PDA

View Full Version : "Able Archer" and on the Brink of Nuclear War in 1983



Nickdfresh
09-20-2007, 02:26 PM
I saw a program, on a Discovery Channel spin off, on the Soviet fears and paranoia of what they thought was planning for a NATO/US nuclear first strike in 1983, which culminated in fears that a NATO communications war game called "Able Archer" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83) was the cover for a first strike. In fact, the Soviet intelligence and the upper echelons of the Politburo had successfully deluded themselves into believing that nuclear Armageddon was close at hand by ignoring all positive information regarding the West and pressuring agents into reporting misleading information, the arrival of Pershing II missiles to Europe, and talk of SDI (or "Star Wars"). They took the US president's rhetoric to heart and thought that Reagan was far more malevolent than he actually was (Ronnie was reportedly actually quite upset after viewing an ABC movie called "The Day After," (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Day_After) which supposedly caused him to more actively seek better relations and disarmament with the "Evil Empire" in his second term). This came close to being a self-fulfilling prophecy as the entire Soviet war-machine was put on high alert and missiles were ready to launch as Able Archer's crescendo was a simulated nuclear counter-strike that was "ordered" right before the exercise ended. The Russians thought these phony "exercise" orders were merely a cover for an elaborate plan to win a nuclear exchange. The Soviets Strategic Rocket Forces were on high alert and some wanted ICBMs launched even even before US launches could have been detected by their satellites. Thank God they didn't.

I never knew how close we came...

Firefly
09-21-2007, 01:35 AM
Interesting stuff. I recently paid a visit to a US Missile Silo and it was very interesting indeed. I will try and post a few photos when I can find them.

Rising Sun*
09-21-2007, 03:25 AM
I never knew how close we came...

Me neither.

I never knew there was even a risk.

Bloody terrifying.

Still, it's no different to two blokes who start abusing each other and move on to chesting each other. There's always the risk that one will think it's going to blow up (no pun intended) and try to get a decisive hit in first.

The trouble with MAD was that it was like the start of WWI gone mad. Once it started, nobody could stop the process until big slabs of the planet were laid waste, and the rest poisoned to varying degrees.

Egorka
01-11-2008, 05:02 AM
I am sorry if I got it wrong.
But do I hear the notes of complain that Soviet leaders were paranoid and blood thirsty because they geniunly were afaraid of the NATO's first strike?
It is funny how peole reading the same text draw opposite conclusions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83
Thus, on November 2, 1983, as Soviet intelligence services were attempting to detect the signs of a nuclear strike, NATO began to simulate one. The exercise, codenamed Able Archer, involved numerous NATO allies and simulated NATO's Command, Control, and Communications (C³) procedures during a nuclear war. It probably emulated the Pentagon's Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP)[citation needed] which, at the time, named 25,000 military targets, 15,000 industrial targets, and 500 targets associated with Soviet leadership. Some Soviet leadership, because of the preceding world events and the exercise's particularly realistic nature, believed — in accordance with Soviet military doctrine — that the exercise may have been a cover for an actual attack.
...
Because Able Archer 83 simulated an actual release, it is likely that the service and technical personnel mentioned in the memo were active in the exercise. More conspicuously, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl participated (though not concurrently) in the nuclear drill. United States President Reagan, Vice President George H. W. Bush, and Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger were also intended to participate. Robert McFarlane, who had assumed the position of National Security Advisor just two weeks earlier, realized the implications of such participation early in the exercise's planning and rejected it.

Egorka
01-11-2008, 05:15 AM
In the mean while this is what things like "Able Archer" can lead to (http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47998)!
But thanks God there are still real people in this world!

So that you know:
Then he made the decision that saved the world. Summoning up his firmest voice, he called his Kremlin liaison and said it was a false alarm. But today he admits, "I wasn't 100 percent sure. Not even close to 100 percent."

Deal with it!!!

