Opposing civil defence and preparedness is such an odd thing. Especially if you're worried about nuclear weapons and the possibilty of war, I'd expect people to push for shelters in every new building, massive government stockpiles of food and such things. Instead, they are going like "Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make ourselves even more vulnerable to show we don't like this!"
Based on what I've read, it was pretty similar in the UK and West Germany, so it's not just a US thing.
On the other hand, in Finland where I live every building over 400 m^2 must have a fallout shelter with a protection factor of at least 40. There's enough shelter space to fit 70% of the population. I've never seen anyone in Finland criticize or even comment that policy, it's just a fact of life like having to wear a seatbelt when you drive or a helmet when you ride a bike.
Sweden and Swizerland have even more extensive civil defence programs, so it might be a difference between countries that were neutral in the cold war vs. those in the NATO. I don't know a lot about Soviet or Chinese civil defence, but I think they fall somewhere in between.
Those countries did not have nuclear arsenals. If they had nukes at all, it wasn't like the US or UK or Germany (where US nuke bombers, etc were based).
The protests were in the countries who might be *engaging* in nuclear war, and the protest were against that - against somthing they believed to be so destructive, horrific, and immoral, that all efforts should be made to ensure it never occurs.
I think the protestors were saying "we believe a nuclear war would be so inherently horrific that all efforts must be made to avoid one in the first place."
So not " 'Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make ourselves even more vulnerable to show we don't like this!'" but rather ...
... "Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make sure it doesn't happen."
The first thing I noticed in that family fallout shelter is the lack of a toilet. :-( It doesn't look like two weeks' worth of food and water either. Alex's other comments are all worth noting too. Does this family expect to go grocery shopping when they emerge from the shelter?
At some point I will write about the toilet situation. It's quite interesting and amusing, and it really centers attention on the realities of the "fallout experience" in a way that these kinds of drawings do not.
funny man eh ? HAHA *** Santa has an armored sleigh with spoofing ECM and his reindeer have anti-ABM systems which thankfully have been classified ABove Top Secret. Happy Thanksgiving. Thomas Reese. -- has The Safeguard debate been addressed here ?
That may be true now. But back in the sixties, Santa still used an outdated Block IA sleigh, known more for its aesthetic appeal rather than its intrinsic survivability. Defence systems were reduced to an elf tailgunner (instaled in the 40 against the Luftwaffe´s Grinch program) and a primitive ECM suit (codenamed "Special Delivery" by NATO, official name unknown). The reindeer lacked afterburners, elves were still conscripts and penetration was dependant on close cooperation with other members of the Christmas Alliance like the Three Wise Men ("Reyes Magos" program) operating from forward bases in the Middle East and Europe.
And it would be really nice to discuss Safeguard here, by the way.
SANTA--you must give this writer a blog for Christmas !*** and our beloved Lyndon will give it a classic side eye of approval. --** and the mighty and mighty expensive Safeguard was so awesome and terrifying at once
> an extremely interesting case study in difficulties of communicating effectively about a large-scale existential risk.
I would hasten to add that, to me, the protestors understood the existential risk extremely well - and were protesting precisely because they believed the war planners and political leadership did not, in fact, appreciate the existential nature of the risk of nuclear war.
the essay is exemplary in that you integrate a song and a man and link to the fascinating Jan. 12 1962 life magazine issue story, great effing work and keep working and making us smile and think and be thankful -- for Now !! what the fuck is wrong with the Handle verifying software - must be part of Boeing Starliner junk,,,,
Opposing civil defence and preparedness is such an odd thing. Especially if you're worried about nuclear weapons and the possibilty of war, I'd expect people to push for shelters in every new building, massive government stockpiles of food and such things. Instead, they are going like "Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make ourselves even more vulnerable to show we don't like this!"
I wonder if countries outside the US saw the same kinds of protests, or if it was just Americans being hyper-individualistic again.
Based on what I've read, it was pretty similar in the UK and West Germany, so it's not just a US thing.
