On Thermonuclear War, by Herman Khan.
Managing Nuclear Operations, by the Brookings Institute and edited by Ashton Carter.

What role do they play in the nuclear command and control system?

Whiteman is downwind.  Kirtland is far.

I should be OK.

Why do we stockpile all of these unusable weapons? Are they just safe guarded in the stockpile while they await disassembly, or do we hang on to them like my Grandmother did with empty cottage cheese containers?

We still have the warheads from the MMIIIs, from when we de-MIRV'd those things right? So there would be some valuable weapons in our reserve/stockpile right? 

Your grandmother did that too?  

Most are awaiting disassembly.  That takes time and money, and we haven't really thrown the money at the problem to make those weapons go away quickly.  Some of them are so old that they basically have to reverse-engineer them, to figure out how to dismantle them safely.  

Example:  B53 retirement.

The stockpile's in three parts--operationally deployed (on an ICBM/SLBM or sitting in an igloo at a bomber base), active (those weapons not operationally deployed, but of the same type as those that are), and inactive reserve (obsolete and awaiting dismantlement).

Didn't you know? Fort Bragg is the center of the universe for the military.

The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, by Glasstone

If this was a strike against a target that wouldn't fight back it would make sense, in reality....

Great book, I have two copies (1964 and 1977 editions), one with the whizwheel, but those are more about the aftermath and less about nuclear war theory and doctrine.  In other words, about what happens, as opposed to why.

Even LeRoy ,NY was on the target list years ago.  Lapp Insulator company is there and they were the only company in the US that made insulators for high voltage transmission lines.  

Industries are targeted too.  Not just military bases.   China figured out a less expensive way to knock out our industrial might.  They simply purchased our factories and moved them to China.  We can no longer fight a prolonged conventional war against a major power.  We don't have the factories necessary to convert to wartime production.  This makes reaching for the "football" a more certain outcome in such a situation.

Looks like wishful thinking to me.

I love all the "My town has a factory in it, we're the number 5 Soviet/Russian target" folks. Few people can actually say they live in or grew up in a Top 10 nuclear missile target. My Dad spent 5 1/2 years as an FM for a Minuteman LCF  (usually Foxtrot) at Malmstrom AFB. If anybody was a top target, it was Malmstrom AFB and the surrounding area.

Shhhhh!...loose lips.

We lived at Grand Forks AFB from 77-80. 

To be fair the MRE little Tobasco bottle plant in Bumfuk, USA might be the #5 Soviet nu-Q-lar target, but I'm not familiar with the effects of the dreaded nu-Q-lar bombs.

Kissinger-Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy 1958.  After you read Kahn.

Brodie-Development of Nuclear Strategy

yeah, I knew it wasn't a accurate map when they don't even have a base like Whiteman listed as a target.

I remember growing up hearing that Ithaca was a target for a Cold War strike.
Why? I'm being serious.

Cornell had its cyclotron decomnissioned, I thought.

Would any/all TYPES of nuclear facilities be a target?

I like this information

Yeah, that's what I was going to say. I'm calling BS on that map. Not because things are inaccurate but that it's incomplete.

probably where the Russians and Chicoms would land.
I'd wager they could pick up a shit load of cannon fodder there to.

Such bullshit.  San Diego and Norfolk are obvious high-value targets because of naval bases.

That map talks like a fag and its shit's all retarded. Tuscaloosa, AL a target in a 500 warhead scenario? There's nothing here but retirees, rednecks, and football.

Well, who knows? Maybe Russia has Bama fatigue.

Red Dawgs!

I was a Farsider, so I went east from malmstrom.  Waaaaaaaaay east.  

My first assignment was there.  89-94.

And after that it's Austin. They have things

I've read Kissinger's, but haven't gotten around to Brodie yet.

Brodie was the first nuclear strategist.  Everything started with him.

Picked a good day to be Tacair

Like lima says, not "must die" targets.

I mean, come on---in this hypothetical you're in charge of Russia when you decide it's nuclear party time.  Are you really going to prioritize naval bases where naval vessels can go to be repaired and rearmed?  Just how long do you envision this conflict lasting now that nukes are flying back and forth?  I mean, East Anglia has some very good flint deposits, should you target them to hinder the production of arrowheads?  It has about as much relevance I reckon.

Just because you aren't worth a bomb doesn't mean you aren't special.

