Tonite we will watch the classic movie Dr. Strangelove, Or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb
It is dated (made in 1964)but it was and still is considered a brilliant satire of attitudes concerning the fears of thermonuclear war of the late 1950s. Being satire, it often tries to be funny and bitingly sarcastic as it explores peoples fears about the Cold War, attitudes about the Soviet Union and communism, as well as the fear of military and political leaders who might cause the destruction of the world through incompetence or fanatical patriotic or anti-communist attitudes. A great deal of its humor was sexually related, which was shocking to moral attitudes at the time buiçt is fairly tame by modern standards.
Here is a link to a fairly extensive review and explanation of Dr Strangelove:
http://www.filmsite.org/drst.html
ASSIGNMENT STRANGELOVE
Your assignment is to post a comment to this entry. Answer the following questions:
1) What is your opinion about the theory of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction), especially as it is portrayed on DR Strangelove.
2) While the movie is a satire, it does reflect many of the nightmare worries of people in the United States and around the world. Identify one thing about the movie that you think is real or accurate about attitudes of the cold war and explain why you think so. Also identify one thing that you think was not realistic and why.
Please post your comments by 11pm Saturday, May 16.
3) Make comments about postings from two of your other classmates. They may be agreeing or disagreeing with the classmate´s post, but should be critical in nature and designerd to start a conversation about the film - in other words, it should be more thatn Ï agree¨or ¨good post¨.
Please post your replies by 11pm, Monday, May 18
Original posts and replies are evaluated and become part of your classroom participation grade.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
There was a problem on the settings that would not allow people to comment. That has been changed so you can comment now!
ReplyDeleteOne observation - there are no completely true answers for these questions, and only answers that show no thought or consideration will be deemed "wrong". That is because the question of whether MAD was right or wrong as a philosophy really has no correct answer. With history as a guide it worked - sort of since it empowered the tactic of brinksmanship which roiled the international dealings between the USA and the USSR for decades - but to this date there has been no exchange of nuclear attacks, even though there are expected to be eight countries who currently have nuclear weapons. See:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cdi.org/nuclear/database/nukestab.html
1) My opinion about MAD... Well, it is a "lose-lose" instead of a "win-win" negotiation. So if people are conscious enough, it is a purposeless method or game to be playing with a rival. Only if the rival really is incoherent, crazy, or egotistical, people should fear it, otherwise just trust on human instinct that is to survive, and not worry about mutual destruction.
ReplyDelete2) It was kind of "funny" to see how each side would like menace each other but at the same time giving themselves up informing the other about their moves, for the purpose of cooperation, because on one thing they certainly where toghether: not go MAD.
What I don't think was realistic was the lack of control within the army, like this general goes crazy and can so easily order destruction, like if it was some kind of game. I mean it is world destruction! you just don't go playing around with bombs driving the enemy angry.
-MILDRED =0)-
1. The theory of MAD was a really childish plan the USSR and US used during the war. For me it is considered childish because these kind of events that are more than life changing cannot be decided on who goes off first. The plan was totally crazy because at the end if things went wrong then no one would've ever survived, so what would be the whole purpose after all? They should've come with a better theory because if things would have gone as in the movie then i wouldn't be here at all.
ReplyDelete2. What was not realisting in my opinion was the whole conversations between both presidents as they didn't seem to take things seriously and I really don't think that would be the case when millions of people are at the border of dying a horrible death. What has realistic in my opinion was the different reactions to the general's orders about starting bombing. They were realistic enough to me because some agreed while others weren't pleased at all with what was happening.
1.- In my opinion M.A.D. is a very clever strategy because it establishes perimeters, which in this case is the world’s destruction. Because of that, neither the USSR nor the United States give a first blow. As an effect, brinksmanship became very well known. M.A.D. worked throughout many years in real life, the closest attempt of a nuclear attack was the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962; in Dr. Strangelove not so long. In Dr. Strangelove M.A.D. is up to a certain point real because when one nation decides to attack, the other one will counteract. That is the same principle than in real life, that’s why they never really attacked, because they were afraid of the worlds destruction. Though in the movie the Russian did not have enough time to attack, they barely had time to try and knock down the plane. The result was a successful hit of the American bomb. We don not know if the USSR is the only one affected, but with the giant mushroom cloud at the end of the movie I think the destruction was mutual.