On the other hand, in Finland where I live every building over 400 m^2 must have a fallout shelter with a protection factor of at least 40. There's enough shelter space to fit 70% of the population. I've never seen anyone in Finland criticize or even comment that policy, it's just a fact of life like having to wear a seatbelt when you drive or a helmet when you ride a bike.
Sweden and Swizerland have even more extensive civil defence programs, so it might be a difference between countries that were neutral in the cold war vs. those in the NATO. I don't know a lot about Soviet or Chinese civil defence, but I think they fall somewhere in between.
Those countries did not have nuclear arsenals. If they had nukes at all, it wasn't like the US or UK or Germany (where US nuke bombers, etc were based).
The protests were in the countries who might be *engaging* in nuclear war, and the protest were against that - against somthing they believed to be so destructive, horrific, and immoral, that all efforts should be made to ensure it never occurs.
the 60's were incredibly "hyper-- "**** whatever the word is, it is way beyond my typing skill...
man, I am trying to thank someone and now my minor "radiation Sickness" has me befuddled ..
but baby, it was forced compliance with "the Man. "-- **** and J Edgar Hoover was watching !! GROOVY baby ..
I think the protestors were saying "we believe a nuclear war would be so inherently horrific that all efforts must be made to avoid one in the first place."
So not " 'Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make ourselves even more vulnerable to show we don't like this!'" but rather ...
... "Hey, there's this huge threat that might kill most of us. Let's make sure it doesn't happen."
The first thing I noticed in that family fallout shelter is the lack of a toilet. :-( It doesn't look like two weeks' worth of food and water either. Alex's other comments are all worth noting too. Does this family expect to go grocery shopping when they emerge from the shelter?
At some point I will write about the toilet situation. It's quite interesting and amusing, and it really centers attention on the realities of the "fallout experience" in a way that these kinds of drawings do not.
I bet the toilet was part of a nuclear - powered "Sanitation and Underground Swimming EXERCISE FACILITY ...
"....and the vegetables better be fresh !! "
That chimney venting to the outer atmosphere seems a little sketchy as well,...
how the fuck is Santa supposed to gain access without that sketchy chimney ???
Santa got hit by the ABM. No gifts this year.
In fact, the very possibility of downing Santa was the real reason to terminate Safeguard.
funny man eh ? HAHA *** Santa has an armored sleigh with spoofing ECM and his reindeer have anti-ABM systems which thankfully have been classified ABove Top Secret. Happy Thanksgiving. Thomas Reese. -- has The Safeguard debate been addressed here ?
That may be true now. But back in the sixties, Santa still used an outdated Block IA sleigh, known more for its aesthetic appeal rather than its intrinsic survivability. Defence systems were reduced to an elf tailgunner (instaled in the 40 against the Luftwaffe´s Grinch program) and a primitive ECM suit (codenamed "Special Delivery" by NATO, official name unknown). The reindeer lacked afterburners, elves were still conscripts and penetration was dependant on close cooperation with other members of the Christmas Alliance like the Three Wise Men ("Reyes Magos" program) operating from forward bases in the Middle East and Europe.
And it would be really nice to discuss Safeguard here, by the way.
SANTA--you must give this writer a blog for Christmas !*** and our beloved Lyndon will give it a classic side eye of approval. --** and the mighty and mighty expensive Safeguard was so awesome and terrifying at once
https://3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2024/07/nine-hot-weeks-with-misgivings.html
> an extremely interesting case study in difficulties of communicating effectively about a large-scale existential risk.
I would hasten to add that, to me, the protestors understood the existential risk extremely well - and were protesting precisely because they believed the war planners and political leadership did not, in fact, appreciate the existential nature of the risk of nuclear war.
the essay is exemplary in that you integrate a song and a man and link to the fascinating Jan. 12 1962 life magazine issue story, great effing work and keep working and making us smile and think and be thankful -- for Now !! what the fuck is wrong with the Handle verifying software - must be part of Boeing Starliner junk,,,,