# ICBM missile crews refusing to launch? (possibly apocryphal incident) **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 24, 2011, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501 "2011-09-24T22:19:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2011, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/41 "2011-09-28T10:26:14Z")
> [@Zsofia](#): > > I understand your viewpoint, **LSLGuy** , but does that mean that you think people like Stanislav Petrov who didn’t follow orders and didn’t fire aren’t heroes? Did he not follow orders, or did he not launch because he was authorized to make a choice, and he made the right one? hh ---
**Author:** ![Dallas\_Jones](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dallas_jones/32/3277_2.png) [@Dallas\_Jones](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dallas_Jones)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2011, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/42 "2011-09-28T17:21:43Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > The argument for bombing civilians is that in an industrial society war, almost everyone’s a participant and a target - the person who drives the tank, the one who makes ball bearings so the tank can roll, the one who packs the lunch for the ball bearing maker or paves the road so the bll bearings can be delivered t the tank factory, or runs the generating station that provides power for it all, or farms the food for the soldiers and workers. Seriously where does it stop? There’s a reason that all-out war makes no sense. Interesting comment about the ball bearings. The fire-bombing of Dresden, Germany in WW2 was partly an attempt to destroy the ball bearing factories there. But you probably knew that. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2011, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/43 "2011-09-28T17:56:59Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > There’s a reason that all-out war makes no sense. Interesting. I consider anything but all-out war makes no sense. Maybe this would be a good GD topic. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2011, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/44 "2011-09-28T20:20:08Z")
Of course, you could combine those two statements and conclude that _no_ war makes sense. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2011, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/45 "2011-09-28T20:28:49Z")
War? Huh! What is it GOOD for? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2011, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/46 "2011-09-28T20:55:41Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Of course, you could combine those two statements and conclude that _no_ war makes sense. > [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > War? Huh! What is it GOOD for? No war makes sense, and it isn’t good for anything. But if you find yourself in a war, you can give up, go all out, or something in between. I’d go with all out. ---
**Author:** ![PlainJain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5daacb/32.png) [@PlainJain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PlainJain)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2011, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/47 "2011-09-28T21:06:23Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > War? Huh! What is it GOOD for? (OK, I’ll do it) Absolutely nothin’. ---
**Author:** ![Atomic\_Alex](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atomic_alex/32/175_2.png) [@Atomic\_Alex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atomic_Alex)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2011, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/48 "2011-09-28T21:07:35Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > No war makes sense, and it isn’t good for anything. > > But if you find yourself in a war, you can give up, go all out, or something in between. I’d go with all out. This topic came up in another thread started by your ruggedly handsome hero _(yours truly!)_ about proportionality in war. I couldn’t get my views down in a format coherent enough to post but I’d be interested in the thread you considered starting as a GD topic. For the record I’d be of the opinion that you use the minimum force necessary to achieve your aims but I recognise the difficulties with and arguments against that idea. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2011, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/49 "2011-09-28T21:21:06Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > But if you find yourself in a war, you can give up, go all out, or something in between. I’d go with all out. It depends upon whether Mr. Jenkins lost an ear or somebody wants to turn your Mama into soap. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2011, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/50 "2011-09-29T02:39:11Z")
In any war you face two phases: 1) Winning. 2) Dealing with the aftermath. The more force you apply to Phase 1, the more likely you win. The more force you apply in Phase 1, the more difficult phase 2 will be for you whether you won phase 1 or lost it. As winner or as loser you’ll face very different problems. But in either case the more force you’d applied the tougher the problems you’ll have. So the optimal strategy is to apply \*just \*enough force to win. Given the imponderables inherent in war, you overapply force to \*ensure \*you’re sure you’re gonna win. Then you deal with the simplest, easiest, possible post-war scenario. IF we develop weapons which can A) reliably kill 100% of the enemy population, and B) not pollute the enemy countryside, THEN going really fully all-out & annihilating the enemy in detail will become the new optimal strategy. I’ll leave the moral implications of this development as an exercise for the reader. ---
