Was Cold War really a Cold war or a myth?

[gamer78]

I understand 'Cuban Missile Crisis' was a real crisis and some more if I've born on these times. But from todays perspective or from the past -who lived on these times- can we call those times struggle between equal powers. Or is it these times more about inner politics. Cheers.

[Lobster]

Wasn't all that cold. Lots of proxy wars and the big two got into trouble in little countries. So Cold War wasn't all that cold. [;)]

Not sure why you would ask if it was a myth unless you are a history revisionist. [8D]

[Anonymous]

[Deleted by Admins]

[UP844]

If you have never thought "A SS-19 can be on its way now and there is nothing I can do" (as I often did in the early '80s) you wouldn't doubt about it [:D]

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: UP844

If you have never thought "A SS-19 can be on its way now and there is nothing I can do" (as I often did in the early '80s) you wouldn't doubt about it [:D]

Have you ever thought a truck can go through a red light and kill you in your car? Nothing you can do about it so just live life and don't sweat crap you have no control over. [8|]

[UP844]

I had no driving license then [:D].

[OldSarge]

The "Cold War" seemed pretty real for me. Being in the Army from the late '70s to the mid '80s, there were plenty of middle of the night alerts and various exercises - which beat painting anything that didn't move and repairing broken equipment. It wasn't until later that I heard about the Able Archer CPX that almost caused a shooting war! [X(]

I recently dug out my old SMLM card that we all had to carry around with us, because Soviet 'diplomats' would wander around and watch our exercises while our own 'diplomats' returned the favor. The card contained instructions that we were supposed to follow, fun times!

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: UP844

I had no driving license then [:D].

Do they let you have one now? [:'(][:D]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: gamer78

I understand 'Cuban Missile Crisis' was a real crisis and some more if I've born on these times. But from todays perspective or from the past -who lived on these times- can we call those times struggle between equal powers. Or is it these times more about inner politics. Cheers.

warspite1

I'm not sure if something has got lost in the translation.

The Cold War was a name given to a period of time. There is no myth. It is a period of history.

A struggle between equal powers? I'm not sure why it matters if the sides were equal or what measure you wish to use to gauge that. But the two sides each had the nuclear power to bring civilisation as we know it to an end so, regardless of any other measure, then that sounds pretty equal.

There was at least one incidence where the 'button' could have been pressed - 1983? - not because someone was actively trying to start a war, but through human error.

Was there ever a chance that some 'crazy' in the Kremlin or the White House believed such a war could be winnable and would actually start a fighting war? Probably not, but that doesn't make the Cold War, and the inherent dangers the holding of huge nuclear arsenals brings, a myth. And there were plenty of localised conflicts as each side sought influence in Asia or Africa etc.

It's such a shame that we can't uninvent nuclear weapons, but as terrible as they are it is difficult to imagine the West and the Soviets not going to war at some point had neither side had them. Terrible things - but they've kept the peace - localised wars aside - since 1945.

[bayonetbrant]

if you were living in Europe in the 70s-80s, as I was, I can assure you it felt very real

[altipueri]

Get and read Thomas Schelling's "The Strategy of Conflict"

Search and you can get the whole revised edition free, but here is a review;

https://www.jstor.org/stable/40651534?seq=1

[Lobster]

There's more danger now than during the Cold War simply because you have more players and some are not very mentally stable.

[JWW]

Well, the term is used loosely to denote an armed standoff between NATO and the Warsaw Pact with hundreds of thousands of well armed troops backed by nuclear weapons on both sides. In that sense it was very real, and that is the most common definition of it. Like more than one person here, I served during the Cold War and spent two tours in (West) Germany, 74-74 and 85-88. It is also sometimes more loosely used to describe all the armed conflicts of that period between the US and allies and communist proxies, including the Korean War and Vietnam War and some other conflicts.

[Kuokkanen]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Was there ever a chance that some 'crazy' in the Kremlin or the White House believed such a war could be winnable and would actually start a fighting war? Probably not

I have read about one man in Soviet Union who believed Kremlin having such 'crazy' person (or few). I haven't memorized the names, but man in question was responsible in operating an early missile warning system. System printed a warning about incoming missiles and man should have reported it. But believing it to be a malfunction, he didn't. Can you make a guess why not? He has been mentioned on this forum before.

I have a recollection of watching a TV documentary where one 'crazy' American politician(?) is quoted saying something along the lines:

If in the end there are only one of them and two of us, I'll be satisfied.

Somebody was quoted telling him:

At least one of them should be a woman.

[Zorch]

ORIGINAL: Kuokkanen

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Was there ever a chance that some 'crazy' in the Kremlin or the White House believed such a war could be winnable and would actually start a fighting war? Probably not

I have read about one man in Soviet Union who believed Kremlin having such 'crazy' person (or few). I haven't memorized the names, but man in question was responsible in operating an early missile warning system. System printed a warning about incoming missiles and man should have reported it. But believing it to be a malfunction, he didn't. Can you make a guess why not? He has been mentioned on this forum before.

I have a recollection of watching a TV documentary where one 'crazy' American politician(?) is quoted saying something along the lines:

If in the end there are only one of them and two of us, I'll be satisfied.

Somebody was quoted telling him:

At least one of them should be a woman.

Queue Dr. Strangelove!

[z1812]

Yes, the term Cold War was a Total Myth. It would have been more appropriately called The Hot War based on the number of regional wars related to it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... e_Cold_War

[gamer78]

Thanks. Sorry for being in lost in translation. [:)] I mean by pressing some buttons about nuclear war. I believe some of the conflicts roots way back before Cold War. Both in Europe and far east Asia. And I also exclude WTO states of conflicts such as occurred in Hungaria. It is typical sphere of influence politics, Not a typical Cold War definition I think. For the domestic politics I remember when nuclear reactor exploded in Ukraine many -not the most- people in Black sea region have problem with cancer. But politicians have said -just after the explosion- production of tea is safe no one will be effected.

ORIGINAL: bayonetbrant

if you were living in Europe in the 70s-80s, as I was, I can assure you it felt very real

Thanks for the answer. But was it Western Europe?

[z1812]

It is well known that The Soviet Union and America were always in competition for influence to further their interests post world war 2.

What is not very often considered is the possible benefits of both sides having nuclear weapons.

It occurs to some, myself included, that the possible escalation to nuclear war might have acted as a deterrent to pursuing a large scale conventional war. Let's hope that's true and continues for the future.

[Gilmer]

I'm just hoping this isn't locked.

[Simulacra53]

No myth, except the narratives on both sides.

The original cold war was a reboot of the old Anglo-Russo competition dating back to the mid 19th century, albeit with the US in the lead and an ideological element added. The new cold war is same as the original Anglo-Russo competition, zero ideology, all about geopolitical power and wealth.

I’d add that having an enemy is good for both domestic and international consumption.

IMO it is a tragedy that the end of the previous cold war was only unilateral.
That new world order established after 1989 is a big disappointment...

The world is not a zero sum game.

[8|]