Timeline for Why was the Cold War carried out over the whole world instead of between Siberia and Alaska?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 25, 2022 at 12:04 | comment | added | totalMongot | One thing to highlight: Cold War is not a war, so there was no point for both countries to attack above their main frontier | |
| Jun 17, 2020 at 9:02 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| May 2, 2019 at 21:26 | comment | added | ed.hank | @xdaizu - yes you are correct, the circles are not circles because of distortions due to map projection. | |
| Feb 8, 2018 at 15:24 | comment | added | Todd Wilcox | I think one thing missing from the discussion of Cuba (and the non-discussion of nuclear submarines) is that in a first-strike scenario, the flight time of the missiles is also important, not just the range. If the USSR could launch a missile that would hit Washington DC before the US command structure could react, they would have a chance at total victory without any retaliation. Effective range is not the only concern about proximity. | |
| Feb 8, 2018 at 15:18 | comment | added | xDaizu | I'm confused by the "Cuban Missiles Crisis" range map. Why do missiles reach farther north than south? Is it one of those map projection things? | |
| Feb 7, 2018 at 6:21 | comment | added | Semaphore | @LangLangC "needed not more than one" What? A nuclear first strike is not about drawing first blood. Having just "one" missile that "could (but no guarantees)" reach the US is pointless. You also can't conduct one with a missile that needed almost a whole day's preparation just to get ready; that's what gets wiped out by a first strike. Hence why there's a vast difference between a small handful of unreliable and inaccurate ICBMs, and the potential arsenal that was being built on Cuba. Maybe you should post a full answer to expand on this perplexing point. | |
| Feb 7, 2018 at 3:49 | comment | added | LаngLаngС | OK. It's just to say that range-wise for a first strike the USSR needed not more than one that could reach the US, even DC. Any strike in mid-flight? You yourself used a pic of ICBMs. The havoc of many of the MRBM in a shorter time is indeed not well compared. But that was just my point. It was not really about range but time; and backyard infringement. | |
| Feb 7, 2018 at 3:36 | comment | added | Semaphore | @LangLangC The R-7 Semyorka's practical range was 0 km. It was too massive to hide and took 20 hours to fuel, during which time it would most certainly be destroyed by a US strike. Hence Moscow never deployed more than four of these. This is utterly incomparable to the short and medium range missiles they could plant on Cuba. | |
| Feb 7, 2018 at 3:10 | comment | added | LаngLаngС | Soviet R-7 Semyorka were operational in 1959, version R-7A, range: 12000km. Distance from Washington, D.C. to Seattle is 3,745 kilometers | |
| Feb 7, 2018 at 2:30 | comment | added | LаngLаngС | Note that the R14 has widely conflicting range reported. 4500km being even more impressive than the pic shows. Some Russians today claiming even more than that. But range is less important than warning time and flexibility of multiple deployments./redundancy. | |
| S Feb 7, 2018 at 2:02 | history | suggested | gerrit | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
rephrased to stress that deterrence theory is theory (not undisputed fact)
|
| Feb 7, 2018 at 1:48 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 7, 2018 at 2:02 | |||||
| Feb 6, 2018 at 18:43 | history | edited | Semaphore | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 44 characters in body
|
| Feb 6, 2018 at 18:23 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Feb 6, 2018 at 18:40 | |||||
| Feb 6, 2018 at 16:33 | history | edited | Semaphore | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 9 characters in body
|
| Feb 6, 2018 at 15:45 | vote | accept | japhwil | ||
| Feb 6, 2018 at 15:42 | history | edited | Semaphore | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 4 characters in body
|
| Feb 6, 2018 at 15:25 | history | edited | Semaphore | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 211 characters in body
|
| Feb 6, 2018 at 14:25 | history | edited | Semaphore | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Feb 6, 2018 at 14:11 | history | edited | Semaphore | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 756 characters in body
|
| Feb 6, 2018 at 13:48 | history | answered | Semaphore | CC BY-SA 3.0 |