**Author:** ![engineer\_comp\_geek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/engineer_comp_geek/32/504_2.png) [@engineer\_comp\_geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/engineer_comp_geek)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2011, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/51 "2011-09-29T04:31:29Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > War? Huh! What is it GOOD for? > [@PlainJain](#): > > (OK, I’ll do it) > > Absolutely nothin’. Say it again, y’all. (Anyone hearing a big whooshing noise right now should probably click this: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01-2pNCZiNk](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01-2pNCZiNk) ) ---
**Author:** ![Walther\_Ego](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8dc957/32.png) [@Walther\_Ego](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walther_Ego)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2011, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/52 "2011-09-29T07:35:43Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Interesting. I consider anything but all-out war makes no sense. Maybe this would be a good GD topic. All-out war makes sense only if you find yourself in a cage-match type war. These kinds of wars are extremely rare and typically a symptom of your political system having failed utterly. If a war must be won at any price, your leader should probaly run a pizza-place r something. Most wars are simply not worth winning at any price. ---
**Author:** ![Undershaft](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f19dbf/32.png) [@Undershaft](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Undershaft)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2011, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/53 "2011-09-30T02:20:28Z")
Neat little bit of trivia…in the opening scene of the movie ‘Wargames’ as the two missile officers are going into the bunker they are having a conversation about weed. One of the guys is mentioning to the other something about the “finest sensimilia”. I don’t remember the exact quote since its been a while since I have seen the movie. I have no idea what it means…I’m sure real SAC missile launch officers were/are not potheads. Just something I never picked up on the first half dozen times I saw that movie. Very Interesting thread! I love Cold War History. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2011, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/54 "2011-10-01T03:24:38Z")
What some people are missing here is that the whole point of ICBMs and SLBMs is strategic _ **deterrence** _. If the weapons are actually ever used, then they have failed in their primary purpose. That being said, the only way that strategic deterrence works is for a nation’s potential adversaries to firmly believe that the weapons will in fact be used in a counterattack if the adversary attempts a “first strike” attack. > [@Disposable Hero](#): > > …I always wonder about the psychology behind people willing to use nuclear weapons, especially those that will be targeted in or near cities. I don’t for an instant think they’re unfeeling monsters or anything of the sort but I certainly couldn’t do it. As **LSLGuy** noted, to a certain extent you simply compartmentalize. Another thing that is done is endless drills. Many years ago, I served on a patrol on a ballistic missile submarine. We received orders to conduct launch drills every few days during the patrol. After dozens of launch drills, an actual launch would have seemed like much the same. Incidentally, the actual targets of the missiles was not common knowledge on board. For what it’s worth, I firmly believe that if the order came to launch the missiles, the orders would be followed. ---
**Author:** ![williambaskerville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f14d63/32.png) [@williambaskerville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/williambaskerville)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2015, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/55 "2015-10-04T00:51:41Z")
> [@williambaskerville](#): > > This doesn’t answer the OP, but is somewhat related. The UK’s nuclear weapons are under the control of the Prime Minister, but they operate a system of designated alternates :- the Prime Minister designates an alternate who can make the launch decision if he’s unable to. > > As Defence Secretary, Denis Healey, the retired Labour politician,was a designated alternate at one point. He said in an interview a few years back that if it came to it, and it was his decision, he would never have launched Britain’s nukes. His reasoning was that no matter what had been done to the UK, launching nukes against Russia would have just been slaughtering civilians. Just resurrecting this thread to pay homage to a man who fought bravely in a good war and who gave an honest answer. RIP. ---
**Author:** ![williambaskerville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f14d63/32.png) [@williambaskerville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/williambaskerville)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2015, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/56 "2015-10-04T00:59:42Z")
> [@williambaskerville](#): > > Just resurrecting this thread to pay homage to a man who fought bravely in a good war and who gave an honest answer. RIP. Denis Healey died today, it just occured to me a lot of readers of this board won’t know. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2015, 10:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/57 "2015-10-04T10:21:16Z")
Denis Healey was a complete and utter disaster. ---
**Author:** ![williambaskerville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f14d63/32.png) [@williambaskerville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/williambaskerville)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2015, 10:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/58 "2015-10-04T10:56:43Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > Denis Healey was a complete and utter disaster. That may or not be true. But he was a beach master at Anzio, and served well. So he fought, and fought well, in the defining war of the 20th century. And he gave an honest answer when he was asked if he would ever use Britain’s nuclear weapons. ---
**Author:** ![thirdname](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/d07c76/32.png) [@thirdname](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thirdname)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2015, 11:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/59 "2015-10-04T11:22:18Z")
That was a really irresponsible thing for him to say. Even he wouldn’t have launched the nukes, he should give the impression he would have. Stating otherwise undermines the credibility of the UK’s nuclear deterrence. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2015, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501/60 "2015-10-04T16:14:10Z")
One of the points of launching your nukes - perhaps even the main point - after you’ve been attacked is to deter the _next_ nuclear war. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/icbm-missile-crews-refusing-to-launch-possibly-apocryphal-incident/597501.md?page=4)