This article was written by The Zillennial Zine’s spring editorial intern Ian Ferdock. Find him on Instagram at @ianferdock. If you would like to share an article with The Zillennial, send us an email at thezillennialzine@gmail.com.
So, things have felt a bit tense lately, haven’t they? During a time of significant geopolitical turmoil, it’s natural to have some anxiety. Especially when you know the world is controlled by leaders who can be a wee bit impulsive. All it takes is a single headline before “World War III” starts trending. While I am not a fan of reactionary behavior, it doesn’t seem completely unreasonable to be afraid of global conflict. Fueling much of this fear is concern that a third world war could very well be fought with nuclear weapons. However, most people probably don’t know exactly how that would happen, or what the result would be. Annie Jacobsen’s Nuclear War: A Scenario breaks down a hypothetical scenario to lay out exactly how a real-life nuclear war could occur.
I’ve always felt well-informed regarding the realm of foreign affairs since I studied history in college. My education has given me a broad foundation to understand the context of global conflicts. I’ve also studied 20th-century American history extensively, particularly the Cold War. So, I thought I was relatively knowledgeable about US nuclear policy and how it translates to the present day. A year ago, on TikTok, I saw clips of a woman giving interviews about her new book. I was fascinated and decided to pick up a copy. Little did I know Annie Jacobsen and her New York Times Best Seller would send a pronounced shiver down my spine as I soon realized just how insane nuclear war policies actually are.
Annie Jacobsen and Nuclear War: A Scenario
I honestly can’t say enough good things about this book. While yes, I did find the information enclosed rather terrifying, it was a phenomenal read. Jacobsen’s ability to synthesize incredibly complex information and render it easily digestible is immaculate. Even if you aren’t a big non-fiction fan, I think you’ll enjoy it. What makes her approach to understanding nuclear war so compelling is a reliance on storytelling. Instead of just spitting out a collection of facts detailing US nuclear policy, Jacobsen lays out a hypothetical scenario where nuclear war is waged.
It begins with a bolt out of the blue, or unprompted, nuclear attack launched by North Korea on the Pentagon. From there, she goes minute by minute to explain every detail that will follow. In all, she covers the first 74 minutes of the attack and concludes with a discussion of the years following a global nuclear catastrophe. It would be impossible for me to provide every single detail, but I can break down the most important takeaways from her book to give you insight on what to expect.
US Nuclear Capabilities
I’m not here to scare you or be an alarmist. On the flip side, I live within a 7-mile radius of the Pentagon, so I get why this information is frightening. In Jacobsen’s scenario, I would be one of the first to go. Regardless, I think this is a subject that lacks ample attention and it’s worthwhile understanding it a little better. So, let’s get started by examining the US’s nuclear capabilities.
I assume it’s common knowledge that the US built the first nuclear bomb during WWII under the guise of the Manhattan Project. *Cue Oppenheimer music* The bombs initially intended for use in Germany were eventually dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Those two incidents remain the only use of a nuclear weapon in combat.
In the wake of WWII and throughout the Cold War, the US would not stop manufacturing nuclear weapons. Quite the opposite. We built up a massive arsenal in the name of deterrence against the Soviet Union. In 1967 at the height of the Cold War, the US possessed 31,255 nuclear weapons. Today that number has fallen to 3,750 total warheads. Despite the decrease in size, current nuclear capabilities still reflect the tensions central to the 20th century.
By Land, By Air, By Sea – The Nuclear Triad
The US military possesses robust nuclear capabilities. Nuclear warheads can be launched by land, by air, or by sea, forming the devastating nuclear triad. Throughout the country, silos house nuclear warheads contained in intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) which can be launched within minutes at the president’s discretion. Nuclear submarines patrol international waters every minute of every day and are untraceable. By land and by sea are the quickest ways nuclear weapons can be launched, but the US can also send bombers to drop nukes as well.
ICBMs
ICBMs date back to the early days of the Cold War and today there are 400 Minuteman III ICBMs ready for launch located in Wyoming, Montana, and North Dakota. Our missiles are stationary, while in North Korea they are housed in mobile launch vehicles constantly on the move. These missiles can carry more than one warhead and may even contain dummy warheads to confuse missile defense systems. In less than 30 minutes, missiles launched from the US can reach Russia. Their journey begins with a boost phase and then transitions to the midcourse phase during which a warhead, or multiple, is released. From there it enters a terminal phase where it is guided to its designated target. Once an ICBM is launched, it is impossible to recall. There is no going back.
Nuclear Submarines
Nuclear-armed submarines are arguably the most intimidating component of the nuclear triad. While American ICBMs remain in their well-documented locations, submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) are untraceable. The Ohio-class nuclear submarines that house SLBMs are unable to be located as they maintain constant stealth. Each submarine carries up to 20 SLBMs, more than enough to destroy an entire country. ICBMs are restricted in their ability to quickly travel to their targets since they must travel through atmospheric heights to another continent. Meanwhile, SLBMs can be launched along an enemy’s coastline, vastly reducing the time it takes to reach a target. For example, if a Russian nuclear submarine launched an SLBM around 600 miles from the US coast, it would reach its target in just 7 minutes.
Bombers
Completing the nuclear triad are B-52 bombers and B-2 stealth bombers. In total, the US possesses 66 bombers capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads to their designated targets. Because this aspect of the triad is restricted by how fast airplanes can fly, the required time to reach their targets is much longer in comparison to ICMBs and SLBMs.
Space Based Infrared System
22,300 miles above Earth’s surface, a sophisticated system of satellites, the Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS), constantly patrols for possible missile launches. Within a mere fraction of a second, hot rocket exhaust is detected, informing the US that an ICBM has been launched. ICMBs are launched around the world regularly, totaling 1,968 in 2022 alone. Aside from North Korea, most nations communicate their launch tests to avoid igniting a catastrophe. This quote from Nuclear War best sums up the current situation: “Between January 2022 and May 2023, North Korea test-launched more than 100 missiles, including nuclear-capable weapons that can hit the continental United States”.
Luckily, SBIRS can detect the trajectory of missiles shortly after they are launched, which helps defense officials know when an attack is imminent versus a test launch. But in the event of a real attack the clock is ticking, precious time must be taken to ensure where a missile will hit before the president can decide on a possible response.
SBX
Even though the US can see ICBMs with the assistance of SIBRS during their initial boost phase, once the rocket exhaust is no longer visible during the midcourse, the rockets can’t be tracked. In the boost phase, Reaper drones could shoot down an ICBM, but as of right now, there aren’t any drones actively patrolling all areas near enemy missiles that could be launched. This poses a significant vulnerability for the US.
Once the boost phase of an ICBM ends, it is nearly impossible for it to be shot down. A defense system called SBX exists in the Pacific Ocean but as Jacobsen explains it is woefully inadequate. As of 2017, the success rate of SBX shooting down incoming missiles was an abysmal 40%. For it to work, the system is best described as “shooting a bullet with a bullet.” Plus, it must decipher real warheads from dummies, complicating matters further.
US Nuclear Policy
It’s not enough to understand the weapons and defense systems that could be used in the event of a nuclear war. It is also essential to understand the policies that guide the use of these weapons. Policies such as deterrence and launch on warning have been in place since the early days of the Cold War. Strikingly, there have been very few alterations since.
Deterrence
Deterrence is the foundation of US nuclear policy, and it has pretty much remained unchanged since the 1950s. Essentially, the US and Russia, as well as a few other nuclear-armed nations with smaller arsenals, keep their guns locked and loaded, pointed at their enemies, at all times. The idea is that mutually assured destruction is guaranteed if anyone launches a nuclear weapon. In theory, the inevitable destruction of all of humanity is a threat so severe that no one would dare use a nuke. Of course, if no one had nukes, that would also produce the same outcome.
Another important aspect of deterrence, especially as it relates to Russia, is nuclear parity. Throughout the Cold War and even until today, both countries have maintained comparable nuclear capabilities. That ensures each nation is just as capable as the other of inflicting catastrophic damage.
Launch on Warning
Launch on warning is the other lynchpin of US nuclear policy. Quite simply, it means that the US will not wait to absorb a nuclear attack before it launches one of its own. If SIBRS detects an incoming ICMB believed to be loaded with nuclear warheads designated to fall on American soil, the US will retaliate before it strikes its target. In 2000 as George W. Bush was making his way to the presidency, he maintained that he would alter this policy. He did not. Later Obama made a similar claim. Still, no changes were made.
How Nuclear War Is Waged
Now that we’ve discussed the weapons of nuclear war and the policies that guide the use of those weapons, let’s examine exactly how those plans are implemented.
The Football
The decision to launch a nuclear weapon is solely left to the US president. Yikes. However, if an attack is imminent the president would be on the move to secure his or her safety so the ability to retaliate needs to be mobile as well. The solution to that conundrum is the president’s football. Each nuclear weapon, whether it is designed to be launched by land, by air, or by sea, has its unique security code. Inside the president’s football, all these codes are available along with various strike plans. 24/7/365 the US president maintains possession of the football, enabling them to launch any and all components of the US nuclear arsenal at a moment’s notice.
Russia’s Dead Hand
Another striking addition to Nuclear War is Jacobsen’s discussion surrounding Russia’s Dead Hand defense system. Similar to the US, the decision to launch nuclear weapons is left solely to the Russian president. Unsurprisingly, most nuclear plans aim to take out an enemy’s government. To combat that, the Russians have developed the Dead Hand. If their defense systems detect a nuclear attack on Russian soil using seismic sensors underground, then their nuclear arsenal will essentially auto-launch weapons until it’s empty if connection with Russian command centers is lost. The exact specifications and operationality of this system are still somewhat shrouded in mystery. Nonetheless, it exemplifies the extreme nature of nuclear war and how quickly it can escalate into Armageddon.
FEMA
Whenever there is a large-scale catastrophe in the US, FEMA is who you call. That said, nuclear war is not the same as wildfires, hurricanes, or tornados. In the event of a nuclear war, FEMA has a single purpose. And that purpose does not pertain to the protection of civilian life. You’re on your own and the only plan for nuclear war is to try and protect the continuance of the US government. Civilians will be largely left to fend for themselves.
The Proud Prophet War Games
To better understand the prospective dynamics of a possible nuclear war, in 1983 President Reagan called for an exercise to be conducted to explore all possible outcomes. This was accomplished by employing sophisticated mathematical equations to map out all possible scenarios that could take place during a nuclear conflict. The results were staggering. No matter how or where a conflict began, the end was the same. If a nuclear war is waged it will undoubtedly end in the destruction of all of humanity.
https://www.tiktok.com/@unmasking_reality/video/7398563894278589701?lang=en
Jacobsen’s Scenario
I’ve really only gotten into the basic facts that underline Jacobsen’s narrative and are central to both US nuclear policy and capabilities. That was intentional because ultimately this litany of information provides the crucial principles for readers to understand. Plus, I’m not one to spoil a good book. If this article has terrified you, interested you, or both, I highly recommend picking up a copy. It’s one thing to slog through all the data. It’s another to be walked through minute by minute as to how nuclear war could take shape. When you get immersed in the narrative she provides, the information becomes tangible it will raise the hair on the back of your neck.
Despite the fact that this information has been widely available to the public for quite some time, it has escaped public discourse. The threat of nuclear war was always imminent during the Cold War, and perceptions since then suppose it has faded away. However, Jacobsen proves that threat is very much alive.
The sad truth is global tensions are the highest they’ve been in decades. Furthermore, nuclear war is as much of a threat today as it was throughout the Cold War. Historically, deterrence has worked and managed to avoid mutually assured destruction. But there’s no guarantee the same will be true tomorrow.
Are we as informed as we should be about the reality of nuclear threats? What do you think about Annie Jacobsen’s Nuclear War? Let us know in the comments below.
Leave a Reply