PC/AHC: Limited, non-apocalyptic nuclear war between the US & NATO vs. USSR & Warsaw Pact in the 1980s

athgtq16129

I am fascinated by stories about nuclear warfare or WW3 that do not actually cause the apocalypse, or cause the a majority of the world to turn into Fallout, Wasteland, Atom RPG, or Mad Max, even despite nuclear strikes on massively populated cities, millions of deaths, and a total reset of human history into a "before and after" period, in some other countries, life is not only more or less the same as it was back then, but in certain senses, technology even advanced despite such nuclear war occurring, however, this is more of a 1980s cultural amalgamation of nuclear apocalypse + futuristic tech, rather than it being based on any semblance on reality.

I am really enjoying this thread by @SpaceRome about thinking of a nuclear war that does not causes the apocalypse, but instead of the topic of that thread that usually points to "smaller" localized nuclear exchanges such as Israel vs. Egypt or India vs. Pakistan, I want this thread to strictly discuss a limited nuclear war involving NATO and the USSR in the 1980s, as well as the possible spillovers of the war elsewhere such as China, Cuba, Turkey, etc., if such a scenario is even possible with MAD in mind.

But overall, I am even more fascinated by retro-futuristic scenarios and future stories featuring outdated geopolitical concepts, mainly Cold War and pre-9/11 "End of History" ones, so even though this is all still unlikely given MAD, works such as:
  • Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? / Blade Runner (1968 novel, 1982 movie)
  • Akira (1982 manga & 1988 movie)
  • Future War 198X (1982)
  • The Third World War: The Untold Story by Sir John Hackett (1982, Jesus Christ guys, what's up with 1982 in particular being the year that people thought a nuclear apocalypse would happen?!)
  • Cyberpunk 2020 (1990; I can recall a WW3 in the lore but I am not 100% sure)
These works from the 1980s-1990s are all set after some kind of standard World War 3 involving the US/NATO and the Soviet Union (198X is itself an anime about such WW3 scenario), as well as nuclear strikes against populated cities of these countries, however, more interestingly, this war has not only not resulted in an apocalypse, but as far as the lore is concerned, both the US and the Soviet Union still continue existing even despite that!

So here is both a question, and also an alternate history challenge: What kind of scenarios could result in a limited, nuclear World War 3 between US & NATO vs. USSR & Warsaw Pact in the 1980s (during the peak of Soviet nuclear might)?

Bonus points: Have the USSR as a whole survive this nuclear war, because.... reasons, some of these fictional settings feature the USSR surviving even after losing WW3, I really want to explore an outdated sci-fi setting where the USSR not only manages to survive WW3, but also keeps on existing well into the 21st century.
 

athgtq16129

CarlosTheAltHistoryGuy said:
If Ronald Reagan somehow manages to get SDI running, then the USA might make it.
Click to expand...
In a more sci fi-esque scenario, this could certainly be a viable option, but from a more realistic standpoint, hasn't it now been agreed that the SDI was an unfeasible project at the time, and that it was a thing that came out of Reagan's own uninformed ideas that were not based on reality?

However, in the anime Future War 198X that I cited, they predicted something almost identical to the SDI as the main cause for World War 3, this film was released a year before the SDI was publicly revealed by Reagan!
In September of an unspecified year in the 1980s, the United States conducts a nationally-televised orbital test of "Space Ranger"—a crewed missile defense space weapon consisting of four laser-equipped modules and a mother ship named Voyager—at Vandenberg Air Force Base, overseen by DARPA and American researchers Burt Gains and Professor Brown. Gains views Space Ranger as having the potential to end the specter of nuclear war, but also fears it could further inflame the nuclear arms race.
Click to expand...

Future War 198X - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Here is an analysis/review video of this anime in question, I was intending to make its own thread to discuss the film from an alternate history perspective, but I will post the video here for convenience:
 
CarlosTheAltHistoryGuy

CarlosTheAltHistoryGuy

athgtq16129 said:
In a more sci fi-esque scenario, this could certainly be a viable option, but from a more realistic standpoint, hasn't it now been agreed that the SDI was an unfeasible project at the time, and that it was a thing that came out of Reagan's own uninformed ideas that were not based on reality?

