Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18

Thread: Nuclear Weapons - Papers and literature advises.

  1. #1
    New Member radicchix's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Mar 07
    Posts
    13

    Nuclear Weapons - Papers and literature advises.

    Hi everyone.

    I am graduating in International Relations and I would like some advises on books, papers and articles that I should read, since my final papers is about Nuclear Weapons, Security and International Politics.

    Any advises I will be most grateful.

    Thank you.

    LRD

  2. #2

  3. #3
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    09 Aug 07
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    907
    The Logic of Accidental Nuclear War by Bruce G. Blair.

  4. #4
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    09 Feb 05
    Posts
    1,826
    An interesting (if dated) couple of books are On Escalation and On Thermonuclear War.

  5. #5

  6. #6
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    19 Jun 07
    Posts
    320
    For an alternative approcah to nuclear weapons, you can try Ward Wilson's writing at Rethinking Nuclear Weapons - journal

    He will also be happy to correspond with you via e-mail and provide material links for further reading.

  7. #7
    New Member radicchix's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Mar 07
    Posts
    13
    Thanks a lot, it is always good to share interesting literature beyond our tutors. I am looking for a political debate and I would like to read as much as I can before I star writing anything.

    Yes I have read Waltz and Sagan. I have read these books and a few others:

    Deadly logic: - / 1966 - Livros - Acervo 148080
    GREEN, Philip. Deadly logic: the theory of nuclear deterrence. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, c1966. 361p
    Número de Chamada: 327.174 G797d 1966 –


    ARMAS nucleares e seus efeitos. - / 1983 - Livros - Acervo 25250
    ARMAS nucleares e seus efeitos. Lisboa: Edição do autor, 1983. 255 p.
    Número de Chamada: 621.039 A727 1963 –

    Arms and influence. - / 1966 - Livros - Acervo 91960
    SCHELLING, Thomas C.. Arms and influence. New Haven: Yale University Press, ©1966. 293 p. ISBN 0300002211
    Número de Chamada: 355.02 S322a 1966 –

    The tragedy of great power politics. - / 2001 - Livros - Acervo 51333
    MEARSHEIMER, John J.. The tragedy of great power politics. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2001. 555 p. ISBN 039332396X
    Número de Chamada: 327 M483t 2001 –


    Strategy of conflict, The / c1980 - Livro - Acervo 214618
    SCHELLING, Thomas C. The strategy of conflict. Cambridge: Harvard University, c1980. 309p. ISBN 0674840313
    Número de Chamada: 327.37 S322s

    LAVOY, Peter R; SAGAN, Scott Douglas; WIRTZ, James J. Planning the unthinkable: how new powers will use nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2000. viii. 270p. (Cornell studies in security affairs) ISBN 0801487048
    Número de Chamada: 327.37 P712

    Terrorism, asymmetric warfare, and weapons of mass destruction : defending the U. S. homeland / 2002 - Livro - Acervo 327446
    CORDESMAN, Anthony H. Terrorism, asymmetric warfare, and weapons of mass destruction: defending the U. S. homeland. Westport: Praeger, 2002. 448p. ISBN 0275974278
    Número de Chamada: 323.28 C794t

    Proliferación vertical y horizontal de armas nucleares, La - Artigo de periódico - Acervo 262105
    BUSTILLO, Martín Gómez. La proliferación vertical y horizontal de armas nucleares. Revista Occidental : Estudios Latinoamericanos, México , v.10 n.3, Supl. , p.119-142, set 1993.
    Número de Chamada: E-371

    Limitación de armas nucleares y desarme - Artigo de periódico - Acervo 262089
    NAÇÕES UNIDAS. Limitación de armas nucleares y desarme. Revista Occidental : Estudios Latinoamericanos, México , v.10 n.3, Supl. , p.45-74, set 1993.
    Número de Chamada: E-371

  8. #8
    Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Dec 06
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    347
    You might want to look at Dr. Jeffrey Lewis' blog,

    ArmsControlWonk: about

    where he lists his publications. The blog itself also has many interesting articles and links.

  9. #9
    Patron popillol's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Sep 14
    Location
    India
    Posts
    157
    My doubt:
    In the Nuclear 101: China tried to cajole USSR into nuclear war when they didn't have one, but straightened up when they had one. But why were they thinking that USA might not nuke China if the war broke out (when they did't have one), China was vehemently supporting USSR for nuclear war?

  10. #10
    Banned Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    16 Dec 13
    Location
    India
    Posts
    1,534
    Russia recently test fired a Bulava SLBM. I have two questions on this:

    1) Have they not signed the CTBT? How can they test then?

    2) Is this a (symbolic) warning shot across the bow with regard to what's happening in Ukraine?

  11. #11
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Read the damned the treaty before pretending you know what you're talking about.
    Chimo

  12. #12
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by popillol View Post
    My doubt:
    In the Nuclear 101: China tried to cajole USSR into nuclear war when they didn't have one, but straightened up when they had one. But why were they thinking that USA might not nuke China if the war broke out (when they did't have one), China was vehemently supporting USSR for nuclear war?
    I have no clue what you're trying to say. The one reason why Mao signed the North Korean armistice is because Eisenhower let it known he was going to fly nukes to Taiwan.
    Chimo

  13. #13
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,246
    Quote Originally Posted by sated buddha View Post
    Russia recently test fired a Bulava SLBM. I have two questions on this:

    1) Have they not signed the CTBT? How can they test then?

    2) Is this a (symbolic) warning shot across the bow with regard to what's happening in Ukraine?
    The CTBT bans nuclear explosions, not firing missiles. Additionally, it hasn't entered into force yet as a number of states including the US have yet to ratify the treaty.

  14. #14
    Patron popillol's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Sep 14
    Location
    India
    Posts
    157
    In the nuclear 101:
    "....One of the best examples of this process at work is Mao Tse Tung. Throughout the 1950s he was extraordinarily bellicose and repeatedly tried to bully, cajole or trick Khruschev and his successors into initiating a nuclear exchange with the US on the grounds that world communism would rise from the ashes. Thats what Quemoy and Matsu were all about in the late 1950s. Then China got nuclear weapons. Have you noticed how reticent they are with them? Its sunk in. They can be totally destroyed; will be totally destroyed; in the event of an exchange...."
    Why was Mao so sure that if Chinese did not have nuclear weapons, they will not be a target of one, even if they help the Soviets in the nuclear war against the Americans? Till then, Chinese and the Soviets were on the same page then.

  15. #15
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by popillol View Post
    Why was Mao so sure that if Chinese did not have nuclear weapons, they will not be a target of one, even if they help the Soviets in the nuclear war against the Americans? Till then, Chinese and the Soviets were on the same page then.
    Oh that one. It was the Chinese myth that their large population is large enough to survive a nuclear exchange. The line goes that even if only 10% of China's populations survive, it would be large enough to take over the world.

    There's a misreading there about Mao egging on Khrushchev. Khrushchev thought Mao was a damned peasant "chink" and Mao called Khrushchev ball-less for backing down in the Cuban Missile Crisis.

    That Chinese myth lasted well into the 80s and everybody, including Mao, believed it. It was self delusion that China can stand on her own against the big two. Not that she was looking for nuclear war.
    Chimo

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •