrating the history of US Nuclear policy, is as numerous as the mentions of nuclear weapons themselves. It's a political thinktank for corporate interests; it's a lobbyist-nest. Hidding in plain sight, it is the military-industrial complex. It that wages war for money.

  4. Let me get this straight….civilian oversight/authority was surprised that all the warheads were targeted? Have these people NEVER worked with the government before??? The cardinal, immutable and unassailable rule in government operations is to exhaust ALL resources in every fiscal period in order to ask for more resources in the next fiscal period….its called artificial budget expansion, the primary object of which is enhancing organizational influence and power. The more resources that are committed to your agency, bureau, department, etc., the greater your organization's power and influence. And these people were surprised that all the warheads were targeted and that Omaha (i.e., the military) was asking for more??? How the f did you guys get into leadership/decision making positions?!?!?

  5. There is a problem of fall out on our friends. Especially in Japan but also the Near & Middle East friends. I wonder if a freighter with a nuke that is detected will arrive at it's destination.

  6. If we say we won't hit back than the bully who starts the fight (even by miscalculation) has no fear of getting hurt & will press on (after the Rhineland till he gets to Poland) & be surprised. Too late. The POTUS must be "hard nosed" & believable.

  7. Now we need part 5, with the resurgence of Russia, the second cold war, and the rise of North Korea and China.

  8. North Korea is NOT able to anywhere nearly completely destroy the United States. However, even 500 missiles, 26 subs, is more than enough to turn North Korea into an ashtray.

    Way back in the Reagan days my Latin instructor said large countries the size of America Canada or Russia are simply too large to completely conquer. Cities, sure. But the spaces in between…

    Deadly nicotine
    Kills what might have been

    Metallica, Blackened

  9. Without national will/support and will on the part of American leaders, there is no deterrence. There has been no President since 2003 who has been willing to use nuclear weapons, and that's why other nations are no longer deterred by American nukes.

    So much has been learned in the past 6yrs.

    No will=no deterrence=no need to have these dangerous devices

  10. the 4 documentaries are a total jewell…priceless. For a lover of these subjects one can just get enough. But this series is a diamond. Five stars. Thanks!!

  11. If you want peace, prepare for war. WHAT!  Ok that's enough of this warrior mentality gentlemen, you had your chance, you failed, now move over we girls are taking over. No one will ever be hungry, or thirsty, or cold again, ever. All weapons of destruction are to be be destroyed, you have one month.

  12. Reagan is remembered by many as the president who ended the cold war. But in fact it was the Soviets who initiated the move towards detente. In 1985, the Soviet economy started to buckle under the weight of an arms race that the Soviet economy could no longer bear. The Soviet Union had no other choice but to pursue arms reductions. Reagan had the opportunity to eliminate nuclear weapons from the face of the Earth but balked at the chance because he would have had to abandon the fantasy of Star Wars which to has yet to proven to work. We are now living with the consequences of that choice with nuclear weapon proliferation

  13. The cold war did not just end on it's own. Reagan and his cabinet employed a process that simply broke the Soviet Union.

  14. I think the nuclear disarmament is the biggest threat to peace we now face. Back when we focused on nuclear war it made smaller conventional wars less likely. This new shift in posture away from nuclear weapons to conventional weapons has led to more wars.

  15. A year after this documentary was made, the Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations was publicly discovered in 2005; it was on the circumstances under which commanders of U.S. forces could request the use of nuclear weapons. The document was a draft being revised to be consistent with the Bush doctrine of preemptive attack. Nuking places preparing WMDs for a perceived impending attack, that sort of thing.

  16. And lastly, awesome documentary. Although I don't agree with many of the policies, it all gave me a strange, almost morbid fascination of the entire subject since I was a young boy. I feverently read and watch any new unclassified information only for my own knowlegde as a source of banal entertainment. The subject has captivated my interest for 40 plus years.

  17. With all of our weapons modernizations and strategic refinements we were lucky not to scare the paranoid soviet state into a pre-emptive retaliatory first strike. Our deterrent was so overbuilt and staffed that they must have been terrified that we hoped to be capable of winning a nuclear confrontation. We needed a tactical and a strategic deterrent but we went overboard with spending in these areas. I wonder what might have happened if half the funds had been used for education.

  18. This is all very fascinating stuff, but as real and deadly was the issue, I see a whole other side to the whole thing. I see VIP's who used threat potentials and unknowns to perform grand scale empire building within their respective agencies, designing and equiping for responses that were nonsensicle and utterly useless save for giving everyone on board and bigger hat and higher GS or government executive agent grade. Sure we needed a deterent but it could have been done for a fractional cost

  19. I just wish they'd do more of these. Can't get enough of them. We'd probably have fun having a beer together and talking stuff over.

  20. In my opinion, Al-Qaida and radical islamic terrorists are, from some points of view, more dangerous than the Soviet Union and that is because they can't be deterred and they are also willing to do certain things the soviets would've never done. They are willing to lower themselves at levels the soviets would've never lowered themselves. So the only solution is to simply eliminate them. There's no other way. They must be eliminated in a the cheaper and most effective way.

  21. Without a doubt, this is the best documentary on cold war nuclear strategy that i've ever seen. Sort of the documentary i've been looking for. big big big ups to the NSA archive and all involved in this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *