Nuclear War, Annie Jacobsen and Disinformation
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 кві 2024
- Get my Inaction Figure at www.theknifehandco.com/
How nuclear weapons work:
• How Nuclear Weapons Work
The book, Nuclear War by Annie Jacobson was obviously written with the best disarmament intentions. However, the appearance on podcasts combined with the accessibility of the material may create a perfect opportunity for disinformation.
Disinformation actors may use the potential for nuclear war with Russia or China along with selections from the associated podcasts, to persuade people not to support Ukraine or Taiwan lest we be drawn into a nuclear war scenario.
By knowing this information it may be possible to prevent disinformation agents from using these tactics before it happens.
Special thanks to Cyabra for allowing me to use their software.
For uncensored video, check out my substack at:
ryanmcbeth.substack.com
Like my shirts? Get your own at:
www.bunkerbranding.com/pages/...
Want a personalized greeting:
www.cameo.com/ryanmcbeth
Watch all of my long form videos:
• Military Equipment, Ta...
Twitter:
@ryanmcbeth
Instagram:
@therealryanmcbeth
BlueSky
@ryanmcbeth
Reddit:
/r/ryanmcbeth
Join the conversation:
/ discord
Want to send me something?
Ryan McBeth Productions LLC
8705 Colesville Rd.
Suite 249
Silver Spring, MD 20910
USA
Get my Inaction Figure at www.theknifehandco.com/
How nuclear weapons work:
ua-cam.com/video/gzmk53DJNUI/v-deo.htmlsi=gASSju6pST_kEdi6
The book, Nuclear War by Annie Jacobson was obviously written with the best disarmament intentions. However, the appearance on podcasts combined with the accessibility of the material may create a perfect opportunity for disinformation.
Disinformation actors may use the potential for nuclear war with Russia or China along with selections from the associated podcasts, to persuade people not to support Ukraine or Taiwan lest we be drawn into a nuclear war scenario.
By knowing this information it may be possible to prevent disinformation agents from using these tactics before it happens.
Special thanks to Cyabra for allowing me to use their software.
For uncensored video, check out my substack at:
ryanmcbeth.substack.com
Like my shirts? Get your own at:
www.bunkerbranding.com/pages/ryan-mcbeth
Want a personalized greeting:
www.cameo.com/ryanmcbeth
Watch all of my long form videos:
ua-cam.com/play/PLt670_P7pOGmLWZG78JlM-rG2ZrpPziOy.html
Twitter:
@ryanmcbeth
Instagram:
@therealryanmcbeth
BlueSky
@ryanmcbeth
Reddit:
/r/ryanmcbeth
Join the conversation:
discord.gg/pKuGDHZHrz
Want to send me something?
Ryan McBeth Productions LLC
8705 Colesville Rd.
Suite 249
Silver Spring, MD 20910
USA
sitting in a airport secure area and talking about bombs. ballsy man!
Great video, thank you. Can you recommend a better, more scientific book or books about nuclear war and the initial aftermath?
Hey Ryan - Old trial lawyer trick: Take a metal paper clip and straighten it. Cut it 1/8” shorter than the length from the filter to the end of your cigarette. Push the paper clip into the tobacco so that it is fully buried. The ash will hold on to the paper clip. It freaks people out and all they can concentrate on is when the ash is going to fall.
Should have kept your hat on.
Hahaaa.....)))
talking about bombs at the airport: ❌
talking about Nuclear bombs at the airport: ✅
is he saying nuclear war is not that scary???
i think i need more convincing than random guy on internet calling himself as malformation specialist. . 😂
@@tocreatee3585i think the guy’s talking about the TSA
@@tocreatee3585 It's terrifying, but you cannot let it dictate actions entirely. Otherwise, whichever country threatens to use them wins. Always.
For instance, why is Russia willing to invade Ukraine, at the same time asserting if anybody else really tries to help them they might use nuclear weapons? That is why NATO works, why countries want to join. Attack a NATO country, and multiple countries are treaty bound to help defend it, and two of those treaty countries have nuclear weapons. Mutually Assured Destruction, the aptly named MAD, while terrifying, worked. Thus are national borders maintained, as they were from 1945 until the downfall of the USSR in the 1991.
Regardless, until the world has that Kumbaya moment and we actually do disarm, whoever threatens most seriously wins, if everyone else is too afraid to stand up. "We can't defend Ukraine, Russia has nuclear weapons." "We can't defend Taiwan, China has nuclear weapons." How about Russia and China cannot invade, because other countries have nuclear weapons, and might strenuously object? Without a serious threat of retaliation, the worst actor always wins.
MAD is still terrifying for good reason. We came within *one* Russian sub commander of nuclear war in 1962. *Vasily Arkhipov.* Remember his name, he probably saved a good bit of the life on earth.
As long as you’ve got a cell phone, selfie stick and light to talk to, people will go “Oh, must be an influencer” and let you go anywhere. 😂 It’s the modern version of reflective vest, hard hat and ladder.
@@CoffeeCup1346 Primate pattern recognition at its finest
Ryan only needs 1 take with no editing. That's how good he is.
Spot on!
You didn't notice the editing?
😂 my friend, he literally cut to images of the books he is talking about, what do you mean no editing?
If you meant 1 take in recording the audio then “understandable have a nice day”
Airport green screen /s lol
I guess someone sneaked up on him and played the clip from what he said before with their invisible body and phone :P
No matter how scary nuclear war is the US can't let nuclear war be a sword of Damocles. The more you push back on the little intimidations the more you prevent the pressure building. Push back on every provocation without pushing anyone into a corner. Give your opponent a series of dilemmas not problems.
ah, 'dilemma', learned difference thanks to Ryan.
As the wise sage DMX once said, “Let’s get it on.”
It's not just a Sword of Damocles either, but more like a sword of MAD, as the moment Muscovy's ICBMs so much as twitch, suddenly the end of everything the Kremlin cares about comes very close in the form of US, British and French nuclear warheads.
That's why the only way that the Kremlin can use nuclear weapons is if it wants to commit suicide. That tends to be a pretty big deterrence for even dictators.
I'm of the belief that some techniques work well with Russians.
Such as, “My fellow Americans, I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.”
Boy, did Ronnie Raygun royally piss off a lot of people that day! As a hint, the Russians did go on nuclear alert.
Ah, yes. The Casper Weinberger approach. Worked well.
I have to take it these people never stood up to a bully, they don't know that's the only way to PREVENT the bully from getting worse.
My guess is Russia says the same about NATO. I was proud to serve to reunify Germany. Less proud to fund the slow march East, as NATO absorbs former Soviets (anything with an SSR in its name before) and Warsaw Pact nations. It is a low burn provocation that need never have happened. Look into the Maidan revolution - coincidentally happened after the the Arab Spring stuff happened. Was it popular opinion spreading? Who can say? One thing is certain, the branding was consistent. For about four years every uprising was called a revolution using the word Spring in its name - or a local equivalent. International politics are never as simple as a school yard bully. Ryan does damn fine work shining a light on the other guys, but there are bad actors all over the place.
thats my impression too. Most of those that just want to get along, have never been in a fight and believe that you can "talk it all out" everytime with everyone. Its just a scenario they do not understand.
@@Miner-dyne How did Nato "absorb" these poor little states? I remember that time too. They desperately wanted to be in because they were afraid of Russia claiming them back. Remember how Poland basically blackmailed the USA into their "ok" to join Nato, which the USA then begrudingly gave?
This is the kind of thinking that the russian state always uses - the "either you are under my power or you are under someone elses power" - and that of course understood from a russian perspective where everything is controlled by the Tzar and managed from Moskau. Nato does not work like that. There is no great central control from Washington that "absorbs" these small states into the borg. Thats how Russia works, not the West. There these small states can actually descide on their own if they want to join a defensive alliance etc.
@@Miner-dyne don't forget that the war started 10 years ago with land grabs when russia annexed crimea and parts of donbass. they made up the nato expansion excuse later on the go
Exactly, that s why Russia is standing up to the USA.
the fact that she's a journalist who wrote Tom Clancy fan fiction for amazon explains the popularity of her book and the reason I haven't heard of it or her until this video.
shame because I liked Tom Clancy lol
@@johnroscoe2406 lol, the moment I heard about her I was like "is she some Tom Clancy wannabe?". This explains a lot.
@@johnroscoe2406 what was that book and movie based on Tom Clancy books where they detonate nuclear bomb.... so if she has written another novel , she is copycat :D
@@effexon I think you're talking about "The Sum of All Fears".
@@effexonThe Sum of all Fears
Thank you Ryan. Preventing misinformation by explaining the way it works is better than calling for censorship.
Problem is the majority would rather take the misinformation because they prefer it.
@@Lobsterwithinternet Cognitive dissonances are painful and the pain is what makes all of us choose to believe more truths than lies, if they are available to us. People prefer misinformation when they aren't trusted to hear the actual truth.
Good ideas beat bad ideas when a civil conversation is engaged by two morally equivalent parties .
The funny thing is, everyone gets their panties in a twist over radiation from a thermonuclear warhead and that isn't the greatest threat. Most of the radiation is in the fireball and well, if you're inside of the fireball, you've got a whole hell of a lot else to worry about - like being incinerated.
Fallout from a modern warhead is typically fairly low as well, as most are set for air burst to maximize destruction by heat and overpressure, figure around a half ton, most of which will decay in around 12 days, most a lot sooner.
But, that overpressure and heat, that is the destructive parts, think concrete wall moving at the speed of sound, with negative pressure between pulses, plus the fireball that well, is hotter than the surface of the sun. That's one hell of a pee-pee smack! Broken gas pipes, which the pulverized buildings help by adding fuel, the word being firestorm. Firestorms aren't any fun, we're talking about getting pulled into the fire from more than two blocks away.
Most deaths will occur from carbon monoxide poisoning from the firestorm, well, those who weren't ground into dogfood when their building collapsed on them or had their window glass shred their body.
Suffice it to say, I have intimate knowledge of how a nuclear warhead works, as I worked on nuclear missiles as my first MOS. I call them what they are, products of the insanity factory.
The problem is, if one country has them, well, we'd damned well better have them too, lest oh, nuclear blackmail occur, which is precisely what's being attempted.
Trust me, trying to blackmail me is a really shitty idea, not known for enhancing one's chances of survival. And realistically, I'm old, banged up, not in the best of health, so life in prison or the death penalty aren't exactly a deterrent.
So, what does it take to launch any part of our nuclear arsenal? One telephone call from POTUS, his identity confirmed by someone in the line of succession and in possession of "the biscuit", the magical boom-boom code phrase of the day that POTUS and others in the line of succession possess (typically, it'd be SecDef). Target selection via the SIOP.
No magic buttons, no red phones, a secure telephone is all that's needed. The "Football" being only used while traveling. If traveling, the Football comes along for between times, like while they're setting up the portable SCIF (yeah, they have one that converts a room into a full grown SCIF in kit form, pretty cool, looks like a royal gonad crusher to set up.
Apparently, Dick Nixon was drunk a *lot* toward the end of his Presidency and had actually ordered North Korea nuked. His Chief of Staff sat the orders on his desk and said, "We'll see if he still wants to do it in the morning, after he sobers up".
Yeah.
Oh, for the record, I actually hate nuclear weapons with a passion. But, we don't live in an ideal world, so we're not going to have ideal solutions to our problems.
How is a clip of her talking about the size of the fireball disinformation? It’s true! Why is the promotion of how scary nuclear war is, disinformation? Is it only disinformation if it leads to a policy decision you don’t agree with?
Fear is an incredibly powerful influence, but almost without fail a person who is trying to scare you is doing you a disservice. Minimum they are trying to take away your opportunity to make a decision, and turn it into a reaction. At worse they're trying to manipulate you.
Also caving into a bully does not reform the bully. It almost certainly makes the situation worse.
Yes, look both ways before crossing the street is a disservice.
We learned that during covid.
@@normanlorrain not worse than NUCLEAR WAR
JOIN THE FRONT.
I find it hard to take anyone who thinks large scale nuclear disarmament is realistic seriously. Any nation that has nuclear weapons has a pretty solid guarantee that it wont be invaded. You'd be foolish to give that up.
That's why Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 AFTER Kiev returned their nukes to Moscow honoring a treaty.
Except things haven't worked that way in a long time(Korea?), otherwise Israel wouldn't be an issue. Nuclear weapons have such a high threshold for use that they're practically unusable. That's why you're seeing a push back to tactical , selectable, and unconventional use- it potentially lowers the threshold.
@@jamesbridges7750For an actor that has nothing to lose like North Korea or Iran nukes have more benefits than drawbacks. Those countries would lose in a conventional war against a superpower so they view it as an equalizer.
There are many ways to be “invaded” even though you have nukes. Think economic and cyber warfare. Lots of ways to squeeze a country without lobbing a nuke into their backyard, but these alternate approaches can have just as devastating an outcome for those citizens…especially for those countries that rank highest on the curve in adopting electronic technology and becoming dependent upon it.
@@jamesbridges7750 I wouldn't say they're practically unusable. The nations that have them have already "used" them in that they've benefitted from having them. They've almost certainly had an impact on military decisions made by numerous countries. It's just that the consequences of that impact is a lack of military action. It's hard to point to how effective a deterrence nuclear weapons are since you need to measure the absence of violence in order to tell how effective of a deterrent it is, and measuring something that doesn't exist is impossible. But they've almost certainly helped the various nuclear armed nation's reach their national defense objectives.
The reason you see powers refocus onto conventional weaponry nowadays is because that is all thats left to practically fight over. Because no one is willing to go beyond that and risk a nuclear escalation. That does not mean nuclear weapons no longer have a role to play.
Talking bombs at the airport. Tip to the hat Sir ;-)
Should have kept it on.
Oh, they're only nukes, not a big deal. ;)
I've also talked about nukes at the airport, as my first MOS was in nuclear missiles. The difficulty in a warhead is to maintain supercritical configuration for around 50 - 80 shakes to ensure the core fully fissions.
Damn! Peter Higgs died, of Higgs boson and Higgs mechanism fame. Well, 94, so he had a good run!
@@spvillano That's the first I've heard of that!
As long as he doesn’t look arab, he should be fine.
@@spvillano RIP Dr. Higgs
I’m glad to see someone dropping real knowledge and not just dubious information.
This is disinformation.
This video is disappointing.
I read the book and I found it fascinating, so I came here to see what I got wrong or how I had been misinformed.
Instead, there is some nonsense criticism about the lack of technical details regarding how a nuclear weapon works or how talking about nuclear war might lead to decreased funds for Ukraine (really, queen?), but absolutely nothing about all the hard facts that she refers to in the book, particularly to the recently declassified information regarding the US missile defense system, which I found particularly mind-boggling.
So I stand by my original assessment: the book is incredibly interesting, insightful, thorough, and absolutely terrifying. A must-read.
My thoughts exactly.
Agree, what exactly is the disinformation? This video was distinctly, “I worry this book will be used to further policy I don’t agree with”, and not “the book contains too much disinformation.”
Very well.
Keep reading on the subject. Don’t settle for just one opinionated scared writer.
Like you, I find the prospect of nuclear war terrifying. However, after being interested in the subject for decades I have come to understand the strategy.
Annie’s scenario is far from realistic, especially in the response to an attack.
With just some rudimentary knowledge of the subject, she would have understood that retaliation by ICBM isn’t the first option in this scenario. Actually, it might never be the option since those missile sites serve their purpose just by soaking up incoming ICBM’s.
I think your interest in the subject is commendable and I hope you will keep informing yourself in an unbiased manner
@@davedeville6540 Read the book.
Yeah this dude is acting like she just wrote the book from her own imagination and didn't have a couple dozen actual experts consulting. But we should listen to him, a frickin software engineer who's more concerned that if we're too afraid of the END OF THE WORLD then we might not support frickin Ukraine. Who the hell is he? A smart person (engineer) who thinks that being smart in general makes him smart about topics outside his lane. He then admits that he didn't even finish the book because he "didn't have time", but is gonna do a review on it anyway. What a joke.
Love the airport chat about Nuclear War. lol
The Ryan Macbeth inaction figures get me every time. - Big hug from Germany and Slava Ukraine!
🇺🇦🇺🇲🇮🇱🇩🇪
Edit: Oh yes, the content. I agree. What sucks the most, especially in Germany ist the Angst of everything nuclear. Usually you won't have to open a book (or a person) to know they are absolutely clueless. Even the bare minimum of 'education' is absent. Kinda frustrating...
As an American, who has been in the education field, when a German says just how laughably poor their countrymen's education is , I have to shudder.
We look up to your education system, for inspiration in ways to improve ours....
Talking about books, in Germany you got 'The Cloud' (Die Wolke) by Gudrun Pausewang as a completely illiterate take on nuclear power. Yet it's also very well-known and much of the 'facts' in it are taken as gospel. Definitely a good way to scare a population away from actually informing themselves.
Yes, but there are back in the genocide game. In the Dock in the ICJ atm.
you do realize that the birth of nuclear weapons lies mostly with operation paperclip, and the german scientists who went on to develop the ICBM
Same... The messy hair with a smoke in his mouth and drink in his hand cracks me up. 🤣
I'm concerned that this fellow seemed to downplay how severe the use of nuclear weapons would be and say that people could just stay in their basement for 2 weeks and come out. This doesn't mean we shouldn't support Ukraine in their war against Russia but let's not downplay the dangers of nuclear weapons. In fact that would be a good video for this fellow to do including problems from electromagnetic pulse from nuclear weapons.
It provokes emotional rather than rational responses - just what certain folk like.
Great presentation Mr.McBeth. Thank you.
MAD is fundamentally irrational.
Best of luck in your business endeavors Ryan! That company sounds extremely useful and valuable to the military. You've got the perfect background for it!
