記者葉睿涵／編譯
近年來，全球區域安全危機不斷升高，不少人擔憂這些地區衝突恐將發展成第三次世界大戰，甚至會點燃核戰。一位專家發出警告，若核戰真的爆發，數以億計的人可能會在最初幾個小時內就喪命，但「無論如何開始，最終都將導致所有人死亡」。
雅各布森在接受podcast主持人弗里德曼（Lex Friedman）的採訪時透露，美國國防部有一個預警系統，只要系統判斷美國可能受到敵方核攻擊，就會立刻啟動「預警發射」機制（LOW），在總統的授意下發動報復性打擊。
雅各布森強調，在LOW機制下，人們可能還來不及查明警報為何會被發出，反擊就已經開始了，「在這種情況下，一次誤解、一次誤判都有可能帶來核世界末日，無論核戰如何開始，最終都將導致所有人死亡」。
美國部署了1770枚核武器，俄羅斯也有1674枚核武器，但2國過去已不止一次錯誤判斷己方受到核攻擊。雅各布森表示，「我們不一定每次都這麼幸運。事實上，雷根前總統也曾質疑，讓總統根據雷達螢幕上的一個光點，在6分鐘內做出足以主宰所有人命運的決定是否合理。」
雅各布森指出，核戰的影響經常被人們低估，「核爆所引發的蕈狀雲可能會把幾英里外的人拉進來，拋向天空，再將他們燒死。這種恐怖現象將在世界各個城市裡不斷重演。」雅各布森也和許多政治和軍事人物討論過核威懾的概念，但大家都一致認為「核戰是瘋狂的」。
YouTube: 6 minutes to Nuclear Armageddon: Countdown to full-on nuclear war | Annie Jacobsen and Lex Fridman
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/03/interview-annie-jacobsen-nuclear-war-scenario/
Author Annie Jacobsen on the horror—and unwinnability—of nuclear war.
MICHAEL MECHANIC Senior Editor
Annie Jacobsen is a Pulitzer Prize finalist and New York Times bestselling author. Her books include: AREA 51; OPERATION PAPERCLIP; THE PENTAGON’S BRAIN; PHENOMENA; SURPRISE, KILL VANISH; and FIRST PLATOON.
Her newest book, NUCLEAR WAR: A SCENARIO, publishes March 26, 2024.
Jacobsen.s books have been named Best of the Year and Most Anticipated by outlets including The Washington Post, USA Today, The Boston Globe, Vanity Fair, Apple, and Amazon. She has appeared on countless TV programs and media platforms—from PBS Newshour to Joe Rogan—discussing war, weapons, government secrecy, and national security.
She also writes and produces TV, including Tom Clancy’s JACK RYAN.
Jacobsen graduated from Princeton University where she was Captain of the Women’s Ice Hockey Team. She lives in Los Angeles with her husband Kevin and their two sons.
Nuclear war is a topic few care to think about. We sometimes call it unthinkable. But we need to think carefully, and to talk—particularly with high-ranking foreign officials whose motives we may have reason to distrust, just as they distrust ours—about how we can collectively avoid launching a weapon that would end our civilization.
Pulitzer Prize finalist Annie Jacobsen’s timely new book, Nuclear War: A Scenario, is a lightning-fast read intended to put the nuclear threat squarely back on everyone’s radar. Her narrative thread, as the title suggests, is a fact-based (though thankfully fictional) scenario that shows how a nuclear launch can escalate into World War III at dizzying speed.
Jacobsen tees up her cinematic approach with chapters describing how we got here, including a discussion of America’s Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP) for General Nuclear War—which was devised in the 1960s and, as Jacobsen details in this book excerpt published today by Mother Jones, was more or less a recipe for the end of the world.
Because that’s nuclear war: One bad assumption, one shot, one retaliation, and it’s unstoppable.
Your book is frightful. What made you want to write in such detail how a nuclear war could unfold?
As a national security reporter, I have written six previous books on military and intelligence programs—CIA, Pentagon, DARPA—all designed to prevent nuclear World War III. During the Trump administration, amid the “fire and fury” rhetoric, I was watching STRATCOM commanders and deputy commanders speak freely on C-SPAN about the dangers therein. I began to wonder, My god, what would happen if deterrence failed? I began to interview people during Covid, when people had more time on their hands for someone like me—and that began the terrifying process of learning that nuclear war is, in essence, a sequence of events, and that once it starts it almost certainly will not stop.
The US public hasn’t thought a whole lot about nuclear weapons since the Cold War. We have more nuclear nations today, but far fewer weapons in the global arsenal. Are we safer now?