Chevan
01-11-2008, 06:58 AM
Oh damn it seem i do understand why the Americans sended the Korean Boing 747 to death in 1 september 1983:)
It was a "test program" of soviet AA-system
Psychological operations began mid-February 1981 and continued intermittently until 1983. These included a series of clandestine naval operations that stealthily accessed waters near the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom (GIUK) gap, and the Barents, Norwegian, Black, and Baltic seas, demonstrating the very close proximity NATO ships could attain to critical Soviet military bases. American bombers also flew directly towards Soviet airspace, peeling off at the last moment, occasionally several times per week. These penetrations were designed to test Soviet radar vulnerability as well as demonstrate US capabilities in a nuclear war.[15]

“ It really got to them," recalls Dr. William Schneider, [former] undersecretary of state for military assistance and technology, who saw classified "after-action reports" that indicated U.S. flight activity. "They didn't know what it all meant. A squadron would fly straight at Soviet airspace, and other radars would light up and units would go on alert. Then at the last minute the squadron would peel off and return home.[15]

Those idiots from Pentagon in head with "Holliwood Star" Reigan almost brought the world to the WW3 with his Military and Psuhological exercises.
It strange why the Soviet keep silence about close relation of the Incident with Korean 007 flight and the NATO exercises?
It seem our Opponent simply used the poor Koreans in its OWN political aims.

Nickdfresh
01-11-2008, 07:12 AM
Oh damn it seem i do understand why the Americans sended the Korean Boing 747 to death in 1 september 1983:)
It was a "test program" of soviet AA-system
Those idiots from Pentagon in head with "Holliwood Star" Reigan almost brought the world to the WW3 with his Military and Psuhological exercises.
It strange why the Soviet keep silence about close relation of the Incident with Korean 007 flight and the NATO exercises?
It seem our Opponent simply used the poor Koreans in its OWN political aims.

You're not going to turn this thread (which is almost four months old now) into a flamefest Chevan...

If you want to discuss the KAL 007 shootdown, start another thread...

In any case, the US doesn't control Korean airliners...

You're preceding post has almost nothing to do with the topic and the KAL007 flight wasn't the subject of the documentary which was focused on Europe.

Nickdfresh
01-11-2008, 07:16 AM
I am sorry if I got it wrong.
But do I hear the notes of complain that Soviet leaders were paranoid and blood thirsty because they geniunly were afaraid of the NATO's first strike? ....

I think it was that they were paranoid, very much so. But no one has claimed they were blood thirsty, since this incident illustrated that no one wanted a War...

Rising Sun*
01-11-2008, 07:52 AM
Let's reverse what happened.

Assume you were the nuke controlling officer who didn't respond in compliance with standing orders to whatever information you were getting that said you should launch, and you really were being attacked.

Assume you somehow survived. American or Russian or any other nation.

How would you feel, having exercised your independent judgement?

How would your national history, whatever was left of it, judge you?

So, despite Stanislav Petrov being rightly hailed for his actions on what we know now, was it so terrible for his superiors to think he'd failed to carry out his orders?

Egorka
01-11-2008, 08:17 AM
I think it was that they were paranoid, very much so. But no one has claimed they were blood thirsty, since this incident illustrated that no one wanted a War...
Paranoid? Maybe they were. I guess they were.

So lets try to look at it from outside:

USSR tried to scare USA.
USA tried to scare USSR.
Caving under the phsycological presure USSR leaders got paranoid and mistrustfull.

So the question how do we characterise the US goverment? There were either paranod or not. Right?

If they were paranoid then they were no better than their counterpart. My point proven.

If they were not paranoid than they were not afraid of USSR. But then why the public in the USA was so paranoid about it?

Egorka
01-11-2008, 08:21 AM
You're not going to turn this thread (which is almost four months old now) into a flamefest Chevan...

If you want to discuss the KAL 007 shootdown, start another thread...

In any case, the US doesn't control Korean airliners...

You're preceding post has almost nothing to do with the topic and the KAL007 flight wasn't the subject of the documentary which was focused on Europe.

Well, I do not think we should focuse on KAL007 too much in this thread, but Chevan has a point - it is a brick (just like the episode with Stanislav Petrov) in the big picture which was in it's turn very largerly affected by the "Able Archer". So it is ralated to "Able Archer" topic.

Egorka
01-11-2008, 08:24 AM
So, despite Stanislav Petrov being rightly hailed for his actions on what we know now, was it so terrible for his superiors to think he'd failed to carry out his orders?

I do not remember where I read and about which country (US or USSR) :), but will say it anyway.
According the the research it was estimated that up to 50% of the responsible whould hesitate the activate the procedure for the all out nuclear attack in case it should come that far. This conclusion lead to development of new more automated procedures where the human influence was minimised (but not completely removed though).

Rising Sun*
01-11-2008, 08:37 AM
If they were not paranoid than they were not afraid of USSR. But then why the public in the USA was so paranoid about it?


Because, you silly Russian man ;), America was a benevolent nation which meant nobody any harm and could not cause justifiable fear in anyone just because it was bristling with nuclear weapons aimed at various Russian targets, among other places.

The USSR, however, was an evil nation bristling with evil nuclear weapons which it might use against the benevolent USA which, at the time, was resolutely against denials of democracy such as invading Afghanistan.


Historians looking back at our time will note the consistent restraint and peaceful intentions of the West. They will note that it was the democracies who refused to use the threat of their nuclear monopoly in the forties and early fifties for territorial or imperial gain. Had that nuclear monopoly been in the hands of the Communist world, the map of Europe--indeed, the world--would look very different today. And certainly they will note it was not the democracies that invaded Afghanistan or suppressed Polish Solidarity or used chemical and toxin warfare in Afghanistan and Southeast Asia. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1982reagan1.html

As for the Presidential comment about toxin warfar in S.E. Asia http://www.lewispublishing.com/orange.htm , what an absolute pisser by a President who carefully avoided military service in WWII, a tradition of principle or cowardice nobly followed by Clinton and Bush Jnr.

Rising Sun*
01-11-2008, 08:40 AM
I do not remember where I read and about which country (US or USSR) :), but will say it anyway.
According the the research it was estimated that up to 50% of the responsible whould hesitate the activate the procedure for the all out nuclear attack in case it should come that far. This conclusion lead to development of new more automated procedures where the human influence was minimised (but not completely removed though).

Yeah.

That's what worries me.

These are the same sort of people who can't even deliver public transport ticketing systems years after the due date, but they say everything is working fine and so do the idiot governments which commissioned them.

Chevan
01-11-2008, 09:58 AM
Paranoid? Maybe they were. I guess they were.

So the question how do we characterise the US goverment? There were either paranod or not. Right?


It's easy mate.
They were just bunch of capitalist maniacs who has organized the Milirtary exercises near the border in aim to scare the Soviet paranoidal govenment:)
The whole 40 year the west scared the Soviet by the Nuclear threat - so it is not amazing that the Soviets had finally become the paranoid and mistrustfull in 1983:)

Chevan
01-11-2008, 10:08 AM
Because, you silly Russian man ;), America was a benevolent nation which meant nobody any harm and could not cause justifiable fear in anyone just because it was bristling with nuclear weapons aimed at various Russian targets, among other places.

The USSR, however, was an evil nation bristling with evil nuclear weapons which it might use against the benevolent USA which, at the time, was resolutely against denials of democracy such as invading Afghanistan.

.
That's great RS.
That is i love you what for :) you always know the truth...
Sure you right he is silly russian, that losed Cold war, as wel as silly Japans and Germans losed WW2:)
But how have you guessed that the USSR was a evil nation?:)
I though it was a Top soviet secret ....
Do you accidentally not a lawyer in Australian department of CIA?
Might this reason do not let you to show us your photo?:)

Rising Sun*
01-11-2008, 10:21 AM
It's easy mate.
They were just bunch of capitalist maniacs who has organized the Milirtary exercises near the border in aim to scare the Soviet paranoidal govenment:)
The whole 40 year the west scared the Soviet by the Nuclear threat - so it is not amazing that the Soviets had finally become the paranoid and mistrustfull in 1983:)

Reverse that.

Weren't the Soviets the same?

Or did their ICBM silos have soft cuddly things on top so that their nukes on landing or at pre-determined air-burst heights wouldn't go off to upset the children in the target areas?

Chevan
01-11-2008, 10:33 AM
Reverse that.

Weren't the Soviets the same?

Or did their ICBM silos have soft cuddly things on top so that their nukes on landing or at pre-determined air-burst heights wouldn't go off to upset the children in the target areas?

i know the soviets did the same.;)
but who began it first ?
Who has droped the shit on the japane heads?;)

Rising Sun*
01-11-2008, 10:35 AM
But how have you guessed that the USSR was a evil nation?:)

We knew you were evil, mate, because you were commos.

The fear of commos kept our conservative governments in power for years.

But, at the time, it wasn't a joke. Think about the communist thrusting in Korea and later in Vietnam where the proxy wars were played out. It's all very well slagging America as the imperialist aggressor, but it takes two to tango.


I though it was a Top soviet secret ....
Do you accidentally not a lawyer in Australian department of CIA?

Sad to relate but true. I was sort of recruited by one of our security services after universtity but (and this is how worlds are lost) my wife said she didn't want to be married to a spy. She wasn't actually my wife at the time. She is now.

Do I need to say more? ;)


Might this reason do not let you to show us your photo?:)

Mate, feast your eyes on the mighty FE. :D

Chevan
01-11-2008, 10:55 AM
We knew you were evil, mate, because you were commos.

The fear of commos kept our conservative governments in power for years.

Oh mate i did not guess that we were so bad:)
Really do we want to kill you and your famely?
And nationalized all your millions of dollars,plants , yachts and personal aircraft:)
Oh, i forget, yor have no a plants and yachts?
So why do you FEARED the commi so long time?
Coz you 'conservative gov" inspired it to you?


But, at the time, it wasn't a joke. Think about the communist thrusting in Korea and later in Vietnam where the proxy wars were played out. It's all very well slagging America as the imperialist aggressor, but it takes two to tango.

So on your mind the Ameirican imperialistic agressor was better then the Soviet one.
Why:)

Sad to relate but true. I was sort of recruited by one of our security services after universtity but (and this is how worlds are lost) my wife said she didn't want to be married to a spy. She wasn't actually my wife at the time. She is now.

Do I need to say more? ;)

Oh was it kind of Australian evil KGB?;)



Mate, feast your eyes on the mighty FE. :D
Oh you right , sorry:)

Rising Sun*
01-11-2008, 11:17 AM
Oh mate i did not guess that we were so bad:)
Really do we want to kill you and your famely?
And nationalized all your millions of dollars,plants , yachts and personal aircraft:)
Oh, i forget, yor have no a plants and yachts?
So why do you FEARED the commi so long time?
Coz you 'conservative gov" inspired it to you?

Nah.

Mate, it's 'cos you were commos.

I'll try to make this simple.

You = Bad.

Us = Good.

How hard can it be to work out good from bad? :D


So on your mind the Ameirican imperialistic agressor was better then the Soviet one.
Why:)

Naturally the American imperialistic aggressor was better than the Soviet non-imperialistic non-aggressor that wasn't supplying SAM's and SAM crews etc to North Vietnam, because the Americans weren't bombing Laos and other places the Americans weren't bombing where there weren't Soviet SAM crews etc.

If you think about it, it was really a war that didn't happen as nobody from America or the USSR was actually anywhere where the war didn't happen. :confused:



Oh was it kind of Australian evil KGB?;)

I'm offended by this. ;)

What makes you think that Australia could ever run anything even a quarter as efficient as the KGB? Most of the time we'd be flat out running one of your tractor factories. :D

Chevan
01-11-2008, 11:29 AM
Nah.

Mate, it's 'cos you were commos.

I'll try to make this simple.

You = Bad.

Us = Good.


I do understand that logic mate:)
I do not understand - what personally you did fear in commi?
What they did a bad for you?Or what they want to did against you?


Naturally the American imperialistic aggressor was better than the Soviet non-imperialistic non-aggressor that wasn't supplying SAM's and SAM crews etc to North Vietnam, because the Americans weren't bombing Laos and other places the Americans weren't bombing where there weren't Soviet SAM crews etc.

nah mate:)
You have confused the concequense of events.
Initially the Americans bombed the Vietnam and only after that the Soviets began to supplythem by the SAM's.
So from this point the If the Americans has not started the first - this war would never heppend, right?

If you think about it, it was really a war that didn't happen as nobody from America or the USSR was actually anywhere where the war didn't happen. :confused:

Absolutly agree.
However it why only the soviets was bad?:)




I'm offended by this. ;)

What makes you think that Australia could ever run anything even a quarter as efficient as the KGB? Most of the time we'd be flat out running one of your tractor factories. :D
Oh sorry my friend:)
I just thought that Australia is a great importaint state. Ans as any great state should be great in everythin- even in secret service;)

Rising Sun*
01-11-2008, 11:37 AM
I just thought that Australia is a great importaint state. Ans as any great state should be great in everythin- even in secret service;)

Mate, if our secret service was a dog, it couldn't lick its own arse without biting off its own balls. By accident. Because it lacks the ability to do it intentionally. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/15/2091387.htm

Nickdfresh
01-11-2008, 12:08 PM
Paranoid? Maybe they were. I guess they were.