I wrote my undergrad dissertation on disinformation (my focus was Ukraine and the full scale war kicked off while I was writing funnily enough) - I'm no expert but I think I came away from writing it with one of my biggest impressions being that it's hard to convey to vulnerable people the nuance involved and the consequences of misleading or biased information. As you say, injecting a narrative into the collective consciousness is enough seriously impact global politics, just having people fight over an issue is enough to set the popular agenda. You can't solve this by condescending people, it doesn't work. This is why I think one of the few serious remedies for information-warfare is to teach people media literacy and critical thinking. It's much easier to teach people how not to be taken for a fool than it is to 'teach' them uncritically what is "True".
The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosions and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices ... to be found only in the minds of men. For the record, prejudices can kill ... and suspicion can destroy ... and a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all of its own-for the children and the children yet unborn. And the pity of it is ... that these things cannot be confined to ... The Twilight Zone!
What you are completely missing is propaganda is half the war you can win the battles and loose the war another problem is most people don’t have a critical thinking to see the propaganda on their own side
Tldr
@@theprotagonist8755 no one cares
You need to get out there and spread whats going on!
None of the points Ryan made here really impact the truth or factual content of the book. I think it's a really valuable contribution to society because it has the potential to shock the normalcy bias out of some of the people who have lived their entire lives under this state of affairs and have never realized its absurdity and potential consequences.
I listened to her visit at Lex Fridman for 5 minutes before I shut off because it was so bad. Thanks to Ryan I know I'm not the only one feeling that way.
LMFAO. I remember when she was on Rogan and kept saying "you'll have to read the book" whenever Joe asked literally anything.
That's a lie
One person has the power and sole authority with a 6 minute window to decide the world's fate. Whether others are using this as a tool or not doesn't change this chilling fact.
Thanks Ryan. It's nice to listen to a trustworthy source a few times a week.
I check your channel, and Jake Broe's channel daily.
I appreciate the work you put into disseminating truthful information, and teaching us how to tell truth from propaganda.
What makes him trustworthy? The fact that he’s a govt contractor?
Thank you Ryan!
The total failure of these podcasts to question Mrs.Jacobsen’s claims has been very frustrating. To me, she displays a clear case of a person who is scared because she does not fully grasp the subject.
Babe, McBeth just uploaded a video.
Thanks babe
okay dear
The problem with journalists who try and write books is that they cannot help but exaggerate and misinform their readers with their politics and views.
We all need to remember that media is a business. They are trying to get eyeballs.
I wish they would hammer this home in schools. But in practice im not sure what that looks like. Kids thinking that CNN or fox news is reporting anything without a massive political angle is scary. The media is so much more powerful than we all realize.
Yes, it would be so much better if all books were written by technical specialists who attempt to make no point at all other than describing things in excrutiating detail.
$
Remember her on Joe Rogan a while ago?
Every freaking question asked she would respond "it's in my book, read my book".
She's insufferable.
Yeah and often this is because they only really have 30 pages of content but they need to make it book length. (Pretty much every Gladwell book is basically a long form article with 200 extra pages.)
Thank you for the work you do, Ryan!
I think you have great shirts. Years ago at Ft. McClellan AL, I saw a shirt for sale by a PX vender that showed a submarine with all its missile tubes open and empty. The shirt said, “sixteen missiles away, twelve cities down, its Miller time.”
This is the second time ive seen you discuss nuclear weapons in an airport
Interesting analysis obviously slanted towards continuing the forever wars. I believe it is beneficial to remind modern society that we have this legacy material in our midst. I worked in the nuclear field from 1980 to my recent retirement and I didn’t take issue with Annie’s new book understanding that is not a nuclear science publication but a lucid simple explanation of that aforementioned legacy material that remains in our midst. Like everything else, the salt must be applied liberally to any journalistic, non-science publication (and associated media).
I love your content Ryan and your sensibility! I'm glad you exist to inform the public and that you have great knowledge on different topics.
Great explanation and thank you for helping to cut through the static of misinformation.
Ryan you're a much needed voice in these crazy times.
When he says that she handed Russia a misinformation tool. I take exception to that. She wrote a book. And from what it sounds like it's a pretty good book. One of the challenges of living in a free society with freedom of speech is that people can take and twist what you say. That doesn't mean you shouldn't say it. She has no blame on what Russia does or does not do with her book and how they spin it
While I don't doubt that you're right, Ryan, I somehow feel that the debut of Prime Video's "Fallout" is going to put nuclear war much closer to public awareness, regardless of its fictional nature its premise and visual presentation is the lowest possible bar for entry for emotional response to the threat of apocalypse, even without the factual part or even the potential for Deceptive Image Manipulation
You need to do a short video on the concept of MAD - and show how there is no possible scenario Russia could claim anything resembling victory after a nuclear exchange with the US, as well as point out why Russia's nuclear sabre rattling is actually a sign of strategic weakness.
Basically, Russia only talks up nuclear weapons as it's the only place were it has any kind of parity with US capability, even though if used, Russia would be utterly destroyed.
Edit: Also explain how giving into nuclear blackmail actually increases the risk of nuclear war.
Totally agree.
Letting Russia think we will back down is the worst mistake we can do.
We’ve seen this before. It did not bring peace. It brought on a World War. A war that was ended by nuclear weapons.
I saw her on lex videos. After awhile it was clear she really didn’t know much about anything and was just fear motivated
I got the sense Lex was not too impressed.
@stevenobrien557 if he wasn't, he's an actor.
She’s also an appalling writer, biased, lose with facts and perhaps even outright lies. Had the misfortune to read her Operation Paperclip book, abysmal. Did enjoy deleting though. Never would I read another word of hers or listen to anytbibg she said, she’s clueless and would fit in well at the likes of Faux News.
Well said, she doesn't know what she's talking about. She seems unaware of PDD-60's suspension of Launch of Warning, she thinks nuclear winter is real and that "everyone would die". It's like she did zero deep level research.
You should be afraid of nuclear war, the fact you think its all just fear mongering is terrifying. I bet you live in an urban center as well.
I'm so glad you made a video on her. I hate her fear mongering when it's clear she has no idea what she's taking about...
Completely agree, I'm never watching Star Wars again, because the Russians are definitely going to use clone troopers and starships......OMFG Alien, what about that!
She does know what she is talking about; that is the point Ryan made in this video!
It is our responsibility to understand how that information can be leveraged to feed other peoples agendas!
It reminds me of the Reagan years and all of the propaganda like "The Day After".
And what expertise do you have to state that it's clear she has no idea what she's talking about? Sounds to me like you don't know what you're talking about.
Silly lefties acting like nuclear war wouldn't be world ending
The more i watch this guy the more i'm convinced that he works for the pentagon
Are you trolling us?
first :D
Plus, I love how Ryan gets to see the author going to Lex Friedman's Podcast and that immediatly triggers a red flag.
4:11 The banana wut?
You heard that too? 🦞😂
She's not a scientist, she's a journalist.
Ahhhh there it is. "Non-fiction author".
I read the book, it was very well written and factual in nature. The book that scared me more was the book by Sir John Hacket in 1978 “The Third World War, August 1985”. And I vividly remember watching the movie “The Day After” which brought home to my eyes what war would mean. Also saw the Canadian 7 part Series by Gwynne Dyer War that brought home the fear of war. As a young adult in the 1980’s I have already lived thru the worst of nuclear times, so Annie’s book is just more of a reference manual to the mechanics of how the next war might start. Remember we lived with 30,000 warheads on 24/7 hair trigger alert and Able Archer, and the actual near launches from erroneous launch alerts on both sides, and are still here to read about it.
I think for my cohort it was "If You Love this Planet". It's so weird how we come out of Covid in which people who weren't afraid were deemed deniers, and we're supposed to worry now about the "climate emergency", and now with a possible nuclear exchange the message is being sent to be bold and face up to Russia no matter what.
Another great read is "On the Beach".
Dyer was good. Love that leather jacket!
Who else here heard about this book on the Dan Carlin addendum podcast first?
I really loved her book about the Area 51, but the last chapter of that book ruined it for me and I've never really trusted anything she has done since. Basically, the entire book is an amazing history of area 51 and has so many details, interviews and sources about the first couple of decades of the base's history. The last chapter, ruins it. The final chapter is based off one interview, with a former contractor who worked there and early manhatten project worker, Al O'donnell. Al essentially makes a deathbed confession to Annie about what really happened with Roswell. He alleges that what really crashed was a Nazi derived, Soviet flying saucer that was flown by mutilated children (mutilated by Josef Mengele). It crashed and was covered up to ensure that it didnt spread panic, which the source alleges was the intent by Stalin, to recreate the panic of the War of the World radio reading and cause chaos in the US. Now that doesnt really make sense for so many reasons. That last chapter ruined what was an amazing book on black projects at Groom Lake. The fact she did that, has cautioned me against reading anything she has done since. Although I will listen to any podcast she does because she has maybe one of the most soothing voices ever. haha
I read the book too and personally I don't have strong opinions of the last chapter. In my mind it seems plausible. I'd like to hear you expand more on what you said of it not making sense for so many reasons of why that didn't happen. Perhaps you know something I'm not aware of.
Wtf? Lol
@@codyelder9201You think that seems plausible? Are you intoxicated?
@@codyelder9201People have since had access to Soviet archives. If the Soviets had come up with a flying saucer design the Russians would still be making and selling them.
Do I think the Russians had/have futuristic technology similar to that of what is described to extraterrestrial? No. Do I think the Russians could build something resembling a UFO and faking a crash scene in the USA to cause hysteria? I think it’s plausible but not guaranteed. Do I think the Russians actually flew something from Russia and purposely crashed it into the middle of nowhere in the USA? No. Instead the most likely scenario is they shipped the object somehow or another into the USA and faked a crash landing. To OP’s point, I find it odd to choose Roswell of all places to “crash” land a UFO but then again it is near the US-Mexican border making entry into the US by land easy.
Thank u for all that u do
Thank you Ryan, very useful information and much needed. Share this video please people.
Ryan, whats your preference: flying Delta or flying Delta Force??
whenever someone mentions that a nuclear bomb destroys everything,
I mention two people:
the guy who was in Hiroshima during the Hiroshima bombing, and then he was in Nagasaki during the Nagasaki bombing, and then he lived on until 2010;
and the guy who was 170 meters from the nuke explosion and still survived (until 1982);
The a-bombs are devastating, but they are NOT just deleting everything from here to Boston.
It was probably more a generalization than an over estimation. Having to pause every few seconds to add stipulations to her statements would get very boring and repetitive very fast.
that was an a-bomb, the h-bombs are orders of magnitude more powerful.
The bombs used on Japan are basically ignition fuses for our modern thermal nuclear weapons. We have much more powerful stuff today.
The bombs dropped on Japan were fission reactions. Today we use fission reactions to start a fusion reaction which creates a much higher energy release. It's hard to compare the two.
@@sumduma55yes sure that makes the diameters bigger.
The idea of them being an "i win button" is still questionable... no matter their indded horrific capabillities
@@hawlitakerful first strike doctrine is pretty much an "I win button". That's why we put so much effort into hiding nukes on moving platforms and under the sea. It's why MAD was such a deterrent. It removed any semblance of an I win button.
❤ beanie 79 year old retired telephone repairman with just a high school education I was raised by two teachers who went through the 29 crash because of that they became liberal and progressives and anti-government and aunty big business. Pro-democracy Auntie architecture City I appreciate you keeping an eye out on disinformation and you're doing a damn good job in my personal opinion keep up the great work. This is non-political just obvious exclamation mark mile marker Mikey Trenton Michigan🎉🎉
One of the things that made me roll my eyes a little bit was Jacobsen's comment about the "nuclear deterrent" (MAD) being "just a theoretical phenomenon" . It's like she hasn't even tried looking into the fact that it just might be true, because the way I see it that "theoretical phenomenon" has stood the test of time since the end of World War 2. I dare her to show me an example where a nuclear power, or a country that's allied to a nuclear power, has been attacked. I think the closes she'll get are the smaller skirmishes between Pakistan and India in the Kashmir region, but the fact that most people have never heard of those will tell you all you need to know about the scale of those confrontations.
“If you’re a fan of Malcom Gladwell you might be a fan of this book” 😂😂😂
Gladwell is as big of a hack as they come, I'm so sick and tired of all the people in the comments in videos about the 8th Air Force's bombing campaign in WW2 that think they know what they're talking about because they read his book The Bomber Mafia, particularly about his conclusions when it comes to the Norden bombsight, it's like he watched a bunch of poorly researched UA-cam videos made by war enthusiasts in their basements that either didn't know how to do research and interpret data or just typically repeat the common nonsense that floats around on those subjects none of which comes from actual USAAF reports and studies done on the bombing campaign.
Every one of those people I encounter that quote him I can every single time shut down with one single bit of information, and that's the fact that hacks like Gladwell want to blame every single bomb dropped by the 8th Air Force that missed it's target on the Norden bombsight, but did he mention that 63% of the bombs dropped by them were aimed using the H2X ground scanning radar system instead of being optically sighted especially during the winter months when overcast skies prevented optical aiming? No, he doesn't mention that because he's never even heard of the H2X system much less know that the majority of bombs aimed were done so with it and not optically aimed using the Norden bombsight.
Also does he know about the USAAF's studies that showed how optical aiming accuracy decreased for every following bomber box aiming at the same target due to the target being obscured from all the dirt and debris thrown into the air above the target from the bombs of the previous boxes? No, he knows nothing about the fact that when the Norden bombsight was used the first boxes had an 83% bombs on target average, the next box would have around a 75% average with results degrading down to around 25% by the 5th box.
Each 500 lb general purpose bomb displaced and threw into the air above the target enough dirt to fill 13 full sized dump trucks, twelve 500 lb bombs per bomber equalled 156 dump trucks worth of dirt thrown into the air above the target for each B17, sixteen bombers per box was 2,496 dump trucks worth of dirt in the air above the target that the next lead bomber of that box has to sight through and that's just the 2nd box, take that times 4 and that's what the lead bomber of the 5th box had to sight through, by then seeing the target was impossible, they were simply aiming at the center of everything that was covering the target.
Another thing Gladwell and others like him with an obvious bias towards making the 8th Air Force look as bad as they possibly can will do is include the results from thing's like lead navigators flying entire formations to the wrong target resulting in it getting bombed and being recorded as a "zero bombs on target" result that they'll include in their math, even if the bombardiers absolutely plastered what they were actually aiming at.
Gladwell is neither an historian or a researcher, he's a guy whose written self help books that saw an opportunity to create a big noise about something that's a popular topic these days, and who obviously got all his information from watching nonsense UA-cam videos made by people who never did one bit of actual research on anything except for looking in poorly written books written by people like him with a bias.
@@dukecraig2402 oh. Absolutely. He’s a joke. Watch his debate against Douglas Murray
Remember how the 1000+ above ground tests in the 1950's, totaling over 450 megatons of yield, resulted in a nuclear winter? Neither do I.
Because those weren't over cities and built up areas creating firestorms which send soot up into the stratosphere (which actually wouldn't happen on the required scale anyway)
So....@@stevenobrien557, you came here to show how 'wrong' he was.,....to agree with him??!!
That’s a good question. I think the whole nuclear winter thing was done back in the 1980s. Now we have better climate models. I don’t believe she used those particular new climate models for the book. You might’ve been going with 40 year old data.
@@stevenobrien557 The 1991 Kuwait oil fields pumped black soot into the atnosphere and the effects were 1) localized and 2) short lived.
Plus, modern cities aren't built of wood like 1940s Japan.
well they didnt go off all at the same time over a nice calculated field to destroy the most over an area
also 1950s... thats 70 years ago
Thank you for addressing this
I'm not a religious man at all but I don't know how else to say this Ryan -God bless you!
It’s crazy that so many people are on board for nuclear war and that they fully believe everything will be fine afterwards
I've yet to find a youtuber I admire more than you, my guy. While every now and then I'll disagree with you on certain topics, the way you present properly sourced information and stats really helps to open my mind about these topics. Keep up the amazing work man, love your educational content. I think a lot of people, regardless of politics or religion, could learn a lot from you about things like disinformation campaigns, current global conflicts, and the way we deal with them both as Americans. Love and respect from South Florida brother.
You said precisely what I wanted to say. I second your statement.
You must travel more out of Reagen than a congressman
Most likely since it seems most of them are never at the capital anyways.
I listened to your words. Do not agree, but respect your attitude. You do not have the advantage of having the amazing smooth voice that Annie Jacobsen has! Heaven help us not to go into a nuclear exchange!
I mean, the Lex Friedman podcast is basically a disinformation podcast.
Not one thing you said qualifies Jacobsen's book as disinformation.
Spot on
Man you are a true gentleman to be so kind and thoughtful when talking about a second class mercenary author and a sensationalist fearmonger.
I'm a former CBRNE rogue. Never heard of the 7-10 rule of thumb. Thanks for bringing it up, Sarge.
