Military threats to the Fifty States: A nuclear attack

By Nathan Barton

Back in the early 1970s, during one of the periodic flare-ups of tension in the Cold War, Reader’s Digest published a scare story. The major threat in the public eye at the time was Soviet ICBMs and bombers. But China had nukes, too, People didn’t worry as much about China at the time, because they didn’t have any ICBMs. And no long-range bombers, either.  And being increasingly on the outs with Moscow (and Vietnam), it wasn’t likely to get them.

So Reader’s Digest tried to wake people up to the danger of Red China.  (This was long before so many manufactured goods came to America (or the rest of the world) from China. And before Reader’s Digest got “woke.”)  So they published a “what-if” story.

China didn’t need ICBMs to strike at the Fifty States: they had nuclear bombs that could be delivered by other means, especially in those days before security at American ports was far less than we have in the 21st Century. (Not that it ain’t full of holes even today. Which is good and bad.) BUT the Red Chinese had nuclear bombs: their first (successful) test was in 1964; their first hydrogen bomb was tested successfully in 1967.

Reader’s Digest posed a scenario in which Chinese nuclear bombs were delivered to American seaports on shipping containers delivered by merchant ships, and detonated by radio signals. It was not, as I recall, just seaports that were cremated by the Chinese weapons, as some of the containers were shipped to inland destinations.

It was, even in those days, a chilling story.  Being young at the time, I have no idea whether or not the scenario was taken seriously by the DoD and whether any counteractions or security measures were ever taken.  I suspect that none were, as radiation detectors were not (publicly and officially, at least) installed and used in American ports (air and sea) until after Bloody Tuesday (9-11).

At that time, of course, the US and USSR (and probably the UK and France) had already developed suitcase nuclear bombs, with only a few kilotons of power and intended for tactical use.  Along with small nuclear warheads designed to be launched by small, tactical missile systems like the American Honest John. But in those days, with terrorism an unappreciated threat and usually associated with “people’s revolutions” in far-off places – or the Arab-Israeli conflict – there was no serious worry or thought given.

With the fall of the Soviet Union, there was concern for some time about missing “pocket nukes” as well as standard bombs and warheads.  Today, it appears that the consensus is that none of those weapons exist in usable form any more, as radioactive decay gives both uranium and plutonium nuclear devices a limited shelf-life.  They have to be refurbished every few years or they won’t work. Even worse than your car or laptop.

But the threat still remains.

North Korea, for example, continues to scare the world with its missile and nuclear tests, successful or not.  Western fear of Iran having nukes (and already having proven delivery methods) is alive.  Lost weapons from Russian, Pakistani, and Indian stockpiles are a fairly common feature in fictional thrillers.

And in particular, if Kim were interested in using their military weapons in any way other than to get handouts and concessions from the US, Japan, and the South, there is potential for delivering nukes to American (or Japanese) targets by shipping container. Or even selling those to Iran or even Al Queda to be similarly delivered to the Fifty States, Israel, or somewhere else.

So why don’t they?  Why haven’t they? I don’t know.  And I suspect that no one in the American, British, French, or other intelligence community does either.  Except that the stakes are simply too high: even the nutjobs who run some regimes (or hide within those regimes) and who staff the terrorist organizations of the world seem reluctant to start a cycle which could end in planetary destruction.

Or so most people claim. Others argue differently, but they are suppressed more successfully than Trumpers, Creationists, or 9-11 conspiracy promoters.

Short of Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan deciding on Gotterdammerung, or a competent Islamic or other terrorist organization, the greatest threat of nuclear attack on the Fifty States continues to be a mistake or cabal in Russia, China, France, or the UK, or something truly nightmarish in India.

But it is only the greatest threat: there are others. Logically, China would not be anxious to use a nuclear weapon against the United States, either the Fifty States themselves or American military forces or bases: the risk of massive retaliation is far too great. A fact the Soviets and now Russians have realized for decades. But in an empire that is teetering and showing more than a few signs of fracture, a decision need not be rational or logical.

Unfortunately, there are less insane methods to attack the Fifty States. We’ll discuss those in a later community.

About TPOL Nathan

Follower of Christ Jesus (a christian), Pahasapan (resident of the Black Hills), Westerner, Lover of Liberty, Free-Market Anarchist, Engineer, Army Officer, Husband, Father, Historian, Writer, Evangelist. Successor to Lady Susan (Mama Liberty) at TPOL.
This entry was posted in Nathan's Rants and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Military threats to the Fifty States: A nuclear attack

  1. Lergnom says:

    Reader’s Digest was late to the game with their scare story. Robert A. Heinlein wrote “On the Slpoes of Vesuvius” in 1947, a short story detailing what might happen, even without recourse to what they used to call Rocket Bombs. It can be found in his collection titles “Expanded universe”.
    Stay safe


  2. “an empire that is teetering and showing more than a few signs of fracture” sounds a lot more like the United States than like Russia or China. Russia already lost its empire, and China is only now getting expansionist beyond its own locale.


    • TPOL Nathan says:

      Russia is still an empire, both directly and indirectly. The various countries (ethnic and religious homelands with 15% of the population) in Russia share hatred of the Great Russians and each other. Its population troubles, its lack of defensible borders at present, and its general tenuous unity have been problems for the last 30 years. Yes, it lost a lot of imperial possessions in 1991, but is still is a classic empire.
      China, even more, is and has been an empire for centuries. They do not need to play like the Brits, French, etc. to incorporate areas well outside its locale to be an empire. The Han have dominated for several centuries over the other distinct linguistic and other ethnicities, and continue to do so: especially in the south. Then we have Manchuria, Inner Mongolia, Xingiang, and of course Tibet, and many other homelands. The Han, and the CPC, are in danger of falling off their fast little surfboard. Yes, the Han are officially 91% of the population, but even that group is far from united. As with Russia, its geography works very much against it.
      At the same time, I am not saying that the Fifty States are NOT an empire – they are. And not just the vast external occupation around the world. And it does indeed show signs of fracture and collapse. As many signs as either Russia or China. When you look at North America – despite Canada and Mexico – the geopolitical situation is far better for defense and commerce than either of the other two. The big difference ethnically or nationally is that (other than the AmerInd nations) there are no true “homelands” for the various bits and pieces: the “melting pot” has not created “one race” but the various groups are still pretty much mingled into a stew. There are no core heartlands, hard as some people have tried to build loyalty to a distinct “homeland” whether it is “black” or “hispanic” or “Anglo.” Perhaps because (other than the AmerInd) everyone is pretty much an immigrant (voluntary or not). There is no central place that is a special “Irish” or “Honduran” or even “Jewish” enclave – Americans are spread and mixed in penny packets everywhere. Once distinctive cultures, like Texan or Californio or New Englander, have blended too much, perhaps.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s