Can I get a history buff?

Question

Massive Retaliation left the Soviet Union with only one military option. Analyze this option. (It's from my AP class again.)

Massive Retaliation as in a military doctrine in which an entity commits itself to retaliat in much greater force in the event of an attack.

During the Cold War

Answer 1

I take it this means that the Soviets did not have the option of a limited use of nuclear weapons as they knew the consequence would be an all-out nuclear exchange. But I do not see that this is true. Just because the doctrine of massive retaliation had been enunciated does not mean it actually would have been used. As a French observer mused, would the United States exchange New York for Paris? The Soviets could have tried using tactical nuclear weapons. They could have themselves initiated an all out nuclear exchange. They could have used their superiority of numbers in a convential war. Or they could have done what they did do which is fight proxy wars with the United States. So I do not find this statement very compelling.

Answer 2

I think the Soviets realised they would be devastated by a full scale nuclear exchange, so they fought numerous proxy wars.
In many cases the Soviets would arm one side, the US the other and observe the results and effectiveness of their weapons.
The Egypt-Israel conflict is a good example of this.

Answer 3

Sounds to me like you're refering to the "mutual annihilation" deterent. Basically the idea was that neither side would be willing to start a nuclear war because even if they "won", they would have been wiped out as well. This doesn't lend itself to many military options, except to not fight. Just keep building to maintain your position.

Answer 4

What sort of retaliation? Nuclear?

Answer 5

maybe?