Oh McBeth I'm glad you are speaking on this. I've studied nuclear war as a hobby of sorts since I was a kid, I'm in my 40s, I know a lot about the topic based on open-source information, I also have been educated at the graduate level, and have multiple degrees like yourself, but in other areas of study and practice. Point being I know how to vet sources, research, and think about things. On one hand I appreciate that she is helping a generation or two who are unfamiliar with nuclear war to take it more seriously, but then again, I think to those who studied this on some level there are some red flags. My concern is that she is being presented as someone who knows about the reality of nuclear war, however much of her information is very dated. It is more reflective of nuclear war in the 1980s, rather than post Soviet collapse, many of her sources were quite old, retired, former officials. For example the comments about a 1 megaton nuclear detonation, most nuclear weapons actually deployed are not 1 megaton, most are in the 100-500 kiloton range that are strategic, and tactical nukes can range from about 1 to 10kt. In reality the problem would be an important area being hit by 5, 200kt weapons, which is probably worse, to be fair. Yet it would mean a full exchange occurred, or something on that order, which I think is less likely. When she talks about Hiroshima, and talks about current nuclear weapons being say 20x bigger than that, this give people the wrong idea. People think about Hiroshima and imagine 20 of those. In reality, a better analogy would be earthquake magnitude. Take a look at Alex Jone's Nuke Map. She also insists that any nuclear weapon use WILL result in a massive nuclear exchange and strategy. All due respect to the author, I think the scarier points of the book are less accurate, and more reflective again, of a 1980s era exchange. As for Ukraine, I do think we should fund defense for Ukraine and keep Russia busy there, by proxy, as we want to avoid a NATO conflict at all costs, and work out a cease fire and DMZ. France, really should fall in line, and not put combat troops in Ukraine, that is dangerous for everyone. Russia has made threats, but they also I think attempt to warn against a NATO land war, because if you destroy the Russian armed forces... only one thing left, well 5500 things left. I think that more efforts to stop the war, diplomatically by the world community would be helpful. Yes this gives Russia time to build up, but also NATO, and that is a dance all sides are used to, rather than what is happening now. I also do not support Trump's strategy of removing the US from NATO, that's not going to stabilize the situation. Rather, I think a return to a former cold war posture is safest until Putin is no longer in command of the Russian forces.
Are you kidding? NATO more than doubled its footprint in Europe and toward Russia's border after the USSR collapsed. The west has been extremely provacative for decades building up to this war.
THIS... "It is up to us, to stop the spread, before it starts."
Ryan, of all the things you present, getting your audiance to become the active element in disseminating disinformation imho is your greatest take away. Thank you!
As a whole, our society is still in the infancy in understanding how to filter the tool that is social media to find fact from fiction.
Damn, Ryan. Another amazing video. Best of luck to you in California with your big pitch. I think you could also make a big career chasing and exposing disinformation. The world needs people as dedicated and articulate as you.
Again, best of luck and thank you for your service as well as your ongoing work.
I swear, Ryan Macbeth here is like the modern day equivalent of Cyberpunk’s Medias
I have a hard time believing Annie Jacobsen. On her previous book she writes about CIA assassins, and says on Joe Rogan that one of her sources passed by on his way home from over seas. And showed her kids his rifle with a scope that you could actually see the veins in the leaves on the other side of the valley. And he had a serrated knife, and she asked him what he needed that for, and he answered “some jobs require silence”.
Are you telling me a government operative coming from overseas is just going to drive around with his service weapons? Not being sent to a debrief or turning in his gear at an armory or anything like that?
I do a lot of long range shooting, and own several “sniper” scopes (S&B PM2’s 5-25x56 and leupold MK4 scopes) not a single one of those you can see the veins on leaves at more than 100 meters, not even in a spotting scope up 40 or 50x magnification you can do that. But an assassin will have a scope so powerful that the field of view will be so frighteningly small that all situational awareness is completely gone, and if the target sneezes he disappears from sight? I’m sceptical.
Then the serrated knife, okay an operative is going to assassinate a bad guy and it must be done silently, a government operative in CIA would choose a “Rambo” knife instead of a suppressed pistol? B&T released a modern version of the Welrod a few years back, and a highly trained and experienced operative wouldn’t choose that or any other pistol instead of a knife? Hell a suppressed MP7 would be a great tool for that job, but according to Annie this dude picks a large serrated knife?
I’m sorry but I call bullshit
What I gathered from her interviews is that she has a decent surface level understanding of Nuclear policy, but there's no way a journalist is ever going to write as good a book on the subject as Fred Kaplan's. So I don't plan on bothering with her book anyways.
Yep. My first take on those several videos with her... This is a person that just took a class about nuclear war, and is giving a book report on it. 🤔
I think based on the podcasts with her that Ryan's comparison with Malcolm Gladwell is correct. There is some good material there, and some decent mythbusting in places, but a person would need to read more to get the full picture.
@@justin4911 I do feel guilty for knocking someone who's doing original research, as it's not like I could personally do any better. But I don't see any reason to read a more watered down book that was released just after a far better book on the same subject.
I always enjoy your channel. Keep up the good work.
At this point I wouldn't be surprised that Russia's nukes don't work.
Every single one of your videos is informative and to the point! Thank you for this extremely important work!
Guys, this man, made me develop such an admiration for common sence on a level i never had before. Thank you buddy
I just finished reading the book. It's informative but the author is a writer, not necessarily a subject matter expert. There is good exposition of governmental mechanisms at play in actually using nuclear weapons. There is also a lot of editorial opinion and somewhat sensational descriptions.
China, India, and Pakistan were curiously absent from the narrative.
I don't think Russia would hang up on the Sec Dev when he called on the hotline because he wasn't sworn in as President yet. Especially when they had themselves just witnessed a nuke go off in the US that they knew was not one of theirs.
So, if you have a bookshelf full of nuclear Armageddon, as do a lot of us boomer nerds, this one would be a good contribution but not a great reference to cite.
Johnson hasn't "changed his views on Ukraine" - that's incredibly naive phrasing even if you're using silent air quotes. As far as I can tell he's just switched tactics to put a "deal" through that'll go round in circles. You're probably right about the book BS but yeah, Johnson and co don't do things like change their m.o.
Man I work in manufacturing quality analysis, systems-thinking is the most important and basic skill most people don't have. The absolute best intro book I've found is "The New Economics" by Dr. W. Edwards Deming, he was a scientist who helped in the reconstruction of Japan after WWII. He introduces systems thinking in a place we all can relate to: the workplace. What causes friction between people there the most is failure to appreciate how systems work and how basic statistics work, things like thinking it's bad to be "below average", when that's how averages work, roughly half above and below. From there you can go into higher theoretical stuff, or lower practical stuff. I'm trying to learn basic programming to help develop that part of my brain to think in systems.
I'm so glad I found this channel. Ryan is a true voice of reason. Most excellent 👍
You missed the mark here, Ryan.
Jacobsen is a journalist and does an excellent job staying in her lane, allowing key scientists to fill in the facts along the way.
Be careful to not allow your bias into your analysis - the only “misinformation” in Jacobsen’s discussion of nuclear weapons is that folks aren’t discussing nukes MORE, especially today with Ukraine.
