Name_______________________________
Date_________________________
Nuclear Proliferation and Mutually Assured Destruction Role-Play
Your Role: A military advisor to the President of the United States
Your Task: Based on the situation, explain how you would retaliate if the USSR attacked you.
-----------------------------------------The Soviet Union’s spies learned that the U.S. put nuclear weapons on its military bases in West
Germany, Italy, and Turkey. You (the U.S.) put nuclear weapons there because the USSR has
over 3 million soldiers mostly in Europe, but the United States only has 1.5 million soldiers who
are spread around the world. Since the USSR could invade European nations with an army, the
best U.S. defense against those Soviet soldiers are nuclear weapons. You made a promise to
every nation in NATO that if they are attacked by the Soviet Union, you will defend them by
using the nuclear bomb.
The Soviet Union then invented its own nuclear weapon in August, 1949, 4 months after ending
the Berlin Blockade. What if the blockade had lasted four months longer? Then, the Soviets
wouldn’t be afraid of the U.S.’s nuclear bombs, so they wouldn’t be afraid to shoot down US
planes that delivered supplies to West Berlin. If the USSR killed US soldiers, how would you
stop them?
1) Would you use nuclear weapons against them? _______
If you answered YES, then answer 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. If you answered NO, skip to question 7.
2) What type of location would you choose to attack?
☐Soviet military base with nuclear weapons
☐Soviet city with a low population
☐Soviet military base without nuclear weapons
☐Soviet city with a high population
3) Based on what you know about Joseph Stalin, do you think he would retaliate (fight back)
using the Soviet Union’s nuclear weapons? Explain why or why not.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
4) If the Soviet Union DID retaliate using nuclear weapons, would you use more nuclear
weapons to fight back at them? Explain why or why not.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
5) Would Stalin retaliate with more nuclear weapons against you? Explain why or why not.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
6) Would you retaliate with more nuclear weapons against the USSR? Explain why or why not.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Conclusion Question:
Mutual = all people involved. Assured = it will definitely happen. Destruction = killing
The theory of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) means that if Nation X fires a nuclear
weapon at Nation Y (who also has nuclear weapons) then Nation Y will fire them back, and they
will keep firing nuclear weapons at each other until they are both destroyed. Based on how you
acted during this role play, did this theory come true? Explain why or why not.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
________________
________________
________________
________________
______________
Final Task:
After reading this
political cartoon,
turn to the back of
this packet and read
the article.
7) How will you respond to the Soviet attack on US planes and invasion of West Berlin if you
are NOT going to use nuclear weapons?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
8) Do you think the Soviet Union would use nuclear weapons to retaliate against you? Explain.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
If you answered YES to question 8, go back to question 4, 5, and 6 and answer them. If you
answered NO to question 8, then go on to question 9.
9) If they don’t use nuclear weapons, how do you think the Soviet Union would retaliate?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
10) Could you imagine a way that you or the Soviet Union might EVENTUALLY use a nuclear
weapon to attack the U.S. soldiers or West Berlin in this situation? Explain why or why not.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
If your answer to Question 10 was YES, then go to questions 4, 5, and 6 and answer them.
If your answer was NO, then continue to question 11.
11) Your answers on this sheet disagree with every U.S. President and military general that lived
during the Cold War. Would you have the courage to disagree with them at that time, if the
situation described on the front of this page actually happened? Explain why or why not.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Go back and answer the Conclusion Question between #6 and #7
Will Mutual Assured Destruction Continue to Deter Nuclear War?
By Michael Shermer, June 1, 2014, Scientific American
When I was in elementary school in the early 1960s, we were periodically put
through “duck and cover” drills under the ridiculous fantasy that our wooden desks would
protect us from a thermonuclear explosion over Los Angeles. When I was an
undergraduate at Pepperdine University in 1974, the inventor of the hydrogen bomb,
Edward Teller, spoke at our campus about the effectiveness of mutual assured destruction
(MAD) to deter (prevent) war. He said that by stockpiling (keeping a large amount) of
many weapons, neither side has anything to gain by starting an attack because of the
capability of both nations to totally destroy the other.
So far MAD has worked. But as Eric Schlosser reveals in his riveting 2013 book
Command and Control, there have been dozens of close calls. A deterrence strategy like
MAD is not a long-term sustainable solution because of escalation, accidents and crazy
leaders, and efforts have been made over the past two decades to reduce the world's
stockpiles (amounts) from a peak of around 70,000 nuclear weapons in 1986 to about
17,300 today, only 4,200 of which are operationally active (ready to launch) nuclear
warheads. Can we get to “nuclear zero”?
U.S. President Ronald Reagan (1981-89), thought we could. He considered nuclear
weapons to be “totally irrational, totally inhumane, good for nothing but killing, possibly
destructive of life on earth and civilization.” It's worth noting that 185 of the world's 194
countries (95 percent) are doing just fine without nuclear weapons, and more nations have
started and stopped their nuclear weapons programs than started and completed them. This
is encouraging, but can it prevent nuclear weapons from being used?
Political scientist Jacek Kugler says no, for these reasons: One, some states that have
nukes (nuclear weapons), such as North Korea, are unpredictable. Two, regions within
nations that are trying to gain independence (“rogue states”) want nukes. Three, states who
are fighting regular wars might escalate to using nukes. Four, if terrorists get nukes, they'll
use them. Five, the resistance to using nuclear weapons has not yet become a resistance
against owning them, and so the danger of accidents or crazy leaders is still possible. And
six, the nuclear science of how to make an atomic bomb is now easy to understand, which
means other nations or terrorists can obtain them and ruin the MAD theory.
Kugler thinks we can have “regional zero”—nuclear-free zones such as Latin
America and Australia—if the largest nuclear powers (the U.S., Russia, China, the U.K. ,
and France) agree to provide a response to any use of nuclear weapons by rogue states.
Even then, terrorist groups may be able to purchase nuclear material on the black market,
and if they do, there is nothing to deter them because many terrorists look forward to
death.
If we continue to reduce the size of the global stockpile, reinforce the “no first use”
policy, keep pushing against nations owning nukes, guard all nuclear material strongly,
increase economic relationships between nations so they don’t want to fight against each
other, and encourage democracy (producing less crazy leaders), we can slowly get to a
secure planet.
Name_______________________________
Date_________________________
Nuclear Proliferation and Mutually Assured Destruction Role-Play
Your Role: A military advisor to Joseph Stalin, dictator of the Soviet Union (USSR)
Your Task: Based on the situation, explain how you would retaliate if the U.S. attacked you.
-----------------------------------------Your spies learned that US military bases in West Germany, Italy, and Turkey have nuclear
weapons. You are afraid that the US might use these weapons to attack the Soviet Union. But
your army has over 3 million soldiers who are mostly in Europe, and the United States has 1.5
million soldiers that are spread all around the world. So you can use your soldiers immediately,
which means that the U.S. would NEED to use their only strong defense against your soldiers,
which is the nuclear bomb.
What if the Berlin Airlift (April 1948-May 1949) had lasted until August, 1949? By then, Soviet
scientists had invented a nuclear bomb and Stalin was not afraid of the USA anymore. He had
made some very irrational decisions in the past, like murdering all his top generals and
commanders during the purge, forcing millions of peasants to move to collective farms which
caused famine, making a deal with Hitler and then losing 25 million people in World War II clearly Stalin does not care about Soviet citizens dying so he can prove his point.
1) If Stalin ordered his soldiers to shoot down U.S. planes, would you agree with him? ________
If you answered YES, then answer 2. If you answered NO, skip to question 11.
2) If the USSR shot down U.S. planes, would the U.S. use nuclear weapons against you? ______
If you answered YES, then answer 3, 4, 5, 6. If you answered NO, skip to question 7.
3) What type of location do you think they would attack?
☐Military Base with a nuclear research facility
☐Russian city with a low population
☐Military base with no nuclear research facility
☐Russian city with a high population
4) Would you retaliate using your nuclear weapons? Explain why or why not.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
5) What do you think the US would do if you retaliated by using nuclear weapons? Explain why.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
6) How would you retaliate if the US used nuclear weapons in question 4? Explain why.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Conclusion Question:
Mutual = all people involved. Assured = it will definitely happen. Destruction = killing
The theory of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) means that if Nation X fires a nuclear
weapon at Nation Y (who also has nuclear weapons) then Nation Y will fire them back, and they
will keep firing nuclear weapons at each other until they are both destroyed. Based on how you
acted during this role play, did this theory come true? Explain why or why not.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
________________
________________
________________
________________
______________
Final Task:
After reading this
political cartoon,
turn to the back of
this packet and read
the article.
7) How do you think the US would respond to you shooting down their planes? Explain why.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
8) Would you use nuclear weapons to retaliate against their response in question 7? Explain.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
If you answered YES to question 8, go back to question 4, 5, and 6 and answer them. If you
answered NO to question 8, then go on to question 9.
9) How do you think the United States would retaliate if you don’t use nuclear weapons?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
10) Could you imagine a way that you or the United States might EVENTUALLY use a nuclear
weapon to attack one another in this situation? Explain why or why not.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
If your answer to Question 10 was YES, then go to questions 4, 5, and 6 and answer them.
If your answer was NO, then continue to question 11.
11) Your answers on this sheet disagree with every Soviet dictator that lived during the Cold
War. Would you have the courage to disagree with them at that time, if the situation on the front
of this page actually happened? Explain why or why not.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Go back and answer the conclusion question between #6 and #7
Will Mutual Assured Destruction Continue to Deter Nuclear War?
By Michael Shermer, June 1, 2014, Scientific American
When I was in elementary school in the early 1960s, we were periodically put
through “duck and cover” drills under the ridiculous fantasy that our wooden desks
would protect us from a thermonuclear explosion over Los Angeles. When I was an
undergraduate at Pepperdine University in 1974, the inventor of the hydrogen bomb,
Edward Teller, spoke at our campus about the effectiveness of mutual assured
destruction (MAD) to deter (prevent) war. He said that by stockpiling (keeping a large
amount) of many weapons, neither side has anything to gain by starting an attack
because of the capability of both nations to totally destroy the other.
So far MAD has worked. But as Eric Schlosser reveals in his riveting 2013 book
Command and Control, there have been dozens of close calls. A deterrence strategy like
MAD is not a long-term sustainable solution because of escalation, accidents and crazy
leaders, and efforts have been made over the past two decades to reduce the world's
stockpiles (amounts) from a peak of around 70,000 nuclear weapons in 1986 to about
17,300 today, only 4,200 of which are operationally active (ready to launch) nuclear
warheads. Can we get to “nuclear zero”?
U.S. President Ronald Reagan (1981-89), thought we could. He considered nuclear
weapons to be “totally irrational, totally inhumane, good for nothing but killing, possibly
destructive of life on earth and civilization.” It's worth noting that 185 of the world's 194
countries (95 percent) are doing just fine without nuclear weapons, and more nations
have started and stopped their nuclear weapons programs than started and completed
them. This is encouraging, but can it prevent nuclear weapons from being used?
Political scientist Jacek Kugler says no, for these reasons: One, some states that have
nukes (nuclear weapons), such as North Korea, are unpredictable. Two, regions within
nations that are trying to gain independence (“rogue states”) want nukes. Three, states
who are fighting regular wars might escalate to using nukes. Four, if terrorists get nukes,
they'll use them. Five, the resistance to using nuclear weapons has not yet become a
resistance against owning them, and so the danger of accidents or crazy leaders is still
possible. And six, the nuclear science of how to make an atomic bomb is now easy to
understand, which means other nations or terrorists can obtain them and ruin the MAD
theory.
Kugler thinks we can have “regional zero”—nuclear-free zones such as Latin
America and Australia—if the largest nuclear powers (the U.S., Russia, China, the U.K.,
and France) agree to provide a response to any use of nuclear weapons by rogue states.
Even then, terrorist groups may be able to purchase nuclear material on the black
market, and if they do, there is nothing to deter them because many terrorists look
forward to death.
If we continue to reduce the size of the global stockpile, reinforce the “no first use”
policy, keep pushing against nations owning nukes, guard all nuclear material strongly,
increase economic relationships between nations so they don’t want to fight against each
other, and encourage democracy (producing less crazy leaders), we can slowly get to a
secure planet.