Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
News Government Politics

UK Cold War Era Nuclear War Plans Revealed 200

NicerGuy writes "The BBC reports that documents from 1975, recently released by the National Archives, detail in part the UK's plan in the event of nuclear strikes during the Cold War. An audio download of the prepared radio broadcast is available. Several other topics are covered." From the article: "Further documents released this week reveal that two pandas in London Zoo sparked fears a diplomatic rift could flare up between Britain and China in the 1970s."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UK Cold War Era Nuclear War Plans Revealed

Comments Filter:
  • by user9918277462 ( 834092 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @12:38AM (#14368837) Journal
    Too bad the so-called audio download is only available as WMP/Realplayer embedded content. Where's the direct download link? Isn't BBC one of the few media giants to have embraced open formats, etc?
  • by taskforce ( 866056 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @12:44AM (#14368854) Homepage
    The BBC actually offers an add/BS free version of RealPlayer on their website for people comming from UK ISPs. It's not exactly open, but it's alright. The reason they use WMP and Real is becuase the majority of their content is streaming, and mp3 based streaming servers aren't as well developed at the enterprise level as they could be. I'd imagine the reason this is in the same format (even though for this type of data it would make more sense as a download) is becuase it's a standardised system which they already have implemented for all their audio content.

    To be fair to them as well, they do give you a choice, if that counts for anything.

  • Poland did that too (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MSBob ( 307239 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @12:46AM (#14368866)
    A few weeks ago Poland revealed (to the dismay of Russia) the nuclear war plans from the days of the warsaw pact. The map was a truly scary prospect. Much of Poland would be annihilated in that nuclear war. Here's [scotsman.com] one article covering that story. You can find lots more. One interesting disclosure was the war games map with all the nuclear strike sites marked on it.
  • Check it out, there's some unintentionally amusing stuff in there.

    It's a fascinating era, wildly optomistic in some ways (paint your home with reflective white paint to ward off radiation...) and terrifying in others (stay in your city after the atomic explosion and fight the invaders). There's a great collection of public interest films here;
    It includes the original "Duck and Cover" movie, as well as the "Operation Cue" experiment. A fantastic resource.
  • by xs650 ( 741277 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @02:14AM (#14369119)
    So the Ruskies were going to hit NATO where it cause the most pain. What would anyone except a complete cypher expect of them?

    It's not like NATO was going to shoot it's nukes harmlessly off into some empty desert.

    It was going to be a real nasty fooking war if it happened and very likely the West would have started tossing nukes first because the Warsaw Pact had greatly superior quantities of ground forces.

    During the cold war one of the catchy phrases in the military industrial complex was that NATO forces were going to have a "Target rich environment". That means their asses were going to get run over.
  • by IntelliAdmin ( 941633 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @02:18AM (#14369130) Homepage
    Strange that it was not in the original post..but look at one of the items in the secrect docs: "How British diplomats secretly floated the idea that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein - seen then as a figure to be courted - could be brought to the UK for a back operation."
  • by Waffle Iron ( 339739 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @02:43AM (#14369187)
    The image that sounds more feasible today is the suicide backpack nuker blowing a crater in the middle of an urban area, a couple of missiles lobbied from North Korea into Tokyo, or twin nukes blowing up in Delhi and Islamabad.

    The problem is that if any of those scenarios happen, it's not unlikely that events will spiral out of control afterwards, leading to the eventual launch of all those still-existing ICBMs.

    Just look at all the crazy stuff that's happened in response to 9/11, then imagine multiplying that hysteria level by 1000X. That's the environment we'll be in after even a single nuke gets set off.

  • by Sockpuppetofdoom ( 678616 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @02:47AM (#14369195)
    I've been looking for the documents under the FOI part of the site, and can't find them.. has anyone else?
  • by Shihar ( 153932 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @03:48AM (#14369374)
    There really is no danger of MAD. That said, you are right that there is a slight danger of a nation being wiped out. The scenario that I see having some small possibility is that an Islamic fundamentalist group is given a nuclear weapon by a state, most likely Iran or North Korea, and that weapon is detonated in the US or (even worse) Israel.

    If the US ever traced a detonated nuclear weapon back to another nation, and it was clear that that nation handed over the nuclear weapon intentionally, they would be fux00red. The US would invade at the bare minimum, and probably glass them over if they thought such an invasion would fail. North Korea in particular would be a candidate for glassing, while Iran would be a candidate for a limited nuking and a full scale invasion. Whatever the case, the nation in question probably would stand no chance to fire back. Playing nuclear war with Washington is a horrible idea. Unless you own a few thousand nukes, the US is not only going to win, but probably win without taking a scratch because they can drop a nuke on any spot even so much as suspected as housing nukes. If Washington has to guess where your remaining nukes are, they will leave no stone unglassed.

    Now, to make the situation even uglier, consider if Israel was nuked. The US would likely try and show some restraint if they thought they could achieve their ends and avoid further attacks without glassing a nation over. Glassing a nation is a way to make the prospect of nuclear war too horrible to ever be considered again, but obviously involves mass whole sale genocide. The US might balk at genocide if other options existed. Israel on the other hand would show absolutely no such restraint. Israel would have no compulsions about making a lesson out of the offending nation. Israel would almost certainly glass the entire nation. While Israel doesn't have enough weapons to glass the world, they do have more then enough to glass over any Middle Eastern nation.