However, in the anime Future War 198X that I cited, they predicted something almost identical to the SDI as the main cause for World War 3, this film was released a year before the SDI was publicly revealed by Reagan!

Future War 198X - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Here is an analysis/review video of this anime in question, I was intending to make its own thread to discuss the film from an alternate history perspective, but I will post the video here for convenience:
Click to expand...
That's why the somehow is there, is basically ASB
 

Blyatnik

athgtq16129 said:
So here is both a question, and also an alternate history challenge: What kind of scenarios could result in a limited, nuclear World War 3 between US & NATO vs. USSR & Warsaw Pact in the 1980s (during the peak of Soviet nuclear might)?

Bonus points: Have the USSR as a whole survive this nuclear war, because.... reasons, some of these fictional settings feature the USSR surviving even after losing WW3, I really want to explore an outdated sci-fi setting where the USSR not only manages to survive WW3, but also keeps on existing well into the 21st century.
Click to expand...
The easiest answer is that the US has a 100% funded and operational SDI in its final form and is able to survive (damaged, but not destroyed) with most major institutions at least intact on paper, while the Eurasian continental area ceases to house human civilization. Or the inverse, a rogue Soviet government or element is able to pull off a nuclear first strike on US government institutions, crippling the command structure, while the USSR cleans house vigorously and sucks up to the West to not be nuked/start a nuclear war.

A more in-depth answer; The Soviets and NATO get into it in the mid-late 1980's and there is tactical nuclear detonations over major airbases and staging points across central europe, but nobody will hit another nuclear power's territory for fear of setting off the chain to total war, and so they hastily sign a peace agreement in slight favor of whoever has the initiative at the time. If it is the West, the USSR collapses on schedule or ahead of time, and probably with more war and chaos because the Western powers will have much more reason to isolate Russia from the very start. If the Soviets have the initiative, especially if they are at or near the Rhine, then they can enforce reparations and keep themselves going economically while they hide the societal problems under the carpet, celebrating a massive victory both diplomatically and militarily (taking most of Europe without major nuclear war is certainly an achievement post-1945). They may survive into the 21st century if they can coast for a little while, but only if Gorbachev is either much more successful or isn't in the picture entirely, losing out to someone like Romanov or Ryzhkov in the 1980s, or to Primakov or Lebed in the 90's.
 

NoBull

Well one scenario would be for the Soviet Union to have had a messy collapse in which hard line Communist true believers controlled significant elements of the military including part or all of the Strategic Rocket Forces and used nuclear missiles first internally on Moscow and then on a variety of domestic and foreign targets. As the Soviet Union would be deep in a civil war with an uncertain and changing lines of conflict, retaliation likely would not have occurred using nuclear weapons as they would have hurt both those who used the weapons against the rest of the world as well as those in the Soviet Union that were also targeted.

The question would be which places would be destroyed by this war.

The goal of the initiators of the action would include the destruction of those places in the USSR which were turning away from Communism, the destruction of long term perceived enemies of Communism and In particular of Russia. This would likely be recognized as a one time opportunity.

I do not have any idea which places in addition to Moscow and the Capitals of the Baltic States that would be internal targets. External likely would include Berlin and Bonn, Rome, Paris, London and the other Western European capitals as well as Ankara and Istanbul. In the east, Beijing, Shanghai and Hong Kong as well as some other large Chinese cities and Tokyo and Singapore. Australia and New Zealand might also be targeted. I can also imagine some other places near the USSR, mostly due to annoyance such as parts of Afghanistan, India and Pakistan.

Then there is the Middle East, some such as Egypt and Israel again due to annoyance, but others such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran and Iraq to destroy the oil and the capitalists.

