Slashdot Mirror
Soviets Built a Doomsday Machine; It's Still Alive
An anonymous reader points out a story in Wired introducing us to the Doomsday Machine built by the Soviet Union in the 1980s — and that remains active to this day. It was called "Perimeter." The article explains why the device was built, and why the Soviets considered it to be something that kept the peace, even though they never told the US about it. "[Reagan's] strategy worked. Moscow soon believed the new US leadership really was ready to fight a nuclear war. But the Soviets also became convinced that the US was now willing to start a nuclear war. ... A few months later, Reagan... announced that the US was going to develop a shield of lasers and nuclear weapons in space to defend against Soviet warheads. ... To Moscow it was the Death Star — and it confirmed that the US was planning an attack. ... By guaranteeing that Moscow could hit back, Perimeter was actually designed to keep an overeager Soviet military or civilian leader from launching prematurely during a crisis. The point, [an informant] says, was 'to cool down all these hotheads and extremists. No matter what was going to happen, there still would be revenge. Those who attack us will be punished.'"
Its construction might have had less to do with Reagan and more to do with the fact that a single moment of restraint two years earlier had stopped a nuclear war. This is exactly the sort of almost-disastrous incident that this system was designed to address.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
That IS a Creepy thought. Unless Doomsday can detect location of Origin, and decide accordingly. I bet Washington's Co-ordinates are hardcoded though.
As the article explains, the purpose was to keep Soviet generals from being less hot-headed, by assuring them there was retaliatory capability. It wasn't to deter the US, so no need to tell the US.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
What's the point of building a Doomsday machine if you don't tell everyone about it?
That point is well covered in the article:
By guaranteeing that Moscow could hit back, Perimeter was actually designed to keep an overeager Soviet military or civilian leader from launching prematurely during a crisis. The point, Zheleznyakov says, was "to cool down all these hotheads and extremists. No matter what was going to happen, there still would be revenge. Those who attack us will be punished."
The machine was designed as a deterrent to soviet military commanders, not to deter the US.
From what I've read, the system wasn't designed as a deterrent to a nuclear war, but rather as a deterrent to an overreaction by the Soviets in the event of an incident with the US. Essentially, it was to keep the Soviets from starting a nuclear war based on bad information or an overreaction such an incident. By ensuring they can strike back after a successful first strike by the US, they allow themselves time to consider the ramifications of their actions and allow cooler heads to make a decision that could lead to the end of the world.
I really hope the system wasn't completely automated in case of some kind of malfunction, but I applaud their foresight. If they anticipated the potential problem of a hot-headed overreaction on their side and put measures in place to help keep that in check, bravo.
The confidence of ignorance will always overcome the indecision of knowledge.
Some anti-Yankees (North Korea) could detonate a warhead to set off Perimeter, and wipe us off the map. Maximum return on investment.
It doesn't work that way. High command has to enable it because they saw what they think was a launch from us. Then the detonation would have to sever all communication between command and the bunker. Then, an officer in the bunker would have to look at the seismograph and radiation data and misinterpret it to think there had been a major attack that wiped out all the people in charge and in turn order a launch.
I really hope the system wasn't completely automated in case of some kind of malfunction...
There was a man in the loop, but it was whoever happened to be present at the Perimeter facilities at the time. Ideally, it would be someone from high command sent there because the crisis was recognized before hand; but it's possible that it would be just some random soldier sitting in the hot seat.
Even still, the system is only activated for a limited amount of time by high command, only when they suspected an impending attack.
Here's a more relevant quote from TFA:
So it sounds like the purpose of the devices was more to deter a Soviet first strike, rather than a US first strike.
I don't care why you're posting AC
...If you count in USA, EU, Russia and China thats pretty much 70% of the world. Now just create the same for Africa and we're close to 90%...
Sorry to nit-pick, but you may be neglecting a couple of very populous nuclear powers. I'm thinking of a fairly large mostly-Hindu nation that neighbors a "recently" formed largely Muslim nation that together house well over a billion people?
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
President Merkin Muffley: But this is absolute madness, Ambassador! Why should you *build* such a thing?
Ambassador de Sadesky: There were those of us who fought against it, but in the end we could not keep up with the expense involved in the arms race, the space race, and the peace race. At the same time our people grumbled for more nylons and washing machines. Our doomsday scheme cost us just a small fraction of what we had been spending on defense in a single year. The deciding factor was when we learned that your country was working along similar lines, and we were afraid of a doomsday gap.
President Merkin Muffley: This is preposterous. I've never approved of anything like that.
Ambassador de Sadesky: Our source was the New York Times.
"You can kill the revolutionary, but you can't kill the revolution."-- Fred Hampton
Enabled by military
The subtlety here is that it is not supposed to be enabled just before the strike. Rather, it is enabled when relations become tense, and possibility of nuclear strike by another side rises.
Before nuclear weapons the world fought numerous low level conflicts between spurts of global war. Now prior to the 19th century global war was difficult because people didn't go long distances, so lets start with the Napoleonic Wars. After they concluded in 1815 we had a number of small conflicts. Indian Wars in the US, Zulu and Boer wars, US Civil War, Franco-Prussian war, Italian Revolution, numerous conflicts in India, Crimirian War, Boxer rebellion, Russo-Japanese war, Spanish American War, US vs Mexico (Poncho Villa ), etc.... Then the Great War (WWI), after that we stopped fighting to get ready for WWII, whoops, no we didn't. Spanish Revolution, Japanese in China, Japanese border issues with the Russians, US all over South and Central America, Italians in Ethiopia, Europeans in Russia (their were West European and US troops all over Russia in the early 20's, Russo-Finish war. Now between the Napoleonic Wars and WWI, peace was maintained by overwhelming British Sea Power which kept any of those conflicts from going global. Between WWI and WWII the political will wasn't there to fight for a generation. After WWII if major conflict was avoided by nuclear weapons, which is likely, then good, but don't think that fighting limited wars started in 1945.
You'd discover that this is a very famous line from it:
Dr. Strangelove: Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you *keep* it a *secret*! Why didn't you tell the world, EH?
Ambassador de Sadesky: It was to be announced at the Party Congress on Monday. As you know, the Premier loves surprises.
The whole movie is about the Soviets and a secret Doomsday device. The GP was quoting it because ti is both amusing and relevant.
The article states that if all 4 "large scale nuclear blast" conditions are met, it calls the government first. After the government doesn't respond after an undisclosed amount of time, it just activates the "End the World" button instead of requiring keys and passcodes. So the final button still has to be pushed by whoever is manning the switch.
So the whole "Doomsday Machine" thing was an automated system based on ground sensors to launch the missiles in case US attacks.
No.
If you actually read the article, it's a system that, in the event that it's turned on (and it's normally off) and senses a nuclear strike on Soviet territory, and the lines to Soviet command go dead, automatically gives launch authority of the Russian retaliation force to the humans that are lower down on the chain of command.
It's not "Wargames." It still requires humans to command a nuclear attack.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
No.
"Perimeter ensures the ability to strike back, but it's no hair-trigger device. It was designed to lie semi-dormant until switched on by a high official in a crisis. Then it would begin monitoring a network of seismic, radiation, and air pressure sensors for signs of nuclear explosions. Before launching any retaliatory strike, the system had to check off four if/then propositions: If it was turned on, then it would try to determine that a nuclear weapon had hit Soviet soil. If it seemed that one had, the system would check to see if any communication links to the war room of the Soviet General Staff remained. If they did, and if some amount of timeâ"likely ranging from 15 minutes to an hourâ"passed without further indications of attack, the machine would assume officials were still living who could order the counterattack and shut down. But if the line to the General Staff went dead, then Perimeter would infer that apocalypse had arrived. It would immediately transfer launch authority to whoever was manning the system at that moment deep inside a protected bunkerâ"bypassing layers and layers of normal command authority. At that point, the ability to destroy the world would fall to whoever was on duty: maybe a high minister sent in during the crisis, maybe a 25-year-old junior officer fresh out of military academy. And if that person decided to press the button ... If/then. If/then. If/then. If/then.
Once initiated, the counterattack would be controlled by so-called command missiles. Hidden in hardened silos designed to withstand the massive blast and electromagnetic pulses of a nuclear explosion, these missiles would launch first and then radio down coded orders to whatever Soviet weapons had survived the first strike. At that point, the machines will have taken over the war. Soaring over the smoldering, radioactive ruins of the motherland, and with all ground communications destroyed, the command missiles would lead the destruction of the US.
The US did build versions of these technologies, deploying command missiles in what was called the Emergency Rocket Communications System. It also developed seismic and radiation sensors to monitor for nuclear tests or explosions the world over. But the US never combined it all into a system of zombie retaliation. It feared accidents and the one mistake that could end it all.
Instead, airborne American crews with the capacity and authority to launch retaliatory strikes were kept aloft throughout the Cold War. Their mission was similar to Perimeter's, but the system relied more on people and less on machines.
And in keeping with the principles of Cold War game theory, the US told the Soviets all about it."
according to TFA it most certainly DID require multiple staggered detections combined with simultaneous loss of connection to multiple communications facilities (all of the actually) and even then a human in the launch bunker was still required to manually "push the button". If any of these "steps" failed to trigger the next within set timeframes then the system would automatically shut itself down.
because how right or wrong something is depends on the numbers. fucking idiot.
Yes. Welcome to right and wrong in the real world.