So lets try to look at it from outside:

USSR tried to scare USA.
USA tried to scare USSR.
Caving under the phsycological presure USSR leaders got paranoid and mistrustfull.

So the question how do we characterise the US goverment? There were either paranod or not. Right?

All fair points. But I think one of the problems here was that Soviet intelligence was as guilty of framing the collection and interpretation of intelligence information to meet a predetermined world view of in this case, much as US intelligence was guilty of the same thing on the eve of the second Gulf War, rather than the other way around. That is, they were selectively culling intelligence that met one set of expectations (of which they had nothing tangible or certain), then they were ignoring or dismissing indicators that showed that NATO was not going to attack and that there was absolutely no evidence (i.e. their spy at NATO HQ)..


If they were paranoid then they were no better than their counterpart. My point proven.

If they were not paranoid than they were not afraid of USSR. But then why the public in the USA was so paranoid about it?

I think you mean they were "no worse" that the US or NATO as far as paranoia, of which I would both agree and disagree...

What the USSR was guilty of doing was falling for the same aggressive, sabre-rattling rhetoric from the Reagan Admin. than they themselves had historically made. While it is true that there seems to have been a long running habit of certain Neoconservatives in the US gov't like Donald Rumsfeld, to exaggerate Soviet military capabilities in order to justify new weapons systems and defense spending, there was no incidence of coming close to conducting a nuclear first strike with the total absence of any direct confrontation over some sort of an international incident...

Nickdfresh
01-11-2008, 12:14 PM
Well, I do not think we should focuse on KAL007 too much in this thread, but Chevan has a point - it is a brick (just like the episode with Stanislav Petrov) in the big picture which was in it's turn very largerly affected by the "Able Archer". So it is ralated to "Able Archer" topic.

Oh I agree that it played a part in what happened here. I just ask that we not go off onto another conspiracy tangent because that incident is very clearly a separate issue...

I would say that there were hundreds, if not thousands, of both sides probing each others air defenses and fighter response times. But I would add that a discussion as to whether the KAL007 was some sort of intentional conspiracy by the US to cause a shoot down in which they could blame on the, in Reagan's words, "Evil Empire" is off topic.

In fact, we can discuss those incidents in a separate thread...

Nickdfresh
01-11-2008, 12:19 PM
It's easy mate.
They were just bunch of capitalist maniacs who has organized the Milirtary exercises near the border in aim to scare the Soviet paranoidal govenment:)
The whole 40 year the west scared the Soviet by the Nuclear threat - so it is not amazing that the Soviets had finally become the paranoid and mistrustfull in 1983:)


Yeah, because Able Archer was the only military war game/maneuver ever conducted by either side of the Cold War...:D

Nickdfresh
01-11-2008, 12:25 PM
Because, you silly Russian man ;), America was a benevolent nation which meant nobody any harm and could not cause justifiable fear in anyone just because it was bristling with nuclear weapons aimed at various Russian targets, among other places.

The USSR, however, was an evil nation bristling with evil nuclear weapons which it might use against the benevolent USA which, at the time, was resolutely against denials of democracy such as invading Afghanistan.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1982reagan1.html

As for the Presidential comment about toxin warfar in S.E. Asia http://www.lewispublishing.com/orange.htm , what an absolute pisser by a President who carefully avoided military service in WWII, a tradition of principle or cowardice nobly followed by Clinton and Bush Jnr.

You see, this is one of the great positives that came out of the Able Archer incident. Even though we were on the brink, almost inexplicably, it shocked both governments into some sanity, and may have been one of the biggest single factors of the US and USSR reestablishing Détente...

Few people remember that Reagan was asked, while in Moscow to see Gorbachev, whether he still thought of the Soviets as the "evil empire," and he said "no" while emphatically shaking his head...

Nickdfresh
06-11-2010, 08:00 PM
"Able Archer 83' Part I":

http://www.youtube.com/v/UUGq0JdupNY&hl

The rest (parts 2-8) here. (http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=349613A97BA710A6)