And finally, North America. As you can see from the growing list, to destroy all perceived enemies of the USSR nearby would take a lot of weapons. A side effect of destroying them would mean a limited number of weapons left to target both the US military and U.S. cities. First the military. All major US military bases targeted. Also each of the Service Academies. The Pentagon, White House, Capital Building and CIA and FBI offices mean the DC area would be hit hard. Add in New York, Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, Dallas, Houston, Denver, Atlanta, Miami, Tampa, Orlando, Jacksonville, Charleston, Charlotte, Richmond, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Pittsburg, Northern New Jersey, Western Connecticut, Boston, Buffalo, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus, Indianapolis, St. Louis, Kansas City, Little Rock, Nashville, Louisville, New Orleans, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Salt Lake City and Phoenix in the USA. Canada likely would lose Vancouver, Regina, Winnipeg, Toronto and Montreal. Mexico, Mexico City.

Further south the Panama Canal would be targeted if it would be in range. The same with major South American cities.

I may have missed a city or two, but you get the idea.

What is notable is the places not destroyed, even in fairly densely populated parts of the world, the secondary cities and their industrial capacity. Also large parts of what was then referred to as the Third World. This simply because there would be too many places to target and deliver nuclear weapons to.

As example, Ohio would have about half its population killed, directly and indirectly, but half would survive. This means about 4 million people living in both small and large cities. Here is a list of some of the places not destroyed in that state which had significant industrial capacity: Toledo, Defiance, Lima, Dayton, Springfield, Middletown, Hamilton, Mansfield, Akron, Canton and Youngstown. There were also a myriad of smaller cities with significant industrial capacity and while the destruction of the three largest cities would be significant, all of those cites were and are dispersed on purpose to make them difficult to be totally destroyed. Typically they had industry spread out. Cleveland as example had industry at its edges over 75 miles apart.

And some US states likely would have no direct destruction. The same for most of Africa and Southeast Asia, as well as most of Australia.

I project the world would keep on spinning, at most due to direct and indirect destruction half the population would die, possibly many fewer, if resources were marshaled and starvation was largely avoided. Technology likely would not go backwards, instead it would likely stall for a generation or two for while many universities and research institutes would be destroyed, many would survive. Given the history of humans ability to continue industrial production under war time conditions during WW2, I don’t think most surviving production will stop. Basically people won’t give up and lie down and quietly die, they will try to survive and will work. Technology will not magically stop working. And today, a couple of generations later, well they will watch movies and listen to songs about the old world. People will observe a day of remembrance to the billions who died. There will no longer be a Broadway, but plays would have been written and performed on other stages about that horrible doomsday and the humble and great lives lost that day.
 

jsb

CarlosTheAltHistoryGuy said:
If Ronald Reagan somehow manages to get SDI running, then the USA might make it.
Click to expand...
Why would USSR not just build planet or at least atmosphere killing (kill probability two) weapons that dont require delivery in that case, it was perfectly sufficiently paranoid to do so? Or worse go for an early strike before SDI is ready, not that it will be realistically...?
 

Thomas Jefferson

In the midst of a crisis, the Soviet leadership orders a tactical strike on NATO bases in Europe. NATO retaliates with a limited strike on Warsaw Pact bases, and soft-liners within the USSR stage a coup and surrender. North America, Russia, and Asia are fine, but fairly large chunks of Europe have been taken out.
 

David Floyd

The problem is one of escalation as well as assumptions. Consider this:

The US uses a tac nuke to destroy a Soviet bridgehead over the Weser, with the assumption that this will demonstrate resolve.

The Soviets then hit HQ British I Corps to send the message this won’t be tolerated.

The Brits and US respond by hitting the airbase the Soviet strike came from, as well as HQ Soviet 20th Guards Tank Army as a tit for tat.

The Soviets then escalate to de-escalate, and hit a US carrier group in the Norwegian Sea as well as US 7th Army HQ.

US says the hell with that, and hits Soviet Western TVD HQ at Legnicia in Poland.

The Soviets respond by hitting SHAPE at Mons, Belgium.

The US sends SAC to their failsafe points, while hitting Soviet based around Murmansk.

The Soviets, realizing the next step is a full US strike, make a last ditch escalate-to-deescalate and hit, say, Frankfurt along with a message of “stop NOW.”

The Germans are now screaming for retaliation, as the US has always promised, so the US hits Minsk.

And that’s all she wrote.

See how we get from A-Z?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top