Well, as I show in the book, it doesn’t take but one weapon to set off a chain reaction to unleash the current arsenal, which is forward deployed in launch-on-warning positions and could be fired in as little as a minute—15 minutes for the submarines. There are enough weapons in those positions right now to bring on a nuclear winter that would kill an estimated 5 billion people.
Are there too many? Absolutely. Have we made progress? The all-time high in 1986 was 70,481 nuclear weapons. Now, there are approximately 12,500. But to your point, there are nine nuclear-armed nations, not just two or three superpowers. And that presents a lot of unknowns that create serious unease and room for catastrophe.
RELATED
America's Nuclear War Plan in the 1960s Was Madness. It Still Is.
So we may be less safe because we don’t really know how certain nations might behave—notably North Korea.
Absolutely. Reporting and writing this book was one surprise after another. For example, I did not know until I had it confirmed with US nuclear experts that North Korea does not announce any of its missile tests, whereas the other countries do. North Korea has launched 100 missiles since January 2022. After you read my book, you realize what happens to the US nuclear command and control apparatus in the seconds and minutes after a launch is seen by the advanced super satellite system we have. You can now imagine what goes on in those command centers.
A total frenzy.
One thing that really struck me is the unbelievable speed at which nuclear war is waged.
Gen. Robert Kehler, the former commander of STRATCOM, said to me that the world could end in the next couple of hours. It took me a minute to ask my next question, because coming from someone in that position of authority—the most significant role in the entire nuclear apparatus—that really blew my mind.
Ditto goes for an interview I did with President Barack Obama’s FEMA chief, Craig Fugate. Of course, FEMA is the agency in charge of what’s called population protection planning for American citizens in the event of hurricanes, floods, earthquakes. Fugate told me that after a nuclear war, there wouldn’t be any population protection planning because everyone would be dead.
Help is not coming.
I said, “Well, what should people do?” He more or less said, “Self-survive, and don’t forget your morals, and I hope you stocked Pedialyte”—because radiation poisoning makes you vomit and have diarrhea and away go all of your electrolytes, which leads to secondary problems.
I learned from your book that FEMA plays a unique role in the event of a nuclear attack, and it’s not what one might expect.
That’s right. In the ’50s and ’60s, the US position was that a nuclear war could be fought and won. That is no longer the official position. But plans were put in place for the continuity of government programs—the idea that the government must continue functioning no matter what. That is also a fantasy.
To hear from former Secretary of Defense Bill Perry about the madness and mayhem and anarchy that would follow, in his mind, in the event of a nuclear war, you really get the sense that civilization will fail. I believe one of the reasons so many of these sources went on the record for me is because they know that this is the truth. And they know it is up to the people to change the trajectory of where we’re headed. I mean, my god, look at the saber-rattling going on as we do this interview.
Potential nuclear nightmares range from an accidental detonation to a massive “decapitation” strike to someone using a small nuke on the battlefield. You picked the madman scenario: North Korea inexplicably launches a long-range missile at Washington, DC. Why that one?
I did a series of interviews with [physicist] Richard Garwin, who is now 95. He is arguably the most knowledgeable person about nuclear weapons on the planet, and he probably knows more about policy over the long lens of history because he was 23 or 24 years old when he designed the first thermonuclear bomb.
In the “Ivy Mike” test, it exploded with 10.4 megatons of power—about 1,000 Hiroshimas. Garwin said to me that his biggest fear was now, and always had been, the madman theory you referred to. He used the French phrase Après moi, le déluge—after me, the flood—referring to this idea that a maniacal, egotistical, narcissistic madman leader could launch a nuclear weapon for reasons no one would ever know.
And to counterattack North Korea, as in your scenario, the US would need to send missiles over Russia, which has a very unreliable early warning system.
That’s right. Learning about the technological limitations of some of the Russian systems was just as terrifying as any part of reporting this book.
It’s almost like you’d want to reach out to the Russians and say, look, just take our technology so you won’t launch on a false alarm—but the US would never do that.
There have been many opportunities to have a dialogue with the Russians—Putin inquired about joining NATO back during the Clinton administration. One really has to lean upon one’s leaders to think about communicating rather than saber-rattling, because I hope that my book demonstrates in appalling detail how horrific nuclear war would be. And we know from the Proud Prophet war games that no matter how it begins, it ends in nuclear apocalypse.
For context, Proud Prophet was a classified series of war games President Ronald Reagan ordered in 1983. Civilian and military planners convened for two weeks to run through scenarios that could spark a nuclear war and see how they played out.
