Graeme Wall wrote:
In message
"Andrew Clark" wrote:

"Graeme Wall" wrote

And quite what would be left of the rest of the country in the event of
an attack in the scale they were expecting?
Especially as the USSR was planning a scale of attack massively above the
one the planners somewhat idealistically hoped for...



Alledgedly. Both sides claimed to be able to do things that subsequently
turned out not to be the case.

But even if the attack had only been on the scale anticipated, the post
attack plans were hopelessly inadequate. On the other hand there was no
realistic way adequate plans could have been made, we didn't have the
knowledge, technology or money to implement anything remotely resembling a
realistic plan.

Or put another way, even a "moderate" nuclear attack would so devastate
Britain that there was no practicable means to survive it in a way that
would preserve any of our way of life (if at all). That's why we called
it mutually assured destruction.

Robin