Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
33. Here's something about nuclear war no one at Easter dinner knew about...
Sun Mar 31, 2013, 09:58 PM
Mar 2013

...our military and CIA leadership thought the best time to launch a pre-emptive nuclear war on the Soviet Union would be Fall 1963. President Kennedy thought the idea insane and ordered it shelved. Here are the details:



Did the U.S. Military Plan a Nuclear First Strike for 1963?

Recently declassified information shows that the military presented President Kennedy with a plan for a surprise nuclear attack on the Soviet Union in the early 1960s.

James K. Galbraith and Heather A. Purcell
The American Prospect | September 21, 1994

During the early 1960s the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) introduced the world to the possibility of instant total war. Thirty years later, no nation has yet fired any nuclear missile at a real target. Orthodox history holds that a succession of defensive nuclear doctrines and strategies -- from "massive retaliation" to "mutual assured destruction" -- worked, almost seamlessly, to deter Soviet aggression against the United States and to prevent the use of nuclear weapons.

The possibility of U.S. aggression in nuclear conflict is seldom considered. And why should it be? Virtually nothing in the public record suggests that high U.S. authorities ever contemplated a first strike against the Soviet Union, except in response to a Soviet invasion of Western Europe, or that they doubted the deterrent power of Soviet nuclear forces. The main documented exception was the Air Force Chief of Staff in the early 1960s, Curtis LeMay, a seemingly idiosyncratic case.

But beginning in 1957 the U.S. military did prepare plans for a preemptive nuclear strike against the U.S.S.R., based on our growing lead in land-based missiles. And top military and intelligence leaders presented an assessment of those plans to President John F. Kennedy in July of 1961. At that time, some high Air Force and CIA leaders apparently believed that a window of outright ballistic missile superiority, perhaps sufficient for a successful first strike, would be open in late 1963.

The document reproduced opposite is published here for the first time. It describes a meeting of the National Security Council on July 20, 1961. At that meeting, the document shows, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the director of the CIA, and others presented plans for a surprise attack. They answered some questions from Kennedy about timing and effects, and promised further information. The meeting recessed under a presidential injunction of secrecy that has not been broken until now.

CONTINUED...

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=did_the_us_military_plan_a_nuclear_first_strike_for_1963



Nowadays people don't find it odd to live in a time when pre-emptive war is a normal thing for the USA.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

When I went to the link, the article is dated 3/28/2011 PearliePoo2 Mar 2013 #1
Thank you. It IS. My mistake. Octafish Mar 2013 #2
Just one of those things dipsydoodle Mar 2013 #4
Thanks. I like running a Public Service Announcement on Plutonium... Octafish Mar 2013 #5
Associated links are 2011 too. dipsydoodle Mar 2013 #3
i was wondering why excess radiation from japan would just be showing up *now*. HiPointDem Mar 2013 #25
Even though the article was written in 2011 Oilwellian Mar 2013 #6
More old news: Audit Confirms EPA Radiation Monitors Broken During Fukushima Crisis Octafish Mar 2013 #7
I wondered why we had stopped monitoring so soon. This may explain that. Overseas Mar 2013 #30
As pointed out, the article is dated nadinbrzezinski Mar 2013 #8
Right. marions ghost Mar 2013 #10
Radiation within 80 km of No. 1 plant said down by half Octafish Mar 2013 #14
Iirc two week ago we had a story of fish nadinbrzezinski Mar 2013 #16
Many people mistakenly believe since Fukushima is not on the tee vee, the 'problem' is solved. Octafish Mar 2013 #18
Patches are hyper local papers nadinbrzezinski Mar 2013 #19
5 Easy Ways to Spot a B.S. News Story on the Internet SidDithers Mar 2013 #9
So what? 'CRACKED' is a second-rate 'MAD' magazine. Octafish Mar 2013 #12
Just wondering why you tried to misrepresent the contributor's blog as a Forbes article...nt SidDithers Mar 2013 #13
Thanks for your concern. It was on a Forbes website. Octafish Mar 2013 #15
Sid, I want to see your journal! zappaman Mar 2013 #21
What scares BFEE most is people learning about them. Octafish Mar 2013 #22
Yes! zappaman Mar 2013 #24
It's rhetorical. Do you ever post anything that adds to what we know about the BFEE, zappaman? Octafish Mar 2013 #26
K&R. More news that I missed. Overseas Mar 2013 #29
That's one thing about I like about GD, we can talk about important stuff. Octafish Mar 2013 #32
...and more will soon be on the way from N Korea. n/t L0oniX Mar 2013 #11
I pray not. Warmongers on both sides believe nuclear war is winnable. Octafish Mar 2013 #17
K&R Kurovski Mar 2013 #20
It's the strangest thing, getting mocked on account of the BFEE. Octafish Mar 2013 #23
I heard about that on Prison Planet. That's some mundo scary stuff there. freshwest Mar 2013 #34
I see that you realized one mistake. FBaggins Mar 2013 #27
Like, really. Compared to three meltdowns and exposed spent fuel pools, I did a bad. Octafish Mar 2013 #31
No I didn't catch the story on my local news. Overseas Mar 2013 #28
Here's something about nuclear war no one at Easter dinner knew about... Octafish Mar 2013 #33
How many years is Fukushima expected to keep releasing radiation? Trillo Mar 2013 #35
Four decades is as good a guess as any I've found. Octafish Apr 2013 #36
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»EPA: Expect More Radiatio...»Reply #33