Not sure if this has been discussed before - a search for 'alternate deterrent' didn't bring anything up and I can't seem to find the right combination of 'nuclear not working' type words to find any previous discussions.
So, imagining that for some reason nuclear weapons never come into service (maybe the Manhattan Project doesn't work, maybe no nation is willing to pump the huge amounts of money needed into the research, maybe it's decided that they're just too much of a risk - frankly the reason they never exist isn't really important), could there have been any other weapon types to take their place as a deterrent in a post WW2 Cold War?
There are a few possibilities I can think of:
Chemical Weapons
Pros - well understood by most/all of the major nations of the world. Fairly easy to produce in an industrialised nation. Very scary to your average civilian in a world with a huge folk memory of gas in the trenches.
Cons - can be badly affected by weather, can be dangerous to produce and store, the simpler types are relatively easy to negate with gas masks.
Biological Weapons
Pros - well understood with a very long history (centuries if not millennia) of use, very scary to your average civilian with a huge folk memory of epidemics like the Black Death and even the Spanish Flu.
Cons - could be dangerous if your storage is hit by the enemy or has a leak, no control over the contagion once you've released your agent (ie, you might hit Moscow with Black Death, for the sake of argument, but then there's no way of stopping the disease from making it's way west and infecting your own populations once you've done it), public immunisation can make many diseases ineffective.
Fire Storm (ie, Bomber Command on steroids)
Pros - both the RAF and USAF are well experienced at doing it, relatively easy to do without much in the way of specialised weaponry, no chance of any form of 'blow back' or uncontrollable spread of disease after being used.
Cons - requires large, expensive fleets of bombers, proved in the war to not be all that affective at terrorising civilians and breaking their morale, doesn't have the 'single knock out punch' effects that NBC weapons have.
None of them really jump out as being as effective as nuclear weapons, but could any of them have ended up as the deterrent of choice in an alternate world? Is there anything else I've not thought of that could have?
So, imagining that for some reason nuclear weapons never come into service (maybe the Manhattan Project doesn't work, maybe no nation is willing to pump the huge amounts of money needed into the research, maybe it's decided that they're just too much of a risk - frankly the reason they never exist isn't really important), could there have been any other weapon types to take their place as a deterrent in a post WW2 Cold War?
There are a few possibilities I can think of:
Chemical Weapons
Pros - well understood by most/all of the major nations of the world. Fairly easy to produce in an industrialised nation. Very scary to your average civilian in a world with a huge folk memory of gas in the trenches.
Cons - can be badly affected by weather, can be dangerous to produce and store, the simpler types are relatively easy to negate with gas masks.
Biological Weapons
Pros - well understood with a very long history (centuries if not millennia) of use, very scary to your average civilian with a huge folk memory of epidemics like the Black Death and even the Spanish Flu.
Cons - could be dangerous if your storage is hit by the enemy or has a leak, no control over the contagion once you've released your agent (ie, you might hit Moscow with Black Death, for the sake of argument, but then there's no way of stopping the disease from making it's way west and infecting your own populations once you've done it), public immunisation can make many diseases ineffective.
Fire Storm (ie, Bomber Command on steroids)
Pros - both the RAF and USAF are well experienced at doing it, relatively easy to do without much in the way of specialised weaponry, no chance of any form of 'blow back' or uncontrollable spread of disease after being used.
Cons - requires large, expensive fleets of bombers, proved in the war to not be all that affective at terrorising civilians and breaking their morale, doesn't have the 'single knock out punch' effects that NBC weapons have.
None of them really jump out as being as effective as nuclear weapons, but could any of them have ended up as the deterrent of choice in an alternate world? Is there anything else I've not thought of that could have?
Last edited:
