Purpose of 1969 Nuclear Alert Remains a Mystery

[bananas]

http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2011/10/1969_nuclear_alert.html

Purpose of 1969 Nuclear Alert Remains a Mystery
October 25th, 2011 by Steven Aftergood

For two weeks in October 1969, the Nixon Administration secretly placed U.S. nuclear forces on alert. At the time, the move was considered so sensitive that not even the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was briefed on its purpose. Still today, no conclusive explanation for the potentially destabilizing alert can be found. Even with full access to the classified record, State Department historians said in a new volume of the Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series that they were unable to provide a definitive account of the event.

<snip>

“There are two main after-the-fact explanations: first, that nuclear brinkmanship was designed to convince the Soviets that President Nixon was prepared to launch a nuclear attack against North Vietnam in order to convince Moscow to put pressure on Hanoi to negotiate an end to the war in Southeast Asia” along the lines that previous historians have suggested.

The second proposed explanation is “that the President ordered the alert as a signal to deter a possible Soviet nuclear strike against China during the escalating Sino-Soviet border dispute.” Consistent with the second interpretation, the FRUS volume provides new documentation of intelligence reports indicating that Soviet leaders were considering a preemptive strike against Chinese nuclear facilities.

Astonishingly, even the most senior U.S. military leaders were kept in the dark by the White House about the nature of the alert– before, during and after the event.

<snip>

[UrbScotty]

1. Nixon? Secrecy? I'm shocked, I tell you!

:sarcasm:

[sarge43]

2. Nixon? Paranoia? Who da thought. n/t

[kristopher]

3. I can offer a third possible explanation...

The military is populated with a number of people in high positions that push for the idea that limited use of nuclear weapons is not only possible but desirable. IF that group was in the ascendancy regarding the use of nuclear weapons in Vietnam it is possible that Nixon worried their efforts could have created a climate where he was forced into the use of nuclear weapons by events manufactured by the military commanders.

Some things seem like a good idea in rounds of "barracks gossip" but when the rubber meets the road reality sets in and the consequences of misplaced enthusiasm become a larger part of the discussion. I lived through such an atmosphere when working in the command and control field during the Iran Hostage Crisis and opinion was characterized by the saying "nuke 'em 'til they glow and use their asses for runway lights".

It is *conceivable* that Nixon felt he faced a potential dilemma that he hoped to head off by making the possibility of the use of nuclear weapons more real to everyone in the military than it would have otherwise been. I'm absolutely sure that his move escalated anxiety (we would have said he had everyone's assholes puckered) within the entire military establishment at all levels and focused discussion and debate on the sanity of the idea of a limited nuclear exchange in a way that nothing else could have possibly done.

For those who think this smacks of paranoia, let be share two things: an example of this type of problem can be found in the Japanese military where the engagement that initiated their part in WWII was carried out by a Lt. conducting a false flag operation in Mongolia. His actions were not directed by higher ups, but they were consistent with the wishes of a faction of the military that wanted to go to war and were being held in check by others with better sense. The second bit of knowledge to share is that our nuclear weapons command and control network is focused on the possibility of attempts to misuse the system for launching nuclear strikes by rogue elements of the military. That fear is fundamental to the way the entire system is structured; it isn't paranoia.

[bananas]

4. There was a lot of puckering just a few years ago

A number of high-ranking military officers ended their careers to stop it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_military_action_against_Iran