Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Almost Everything in “Dr. Strangelove” Was Based on Fact

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 164 posts

Re: Almost Everything in “Dr. Strangelove” Was Based on Fact

#41

Post by stonogo »

dbbolton wrote: post #13
cstross wrote: post #8

Young folks today just don't believe how downright surreal (and scary) the cold war was to live through. Look, just read this wikipedia entry about the British Blue Peacock nuclear device, and boggle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Peacock Yes. It's a chicken-heated atomic landmine. Not a joke: it was a Real Thing. And so was this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_%28nuclear_device... The M-29 Davy Crock…

Why couldn't they just bury the mine below the frost line?

Because the problem wasn't "ice," the problem was "cold," especially when you're dealing with finicky moving parts regarding pressure switches and tilt switches. There are tons of components of the era that were subject to thermal variance: oil-and-paper capacitors, wire coils in transformers and inductors, etc etc. We take solid-state reliability for granted these days, but there was a time before.

Re: Almost Everything in “Dr. Strangelove” Was Based on Fact

#42

Post by bane »

philwelch wrote: post #28
bane wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up right at the tail-end of it, the 1984 Red Dawn was a perfectly reasonable scenario. Whenever I think the hysteria was completely insane I think back to my parents and grandparents and some of the truly bizarre notions that happened during their youth: duck and cover, public bomb shelter drills, etc. People actually paid significant parts of their yearly salary to build, stock and maintain nuclear bomb shelt…

That emergency food supply would feed a family of four for a year, that's not "multiple years" of emergency food if you actually have a family of four. If you have a family of six it won't even last one year. Emergency food supplies are also useful for things like earthquakes and other natural disasters where you might have to stay put for awhile but you won't be able to make it to the grocery store either. You might…

who said people only buy one of these?

Re: Almost Everything in “Dr. Strangelove” Was Based on Fact

#43

Post by jeangenie »

geichel wrote: post #2

This is also true for Enemy of the State. Watch it again. Your jaw will hit the floor: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120660/

I'll have to rewatch. My family and I were also discussing this same idea in relation to Minority Report. Are these instances of life imitating art?

Re: Almost Everything in “Dr. Strangelove” Was Based on Fact

#44

Post by JetSpiegel »

techrat wrote: post #23
acdha wrote: post #16

Both my wife and I somehow managed to avoid seeing Dr. Strangelove before this summer. While watching it, I was repeatedly struck by the same realization as in the article: for all the reputation as a wild farce, there was a rather disturbingly small gap between the film and history which has subsequently been publicly released – and Dr. Strangelove came out decades before we reached the point of having an astrologis…

Another film manages to do this and was nearly written off by the screenwriter for being too "Strangelovian" at times. Network. Highly prescient film. Both Network and Strangelove are mandatory watches, IMHO.

This can't be upvoted enough, Network is just outstanding.

Re: Almost Everything in “Dr. Strangelove” Was Based on Fact

#45

Post by jkn »

bane wrote: post #18
cstross wrote: post #8

Young folks today just don't believe how downright surreal (and scary) the cold war was to live through. Look, just read this wikipedia entry about the British Blue Peacock nuclear device, and boggle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Peacock Yes. It's a chicken-heated atomic landmine. Not a joke: it was a Real Thing. And so was this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_%28nuclear_device... The M-29 Davy Crock…

I grew up right at the tail-end of it, the 1984 Red Dawn was a perfectly reasonable scenario. Whenever I think the hysteria was completely insane I think back to my parents and grandparents and some of the truly bizarre notions that happened during their youth: duck and cover, public bomb shelter drills, etc. People actually paid significant parts of their yearly salary to build, stock and maintain nuclear bomb shelt…

Thanks for the links. But really, it would be terribly wrong to institutionalize people just because their choices seem irrational to us.

Re: Almost Everything in “Dr. Strangelove” Was Based on Fact

#46

Post by blhack »

haukur wrote: post #25
acdha wrote: post #16

Both my wife and I somehow managed to avoid seeing Dr. Strangelove before this summer. While watching it, I was repeatedly struck by the same realization as in the article: for all the reputation as a wild farce, there was a rather disturbingly small gap between the film and history which has subsequently been publicly released – and Dr. Strangelove came out decades before we reached the point of having an astrologis…

> we reached the point of having an astrologist in the loop for international decisions. I'm a little bit curious, did you mean to say astronomer or does the US government have an astrologist advisor?

If you read the article, this wasn't a white house staffer, this was somebody that Nancy Reagan, Ronald Reagan's wife, would talk to sometimes.

Re: Almost Everything in “Dr. Strangelove” Was Based on Fact

#47

Post by vezzy-fnord »

geichel wrote: post #2

This is also true for Enemy of the State. Watch it again. Your jaw will hit the floor: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120660/

I also recommend watching Coppola's 1974 film The Conversation, which was a heavy influence for Enemy of the State: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071360/

The technology presented is obsolete, but the film is far more haunting because it's a deeply psychological experience.

Re: Almost Everything in “Dr. Strangelove” Was Based on Fact

#48

Post by iolsantr »

bane wrote: post #18
cstross wrote: post #8

Young folks today just don't believe how downright surreal (and scary) the cold war was to live through. Look, just read this wikipedia entry about the British Blue Peacock nuclear device, and boggle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Peacock Yes. It's a chicken-heated atomic landmine. Not a joke: it was a Real Thing. And so was this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_%28nuclear_device... The M-29 Davy Crock…

I grew up right at the tail-end of it, the 1984 Red Dawn was a perfectly reasonable scenario. Whenever I think the hysteria was completely insane I think back to my parents and grandparents and some of the truly bizarre notions that happened during their youth: duck and cover, public bomb shelter drills, etc. People actually paid significant parts of their yearly salary to build, stock and maintain nuclear bomb shelt…

Extreme emegency preparededness is insane, but buying a yacht is not? I don't think there is anything wrong with someones hobby being building and stocking their secret fort in the back yard.

Re: Almost Everything in “Dr. Strangelove” Was Based on Fact

#49

Post by acqq »

cpursley wrote: post #29

I toured Stalin's secret bunker this summer in Moscow where USSR'S top generals held up during the entire Cuban Missile Crisis. This bunker was the control center for the Soviet's nuclear arsenal at the time. According to the guide, the top leaders debated back and forth whether to preemptively strike the United States. The entire thing was surreal - complete with a freighting nuclear attack simulation (America strik…

Not too long after Hiroshima some US decision makers actually proposed "pre-emptively" bombing the USSR with the nuclear bombs. Why? Well, the communists are dangerous, that's enough, better earlier than later(!) The idea was rejected with the apparent main argument that the US didn't have enough nuclear bombs to annihilate the whole USSR: too many soldiers would continue to fight!

US eventually produced enough nuclear bombs to wipe out the whole USSR, but by that time the USSR managed to produce just enough nuclear bombs to make some damage to the US.

(I don't have the links, if I remember I've read the above in the books or seen in some documentary. Somebody here maybe knows the exact names of the proponents.)

Post reply on HN