    All that said, the real loss in life might not be in the actual nukes themselves. The real loss of life would come in the complete collapse of financial markets. People would flee the cities. Societies would spread out very quickly. This sudden change would have disastrous effects on economics. Developed nations would likely find themselves in a deep depression. The effects on the developed would be sever, but the resulting collapse of the world economy would be even worse on developing nations. Such a depression would ravage the economies of developing nations, resulting in mass starvation.

    Moral of the story? Nukes = teh sux
  • by SonicSpike ( 242293 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @04:14AM (#14369437) Journal
    MOD PARENT UP!

    Finally, someone on /. who understands the gravity of the situation!

    If a nuke was set off in any part of the US, no current politician would be able to resist the public outcry...no make that demands, to glass an entire country or region. The rise of public opinion would be stronger than WWI, WWII, KW, and Vietnam combined! If the person in power here in the US didn't retaliate with nukes I would be willing to bet they would be ousted and replaced with someone who would. An event like that as you mention would change US foreign policy, and even world opinion instantly.

    With that being said, I hope it never happens.

    However, some insight on things. Everyone believed that Saddam had WMDs prior to our invasion of Iraq. CIA, MI6, Mossad, etc all were in agreement. Well, Saddam couldn't get a nuke to the US, but he might could get one to Israel. As you said Israel has stated many times in the past few years that they are prepared to defend themselves and retaliate mercilessly at any aggressor regardless of world opinion or US intervention.

    If you remember just prior to our invasion of Iraq N Korea unplugged the cameras inside their nuclear reactor and began to fire it back up. N Korea is under heavy heavy sanctions and needs crude oil. Iraq needed nuclear fuel for a hydrogen bomb. I suspect they were either about to make a trade, or they had already made the trade.

    This is why we invaded Iraq in my opinion; Saddam was trading oil for processed uranium with North Korea, and he would then be a direct threat to Israel if he had a working nuke. The US knows that if Israel is attacked there is no holding them back so we decided to take out Saddam and make the whole situation go away before the entire MidEast was turned into glass. Invading N Korea wasn't really an option as we didn't want to deal with the Chinese aspect of that equation. Also logistically and practically Iraq was a much eaiser target at the time. Iraq had no major allies or at least none that would stand up to a US invasion. Their business partners (France/Germany) were not willing to go to war with the US over the invasion of Iraq, but they did voice loudly their opposition because they were selling a great deal of arms and technology to Saddam.
  • antique war plans (Score:5, Interesting)

    by technoCon ( 18339 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @04:20AM (#14369449) Homepage Journal
    I had a huge laugh tonight after I read about the US Army's plans to invade CANADA! Seems that back in the 1930s we made plans just in case we went to war with Britain. And back then the Canucks had a plan to invade the US. Let's see, where's the link...

    Raiding The Icebox [washingtonpost.com]

    I figure the Canadians will never forgive US for neglecting to conquer them.

    Years back, I went to Tijuana and looked around and thought, "this place needs adult supervision." And a few years after that, I went to Sault Ste. Marie and saw the perfectly manicured lawns, clean streets, and perfect order. And I thought, "this place has a bit too much adult supervision."
  • by markyb74 ( 854540 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @06:53AM (#14369735)
    I don't think they will be available until January 1st as that is when they are officially released under the 30 year rule.
    I believe that the national archives puts together a list of highlights of what is going to be available and this is what the BBC is reporting on.

    Mark
  • by KingDaveRa ( 620784 ) on Saturday December 31, 2005 @07:29AM (#14369803) Homepage
    I think they are counting on most people having a radio or TV on at the time of such an announcement. I don't think the TV would just instantly go off - there'd be an announcement for an hour or two, then it would be switched off.

    I think if a similar plan existed today, they would keep TV channels running. More people have working/decent TVs now than radios. Many that do have radios they use often are either mains powered, or DAB anyway. The internet would have to play some role too in telling people what was going on.

    I heard about 11/9 via text message from a friend who was listening to Radio 1 whilst on the bus. The London bombings I heard about via IRC, then went looking at the BBC and News 24's stream (which had just been put up as it was happening). It seemed most other people were doing much the same, as IRC was buzzing, and the BBC news site was performing horribly. In this day and age it would be naive for the government to assume they could just shut everything down to the radio channels only. In 1975 this would be such a hard thing as TV was relatively new, and as for the internet, it was hardly in the position it is now.
  • by Alioth ( 221270 ) <no@spam> on Saturday December 31, 2005 @11:22AM (#14370327) Journal
    The film 'Threads' features some of the public information films and broadcasts that would have been broadcast prior to nuclear war. They are made all the more chilling because of the odd music played at the start and end of the broadcasts (Threads used the actual films - not a speculative mock up).

    In the early 1980s, the government also issued Protect and Survive: the leaflets and some of the public information broadcasts are here: http://www.cybertrn.demon.co.uk/atomic/ [demon.co.uk]

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Working...