Scan barcode
ttodd86's review against another edition
4.0
Overall, a very well-done, thorough and terrifying look at America's nuclear history. This book makes clear that the fact there has not been some kind of nuclear holocaust -- either accidental or intentional -- in the past 70 years is in itself quite an accomplishment and a reason to be worried about the future.
My complaint with this book: WHY ARE THERE NO PHOTOS? There's a nice graphic that explains the layout of the Damascus Titan II facility, but nothing else. This is a massive and well-researched piece of work -- nearly half of its 600+ pages are notes and/or sourcing, but no pictures? I don't understand.
One other slight downside to this book: Schlosser tries to weave the Damascus narrative around a detailed look at America's nuclear history. I'm not sure it works. Structurally, it can be a little tough on the reader and historically, I am not sure that Damascus is quite as significant as some of the other events Schlosser discusses but cannot offer as much detail about.
My complaint with this book: WHY ARE THERE NO PHOTOS? There's a nice graphic that explains the layout of the Damascus Titan II facility, but nothing else. This is a massive and well-researched piece of work -- nearly half of its 600+ pages are notes and/or sourcing, but no pictures? I don't understand.
One other slight downside to this book: Schlosser tries to weave the Damascus narrative around a detailed look at America's nuclear history. I'm not sure it works. Structurally, it can be a little tough on the reader and historically, I am not sure that Damascus is quite as significant as some of the other events Schlosser discusses but cannot offer as much detail about.
amrenina's review against another edition
dark
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
tense
fast-paced
5.0
maa_pix's review against another edition
4.0
Just some thoughts:
Fascinating and disturbing, both the level of safety and the delegation of authority. The devices themselves must always be ready when needed and yet never be able to go off accidentally. This always/never conflict was resolved to the benefit of readiness and the degradation of safety nearly every time.
The lack of a robust communication system, or even a strategy, that could be used following a nuclear attack called into question even the theoretical effectiveness of the nuclear arsenal. If the President couldn’t get reliable information or transmit verifiable orders, what would be the point in having an arsenal to respond to a nuclear attack?
More interesting than the Damascus event was the history of America’s nuclear war institutions – SAC, the AEC, the government in general.
The idea of having a plan of attack that would kill 220 million people – in the name of national defense – ignores the fact that perpetrating such a holocaust would effectively destroy our country, regardless of what our enemies might do. What idea of America could survive such a crime? Even Henry Kissinger was quoted as wondering “how one rationally could make a decision to kill 80 million people.”
Greater detail on the Soviet side of the equation would have earned this book a 5-star rating. The U.S. decision makers always seemed to be either over-estimating or under-estimating Soviet nuclear capability. And either assumption was considered grounds for increasing America’s nuclear arsenal. If the Soviets had more bombs, then we needed to make more bombs to keep up. If the Soviets had fewer bombs, then we needed to make more bombs so that the threat of total destruction would keep them from using their limited arsenal for a first strike. The “why” didn’t really matter. The answer was always “more bombs”.
Fascinating and disturbing, both the level of safety and the delegation of authority. The devices themselves must always be ready when needed and yet never be able to go off accidentally. This always/never conflict was resolved to the benefit of readiness and the degradation of safety nearly every time.
The lack of a robust communication system, or even a strategy, that could be used following a nuclear attack called into question even the theoretical effectiveness of the nuclear arsenal. If the President couldn’t get reliable information or transmit verifiable orders, what would be the point in having an arsenal to respond to a nuclear attack?
More interesting than the Damascus event was the history of America’s nuclear war institutions – SAC, the AEC, the government in general.
The idea of having a plan of attack that would kill 220 million people – in the name of national defense – ignores the fact that perpetrating such a holocaust would effectively destroy our country, regardless of what our enemies might do. What idea of America could survive such a crime? Even Henry Kissinger was quoted as wondering “how one rationally could make a decision to kill 80 million people.”
Greater detail on the Soviet side of the equation would have earned this book a 5-star rating. The U.S. decision makers always seemed to be either over-estimating or under-estimating Soviet nuclear capability. And either assumption was considered grounds for increasing America’s nuclear arsenal. If the Soviets had more bombs, then we needed to make more bombs to keep up. If the Soviets had fewer bombs, then we needed to make more bombs so that the threat of total destruction would keep them from using their limited arsenal for a first strike. The “why” didn’t really matter. The answer was always “more bombs”.
ladylizardxvii's review against another edition
5.0
Absolutely fascinating. I learned a ton about American history, the creation and deployment of nuclear weapons and the accidents that came along with them. LOTS of detail, but very readable.
charlottejones952's review against another edition
informative
tense
slow-paced
3.75
Eric Schlosser deep dives into the story of Cold War nuclear weapons and one accident in particular with enthusiasm and detail. However the book is confusing as it is told in a non-linear way that is often confusing, making some parts feel dry.
Content Warnings
Graphic: War
Moderate: Fire/Fire injury, Injury/Injury detail, and Violence
Minor: Drug abuse, Forced institutionalization, Drug use, Hate crime, Alcoholism, and Gaslighting