Well put
In other words, her book is like watching "Threads".
Threads was the feel good movie of 1987 (or whenever). I still watch it once a week.
Exactly. Threads was part of the Nuclear Freeze Movement the KGB cooked up in 1980's.
I like threads cause it's one of the only films set were I live. I can even see were I live in the film lol. Just a shame it gets bombed lol
@@mroctober3657 "Threads" was 1984, "Amerika" was 1987 - set in 1997.
@@baileygregory9192 "Threads" is a great introduction to nuclear warfare and where it can go. At first you think it's over the top but ... the subject itself is over the top. "Threads" should be watched by everyone who owns and operates a nuclear arsenal. But there's a lot that lies in between peace and "Threads" and it's not simple, and it's not easy.
It’s refreshing to see differences of opinion presented accurately and in good faith. Nice work Ryan. Thank you.
A different opinion than what? This is shilling for the MIC.
The book was designed to be scary? Any discussion of nuclear war should be scary genius!
Reading and listening to Annie Jacobson is like asking the McDonald's employee if they can do open heart surgery. I'm so sick and tired of these activists pretending they're on some kind of moral high ground without knowing facts.
Have you actually read or listened to her?
Jacobson has a really good book about DARPA. I haven't read this book yet, but plan to get to it.
You make a great point about how it will be used for disinformation, and I'll keep an eye out of it.
The lady walking behind you as you said "nuclear bomb" 😂 you spooked her bro
"If you like Malcolm Gladwell's books you'll probably like this one... but that isn't necessarily a compliment."
Guh, finally. Good to hear at least *someone* say it.
Thank you. Incisive and truthful.
I’m early pass me the popcorn
Feel the same way
I just had wisdom teeth removed yesterday, too swollen to eat, take my popcorn sir! 🍿 🍿
@@4-Methylaminorex I feel u my thumbs currently super infected. Bad news my thumb looks mangled good news they gave me percocets and antibiotics
Thank you for making these awesome videos very informative
Thank you for this type of content. This is very easy to digest so it is you readily keep the viewer's attention. Further no one does disinformation content like you do. You need a much broader audience.
I listened to her interview with Dan Carlin. It was very interesting from a historical standpoint, but her information seemed very dated. She made it sound like we don't have any defenses in place if someone started throwing nukes at us and that just isn't true. We have subs always following their subs. Our anti missile defenses are near impenetrable and our intelligence gathering is so good that if the order to launch was given we would know about it before the team who was ordered to launch would receive the order.
I also listened to the interview on Dan Carlin. From what I understood, the reason everything was to turn into a full nuclear exchange was that:
1) DPRK attacks the US with nuclear weapons
2) US retaliates and (for a completely unexplained reason) seems to retaliate by sending land based missiles from continental US towards DPRK, which makes them overfly Russia?
3) Russia misunderstands, thinks it’s being attacked, and attacks US.
Why wouldn’t the US retaliate against the DPRK using either SSBN-launched missiles from subs in the Pacific and/or B2 bomber raids without overflying Russia?
I mean, you have the whole triad available, but you decide to use the one part of it which might initiate an exchange with Russia?!?
Sorry to tell you, but we have very far from a “near impenetrable” missile defense system against ICBMs. An all-out nuclear exchange, however unlikely, would lead to tens of millions of dead Americans, minimum.
@@mariozavood Yep, 100%, it is a ridiculous scenario, so stupid that it ruins the book.
Lets lets talk about Snopes, Gates paud for DISINFORMATION platform.
I got your DISINFORMATION.
Gotta love the ‘what-about-ism’ from the WASP mob. Instead of deflecting, you’ll have a better chance convincing people if you actually bring facts and evidence to support your difference of opinion.
@@910rado the irony is that you dont say any facts in youre argument.
Even a limited nuclear conflicted would make millions starved to death but hey "poOtin is bluffing broo".
@@blue_ish4499 Google the platform. Your comment tells me you never even googled snopes.
Click the links embedded and find out EVERYTHING you need to know.
Do your research!
Spoon feed info only huh?
Good stuff as usual - interesting seeing the people walk behind you as you recorded this 😆.
I come for information I stayed for the action figure commercial.
We went downhill when journalists moved from people who specialise in a subject then writing about it, and then moved to people who do journalist degrees and then write about subjects they have no idea about
Only person that can say "Bomb" in a airport and not get arrested.
Hey Ryan! What are some good books to read or look into that you think is crucial for everyday life or a book that you think is important for others to read. I love your videos and I think that you give an excellent perspective on the world and important events, thank you for the amazing work you've done and keep it up!
Ryan, I think the disinformation example you showed would actually convince a lot of anti-NY folks to wholeheartedly support a weapons aid package for Ukraine.
Lex Friedman and his guest is always such a brain cell kill fest. Nuclear detonation is a fireball with a diameter of 19 football fields? I'm not a child, you can tell me in grownup internationally recognized units of measurement *eyeroll*
I also have heard / understood that this author is not the most scientific. It still doesn't change the fact that people are understandably nervous (to put it lightly) of a nuclear war / attack. I'm also of the opinion that America should not fund more war and actually should got to the negotiating table. You can avoid the fall out to a certain respect, but think of the 1000s / millions of lives casualties of people in the direct blast. Think what havoc that is going to cause to the world economy, let alone the economy of whichever country suffered as such. End line STOP WAR!
I'm a new Subscriber and I so appreciate you bringing common sense into such complex issues.
I watched Annie Jacobsen on a podcast. And I actually felt great anxiety listening to her extreme take on a doomsday scenario she presented. So thank you for giving some clarity to the possible apocalyptic WWW3 scenario we all grew up with. Myself at 72 I clearly recall the fear we all experienced in grade school practicing the weekly "Duck and Cover" with neighbors building bomb shelters in their back yards. All we can hope for is that common sense prevails. And we all know that if just one nuke goes off, Even a tactical Nuke, the whole world will change. But I do feel some anxiety relief from this and so many other videos you have presented. Thank you so much.