ReplyDelete2.- I think that the conversation between the United States president and the Soviet Premier is very likely to be real, not because the US president is sort of easy going and very calm but because if the world’s destruction is at game, and one player is very angry, the other must play calm to contain the other. Also because since 1962 the hotline was created it is very likely to have a conversation between the US president and the Soviet Premier with much ease. What I think is not realistic is the American attack scheme. If a fleet with enough nuclear power to destroy the world is called, I find it ridiculous that a guy with four or five badges can issue that order and that a person with a greater rank or even the president can not cancel or give new orders to that fleet. Also I can not find it logical to cut the communication with that fleet.
ATT. Jose Jarrin
Mildred - while MAD is a lose/lose proposition - you noted that only if you thought "Only if the rival really is incoherent, crazy, or egotistical, people should fear it". Since the two sides DID enter into this scheme, what does that say about how each country saw the other side?
ReplyDeleteAna- You mentioned about the different reactions of people to the emergency - some agreed and some didn't. How do you think that affects the ability of a government to react to a major crisis?
Jose - You mention that you do not find it logical that a country would cut its communication with a fleet when it begins an attack. The idea came out of experiences in WWII when Japan, Germany and the Soviet Union had special units designed to send confusing and contradictory orders and messages to their enemies. In fact, recently Colombian Special Forces used the same technique to trick FARC forces into positioning hostages to a place where the Colombian military units were able to attack and retrieve the hostages. Does this change your mind about the communication strategy? Why or why not?
Because both sides where under the same scheme, they knew nothing would really happen. I think they saw each other both: clever enough not to destroy the world, but also pedantic because none would give up, and had it going for so long. I think this MAD theory is what made that was to be COLD, because for that nothing happened. it was a waste of time, resources, oportunities, etc.
ReplyDelete-MILDRED-
1.- I believe MAD is a very important politic during the cold war because it kept USA and the USSR from lauxing an atack to the other in the strang MAD sort of useless because an atack is launch and the world is destroyed.
ReplyDelete2.- I think it is realistic the fat that there is a secret room to discuss war affairs and similar things. what I found not realistic was when soldiers where in the airplane and they were relaxing reading without the tension of war.
1) I think that MAD is a sucessfull plan, because it is like if you kick me i will kick you, is mutual fire; in Dr strangelove i didn't understand it very well, but I think that it was a parody of MAD.
ReplyDelete2)I think that the part of thw atomic bomb, and the nuclear weapons. The part I think is was very fake, was the man sitting on the bomb and being thrown, in the USA that would never happened.
1.- i think MAD was a little extreme law. but at the same time very good because it hold up the countries to start a war. in the movie it looks like it fail because the americans initiate an attack and the soviets tried to make a counter strike.
ReplyDelete2.- what it look real was the room where they discussed things like wars. and what it looked like fake was that a simple captain could tell the planes to start an attack and that the communication were cut off. and no one could cancel that order.
att Leonardo Solis
1. The theory of MAD created consciousness of the fact that if either the Soviet Union or the US started bombing each other the result would be total destruction. It is obvious to all of us now, but we don’t know if without the theory of MAD everyone would have been aware of the terrible danger of beginning a nuclear war. Any theory that made both countries fear the war and stopped them from bombing is extremely valuable.
ReplyDelete2. -Real: the President’s attitude, in the sense that he wasn’t going to approve the bombing, although Turgidson said it was impossible to do anything to stop it. Turgidson even went further and defended his view that the US should go “all in” since at the very most, ONLY 20 million people would get killed and for him, that was an acceptable number. The President of the United States of America could NOT agree with this not even in the dramatic situation his country was in, even when he got accused by Turgidson of worrying only about himself.
-Not real: the Soviet Union’s decision to launch the Doomsday Machine even when the US was able to recall all but ONE of the planes and offered to provide all the necessary information so that the USSR would be able to control the situation.
The fact that people have different opinions affects the government because no decision will ever be the right one for every single citizen. When they have to make an important decision the ones who have the final call will have some sort of pressure of doing what the majority think its right as well as it being biased by their own beliefs. Its obvious that running a country is very difficult
ReplyDelete1.- (MAD),I think that was very funny situation which two powerfull countries were envolved thinking how can I get the whole world but really they didn´t know the potencial of each one ,so thats the reason cuz they never getting the war.
ReplyDelete2.-the film was very interesting, they were prepared to start bombing RUSIA and viceversa , i know that was only a movie but if you think they had to be spying to get some idea to make the film which became some real, but i wanted to see more girls on the film. I didn´t understand why the president looked as a consuler.
--ROBBY MITE--´
response: Sort of because if there is a unit in charge of sending fake, contradictory messege to the rival, there should also be a unit responsable for decripting these sort of orders. If they learned from experiences from WWII, they should not just cut off the communications, they should look for a way of making it safer. If the enemy has access to your communication, you should worry about reinforce that, perhaps with codes, passwords or other things. Maybe in the 1960 they did not count with that type of technology, but now they should.
ReplyDeleteJose
I agree with leonardo in ? 1 because M.A.D. is an extreme politic but in real life it was successful because nuclear attacks of that caliber did not occured during the cold war.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with ana in ? 2 because i do not think that the presidents are taking this issue lightly but the US president nows that he can not push too much the Soviet Premier because that would defenitly trigger an attack.
Jose Jarrin
Jose: I dont agree with what he said about MAD being a clever strategy because it not only affected both countries but the rest of the world as a whole. Brinksmanship to me is a strategy a kid would use not leaders of countries. It could all have gone wrong with only a crazy person like in the movie.
ReplyDeleteDiana: I think Diana's making a good point to as the theory even though extremist was a feared one so none of the countries in real life ever dared to start bombing.
I agree with Eduardo that the attitude of the crew members was not realistic. The pilot calmly gave a good speech and even says that when “this thing's over with” they will get important promotions. They all seem too relaxed and they shouldn’t given to the magnitude of the war that was about to begin.
ReplyDeleteMildred, José and Leo talk about how unrealistic it is that one person could order the nuclear attack and apparently no one could stop it. Maybe it IS extreme, but the movie also gives important reasons to why this could happen:
1-the US President himself approved the plan.
2-the plan was meant to discourage the USSR from thinking that if they knocked out Washington there wouldn’t be anyone who could give the order to counter attack since those in charge were dead.
3-so the emergency plan had to allow any commander to issue the counter attack.
4-human psychological tests were made to ensure that no commander would lose their mind. Obviously the last one didn’t work, but the plan as a whole does seem realistic.
i agree with eduardo that in the part of the plane. the way the soldiers reacted to the message of throwing an attack wasn't realistic. they took it like if they have receive the news of its time to lunch or something like that.
ReplyDeletei agree with jose in the part he says it looks real the conversation between the u.s. president and the soviet one. like he said if the world is at game one of them should be relaxed for the other one won't explode and order an attack. and everything could be fix by having a conversation
att leo solis
I agree with Diana, she states that the MAD theory is valuable. It is the reason for us to be alive, and for human kind to exist until these days.
ReplyDeleteRegarding Leo's comment, he also makes a good point, MAD was a method/strategy/? which kept both sides from destroying earth, but I also think that the purpose of it should be clear in everyone's minds. otherwise, someone like that crazy general could screw everyone's lives!
-MILDRED-
I agree with erick because he states that if you make something to a country you will have your consecuence, so you might think about what you will do
ReplyDeleteAlso I agree with leo because that was a cause why countries doesn't fight everytime they have the oportunity.
Atte. Eduardo Leal
I agree with leonardo in 1 , beacuase they both go to the same point and for real, MAD functions well.
ReplyDeleteI agree with diana in 2 beacuase its true, right now is very difficult to send a nuclear attack that could harm people, because therefore are so many things and orgnaizations combating that thigns.
erick