There are historical incidents in the past where mistakes almost led to Armageddon. One in particular in the 1980s I believe where the sun hit some soviet early warning satellites making it look like the USA was making a preemptive attack on Russia. Protocol was to launch a counter strike against NATO and the USA. One officer used his head and disobeyed orders and that is why we are still alive today. He of course was punished for not following protocol. Siberia I think. I don't know his name but it's out there on the web.
OMG! I sure believe you, remninds me of the K-19 or whatever movie where Harrison Ford plays a submarine captain for the U.S.S.R. and how they almost launch WWIII by mistake as well.
That's a huge question and an unthinkable scenario. Realistically, I don't think there'd be time for a UN consult nor would thermal nuclear obliteration of North Korea be tenable. I'd like to think that there's already a contingency (with the help of Japan and South Korea) to at least achieve some neutralization of their ability to launch more missiles. Only then could conventional weapons have a chance of reducing a nuclear winter, extinction of life events, etc. But I may be completely naïve. I'd like to hear from others who know better.
Today, I think the major concern would be a conventional war starting to spiral out of control and possibly leading to a strategic exchange, rather than a sudden nuclear war like during the Cold War. Keep in mind, there weren't just nuts in the U.S. Army back then, they were in many countries and many branches.
For example, the U.S. Air Force wanted funding so badly that they started fudging the intelligence estimates for things like Soviet bombers and missiles, at one point it got so bad they were just adding zeroes at the end. I'm pretty sure I even read that JFK became aware of it. Then there was the CIA of course, and although they had a lot of batsh!t crazy stuff going on (Project ARTICHOKE, a Coca-Cola factory in Laos that produced drugs, Project STARGATE), sometimes I wonder exactly how concerned they were with WWIII and just doing whatever they felt like.
Check out the trivia section for Dr. Strangelove on IMDb, it names a few people in the U.S. military who were comparable to Gen. Buck Turgidson. Then again that was during the McCarthy-era so there were no shortage of crazy anti-Communists.
Recently I read about a situation during the Cuban Missile Crisis when the U.S. naval blockade started dropping depth charges on a Soviet submarine. The captain, understandably upset by the act of war (just to recap which would've been WWIII that the U.S. started) and ordered his nukes ready to fire. However, it took a three-person vote to launch them, and the second-in-command refused to vote "yes." Everyone got pissed at him but he refused, and eventually won the political officer to his side. After awhile he convinced the others to surface the sub, and the Americans stopped.
It's a little nerve-racking to read about how many times we came so close to destroying ourselves.
Can't be too careful with all those weirdos running around.
No, all US nuclear weapons are now safeguarded with PAL's, which require receipt of an arming code from the National Command Authority (i.e., the president, although there are backups who can issue launch orders and PAL codes in dire scenarios) to be enabled. No PAL, no boom-boom.
Of course we now know that Cold War paranoia long outlasted Strangelove. PAL codes on many US nukes were routinely left set to 000000 well into the late 70's. And to this day UK SLBM captains can launch their missiles on their own authority under Letters of Last Resort.
I wouldn't worry about the U.S. armed forces launching nuclear weapons, I'd worry about terrorists setting off crude "dirty" bombs in major population areas.
Incidentally, during the Cuban Missle Crisis the commander of a Soviet submarine issued orders to launch a torpedo tipped with a nuclear warhead at U.S. ships blockading Cuba. Fortunately for the world, one of the officers on board the submarine refused to go along with the decision to proceed with the launch. He was not looked upon favorably by his superiors when he returned home, but we all owe him a lot. Fortunately for him, he was eventually promoted several times in the Soviet Navy and had a distinguished career.
Incidentally, during the Cuban Missle Crisis a Soviet submarine was given orders to launch a torpedo tipped with a nuclear warhead at U.S. ships blockading Cuba. Fortunately for the world, one of the officers on board the submarine refused to obey the order to proceed with the launch. He was of course punished severely when he returned home, but we all owe him a lot.
Do you have a source for that? I've read about him (Vasili Arkhipov) before and I don't recall anything about him being punished. I notice that's something that's often just assumed with no evidence when it comes to the Soviet Union and other communist countries, due to anti-communist bias, and more often than not it turns out to be untrue. So one should provide evidence when making such claims. I just now glanced at Arkhipov's page on Wikipedia (which isn't the best source, I know) and it says nothing about him being punished at all, let alone severely. It just says he continued his career in the Soviet Navy, commanding submarines until retiring in the 1980s. Seems like a "severe punishment" would have involved ending his naval career, but instead his career seems to have gone on just fine. He was even promoted twice, first to rear admiral and then to vice admiral, and made head of the Kirov Naval Academy. This hardly sounds like the story of a man in serious disfavor with his government.
Also, i'm not sure if this was your intention, but you make it sound like he disobeyed Moscow. In fact, the submarine had lost contact with Moscow at the time; that (in addition to the depth charges being dropped on the submarine) was part of the reason why the captain thought that war had already started and therefore gave orders to launch the missiles. Arkhipov vetoed the decision, saying they should wait for orders from Moscow before doing something so drastic without even knowing what was really going on. He was well within his authority to make that judgment, so why would the Soviet government punish him for it?
reply share
The information on what happened to Arkhipov comes from books on the subject of the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Soviet Navy. You can see references to this information in articles in the Boston Globe and The Guardian, in 2002 and 2012, respectively, which both mention that Arkhipov was not looked upon favorably by his superiors after the incident. However, he was eventually promoted to Vice Admiral, I believe, years later, before he retired.
I will change my earlier post to better reflect the whole story. Incidentally, the guy was a hero before this incident, risking his life and taking a high dose of radiation to repair a overheating reactor on another sub. His death was reportedly hastened by the radiation poisoning.
Your worries are bizarrely misplaced on so many levels.
Speaking of "nut jobs", your choice of words say far more about your own personal paranoia and prejudices than anything to do with nukes. A prime example - "(them rifles used in Iraq with bible chapters on them says enough)". Whaaat? And what exactly do "them rifles" (sic) have to do with nuclear weapons? Due to the fact your words scream confirmation bias and irrational fear of that which you don't understand, I'm going to guess you spent zero time in the military.