Keeney's primary purpose in "The Doomsday Scenario" was to make available to the public a fascinating snapshot of how the government viewed the prospects for survival in a nuclear war as the Cold War approached its height (although, ironically, 1958 was a time when the U.S. actually had legitimate first-strike capability). As such, his notes are largely contextual (he also includes some excellent pictures of test shots, which effectively convey the destruction being so baldly stated in the document) rather than opinion or conjecture. Hence, if you are looking for a fleshed out portrait of a individual survival after a nuclear war, I would recommend fiction such as "Alas, Babylon", "On the Beach" or "The Last Ship". However, if you are interested in Cold War history in general, "The Doomsday Scenario" offers a superb primary reference, and nicely frames the nuclear strategy of the following thirty years.
As for the text itself, the document covers quite thoroughly (albeit at a high level) all of the military and societal implications of a nuclear war. Among the items considered are casualties, accessibility to medical facilities, economic consequences, food production, transportation and communication. Surprisingly, the government is rather bleak in its assessment and takes a worst case view in most instances. That's not to say that they were wrong to do so, but American's have become accustomed to the positive spin-doctoring of their elected officials, and it was a little odd to see the fact being so plainly stated. Although brief, there are still more points than I could consider in a review, but there were a few aspects of the document that I (and the author) found intriguing. Specifically, although chemical and biological weapons are never considered at length, nuclear weapons are explicitly only part of a suite of WMD's that the U.S. anticipated the Russians using. It is noteworthy that the government anticipated outbreaks of Yellow Fever, smallpox, cholera and even plague within a few weeks of an attack. While the breakdown of medical services would account for some of this, there seems to be a darker consideration underlying this assessment. At the same time, the plan explicitly considers sabotage (e.g. terrorism) playing a significant role in any Soviet strike.
Which brings me to my one complaint about this book: all to often Keeney draws comparisons to 9/11. While 9/11 was certainly awful, it pales in comparison to a nuclear strike, and while some of his comparisons are valid (strain on the communications network being one) all to often he assumes that the U.S. could rebound from 50 million casualties in the same way it did from a few thousand. There's just not much common ground between these two events, and while I believe Keeney is sincere, repeated analogies with no foundation in reality begin to smack of exploitation.
Ultimately, this is a book that will be best appreciated by those interested in the Cold War as a whole. As I mentioned early, this work is best utilized when it provides context and insight for other aspects of the struggle between the U.S. and U.S.S.R. While dry, the original document is fascinating in and of itself, and in spite of my complaint above, Keeney generally provides valuable insight into what the document is really saying.
Jake Mohlman
