Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nuclear Weapons - Papers and literature advises.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 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
    Nuclear Warfare 101
    Nuclear Warfare 102
    Nuclear Warfare 103

    Comment


    • #3
      The Logic of Accidental Nuclear War by Bruce G. Blair.

      Comment


      • #4
        An interesting (if dated) couple of books are On Escalation and On Thermonuclear War.

        Comment


        • #6
          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.

          Comment


          • #7
            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

            Comment


            • #8
              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.

              Comment


              • #9
                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?

                Comment


                • #10
                  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?

                  Comment


                  • #11
                    Read the damned the treaty before pretending you know what you're talking about.
                    Chimo

                    Comment


                    • #12
                      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

                      Comment


                      • #13
                        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.

                        Comment


                        • #14
                          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.

                          Comment


                          • #15
                            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

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X