LOL strategic missile integration complex L OH FUCKING EL

I don't understand how Pearl Harbor isn't on that map.  One strike takes out the C&C structure for the Pacific - PACOM, PACAF, PACFLT, FMFPAC, USARPAC (aka UselessPac).  Not to mention Pearl Harbor, Hickam, ammo docks and missile/torpedo storage at West Loch, and fuel storage at Pearl and Red Hill.  Cripples electrical power generation for the island by taking out two of the four main generating stations.  

A strike at the VLF station at Lualualei also takes out the primary ammo storage location for all services in Hawaii.  On the upside it also takes out Nanakuli.

Again, why would you waste warheads on things that will not be able to hurt you in the current conflict, while needlessly endangering civilians, and ignoring the enemy's nuclear forces?

"Yes!  We got their ammo supplies!  Now they will be hard pressed to reload their magazines in a few weeks when their ships return to rearm and this war is over!  That'll show 'em!"

1977 version pdf

Letting it sit there and get wiped out by a first strike doesn't sound so great either.  Are the missiles sites vulnerable or not?

Targets makes no sense.


They are hardened against nuke attacks and prepared for it.




If they want to do us damage?  Cut off the cable tv streams.   Place will tear itself apart due to not being able to watch reality tv and msm shit.

As they don't seem to show up as minute man III sites, what are the missile site looking places along US 85/18 in SE WY?

"The Strategic Missile Integration Complex at Hill AFB has three  ICBM silos, complete in every way, but containing only inert missiles: two rigged for Minuteman IIIs and one for a Peacekeeper. Each is connected to an above-ground launch console to simulate alert status. There the guidance system is hooked to a Rapid Execution and Combat Targeting console to go through missile launch simulations. Actual missile crews conduct these tests."

Huh... I did not know that... off to google maps to poke around...

RECT.

Hill AFB ICBM Fact Sheet

Google map of SMIC LF's

Go back and re-read the first sentence, it is key.  One warhead takes out the entire C&C structure for the Pacific in addition to any nuclear capable ships in harbor.

This would have been nice to know growing up in the 80's scared shitless of Nuclear Armageddon.  Also didn't know "Restraint" and "Nuclear war" were ever in the same sentence together.

I read a book last year called The Day After WWIII, which was written back in the 80s. They went into detail about general war plans for a nuclear war. 

The assumption that the Pentagon has always made is that there wouldn't be a total sneak attack. They monitor for one, but they assumed that WWIII would be proceeded by Russian Dan American troops killing each other somewhere in the world prior to a nuclear exchange. This would probably be preceded by a political crisis. So, those two things would give commanders time to protect forces by deploying fleets, arming bomber wings, etc. 

The general idea would be that the Russkies would have attacked NATO and the US would have used tactical nuclear weapons in theater against the red forces. The Russkies would respond by launching against our missile bases, sub bases and bomber bases. They would also take out Washington DC to try and take out our military and political leadership. After the Russian attack, whoever is president (it was assumed that the president would be killed in the first strike) would choose retaliatory options using surviving forces. The Pentagon didn't even want an immediate response, because they would want the new president to evaluate the situation 

So, if you're the Russian, limited to 1,550 strategic warheads, you really need to take out the Minuiteman III bases, the bomber bases and the nuclear arsenals. That would limit our response to some degree, but some missiles would survive and some bombers would survive. Our subs would also be at sea and each of them would have 20-24 Trident missiles, each with 3 MIRV warheads with a 100 kt yield on each. So, a minimum of 60 warheads per sub, with probably 10 SLBMs at sea. 

What we would use them on would depend entirely on the state of the war at that time. If you kill too many Americans with no strategic value then the response would probably be more vengeful. 

I would think that some places would be considered strategically valuable, but if you're Russia and you opt to drop an 800 kt warhead on SanDiego instead of a missile silo in Montana, then the 350 kt warhead you left intact is more likely to be used against a target with a lot of Russians in harms way. 

That said, there are some stories saying that when they were negotiating the New START treaty, the Russians agreed to the 1,550 limit on warheads because it would allow them to hold 300 American metropolitan areas at risk. This would most likely be in a retaliatory strike though, where we bombed them first and they hit back. In a Russian first strike scenario, they would probably go after our nukes first. 

If we have the same amount of nukes, and they have significantly fewer ports, refineries, etc, what do you think happens when they try that shit?

Including derailed.

Which is why in the official acronym, we used the "And".  

Missileers are the penultimate killjoys.

I can stand on my roof and watch planes leaving  MacDill across 6 miles of Tampa Bay

They don't want to piss off Fl. man