That Proud Prophet was declassified is interesting. Nuclear war games are among the government’s most jealously guarded secrets. I printed a copy of what a couple pages of the declassified war game look like—95 percent is redacted. It’s literally a couple of headers and a few numbers.
But when something like that gets declassified, it becomes very valuable to the people. An individual like Paul Bracken—a civilian professor at Yale who participated in Proud Prophet—can now speak about it in general terms. He wrote in his own book that everyone left very depressed, because no matter how the nuclear scenario begins—if NATO is involved or not involved, China is involved or not—it always ends the same way, the most terrible way, because America has a “launch on warning” policy.
We do not wait to absorb a nuclear blow. Once a missile is on the way and there is secondary confirmation from ground radar, the president is asked to launch a counterstrike. In the book—I have the president asking this because it came up in my discussions with sources—he says, “How do we know it’s a nuclear weapon?”
And we don't.
That is a fact. The answer is, Well, it could be a biological weapon. Another answer I was told is that no one launches a ballistic missile at the United States unless they’re expecting a counterattack. So now you are looping into the Orwellian world of: This is deterrence. Deterrence will hold. Don’t you dare launch at us or else! Which becomes part and parcel for why the counterattack is required, per the deterrence doctrine. There is no room for saying, well, maybe we’ll wait and see.
Once you break deterrence, everything else goes out the window.
Correct. One of the most haunting quotes in the book is from the deputy commander of STRATCOM, Lt. Gen. Tom Bussiere. I located an unclassified discussion he had with insiders, and the quote is along the lines of, When deterrence fails, it all unravels. In seconds and minutes and hours—not days and weeks and months.
Twelve thousand years of civilization extinguished in a few hours.
General Kehler was not speaking hyperbolically when he said that.
Say more about “launch on warning.” You cite Paul Nitze, a former defense secretary and later presidential adviser, calling the policy “inexcusably dangerous.” Presidents Bush, Obama, and Biden wanted it scrapped. So why is it still in place?
I’d like to shout out William Burr, who runs the Nuclear Documentation Project at the National Security Archive at George Washington University, because many of those quotes and documents come from that organization, which made them accessible to journalists like me. Nitze was one of the biggest hawks across the Cold War. To have a guy like that go on the record and say this is inexcusably dangerous says a lot.
Multiple presidents have campaigned on the promise that they will change this dangerous policy, but then they become president and you never hear of it again. That speaks to the kind of secret-keeping that is dangerous and can be changed. I wrote Nuclear War: A Scenario for the layperson to be able to rip through it in a night, no matter how terrifying. I do not bog the reader down with polemics or jargon, because this is an issue everybody should know about. Because only in knowing about it is change possible. We can look to The Day After battle, what’s known in inner circles as the Reagan Reversal policy of 1983.
Wait, what's that?
So in 1983—I’m dating myself here—I was a high school student. And I watched the ABC movie The Day After.
I was the same age, and watching it too.
It’s a fictional account of a nuclear war between America and Soviet Russia, and half the country watched it. Interestingly, behind the scenes, ABC got a lot of pressure not to air it. Well, one very important American watched it: Reagan had a private screening at Camp David. His chief of staff tried to suggest that he shouldn’t watch it, but he did. And he wrote in his diary that he became “greatly depressed,” and he picked up the phone and called [then–Soviet President Mikhail] Gorbachev, and the two leaders communicated—which is really the only solution for any of this.
Because of those communications and because of their conference and because of the treaty, the insane nuclear arsenal has been reduced to the approximately 12,500 we have now, which is a considerable reduction. The president’s position prior to seeing The Day After was a much harder, more saber-rattling approach. He changed his position and became much more dovish.
“Launch on warning” puts extraordinary pressure on a president. The one in your scenario is pretty clueless. He hasn’t ever rehearsed. Nobody told him he’d have just six minutes to choose from a Denny’s breakfast menu of existential options in response to what may or may not be an incoming nuke. It’s hard to believe the Pentagon doesn’t put every new president through a series of war games.
I was just as surprised as you are. But that’s coming from multiple secretaries of defense and national security advisers—people in a position to advise the president on a nuclear counterattack. The best summation came from Leon Panetta, who explained that as White House chief of staff he was witness to the fact that the president is primarily concerned with domestic issues—like his popularity. I asked Panetta how clued in he was when he was the CIA director, and he said almost not at all, because the CIA is about intelligence, not nuclear operations.
Only when he became secretary of defense did it really hit home, the weight of all of this. He spoke about visiting missile silos, submarine bases, and nuclear command bunkers—once you go to places like that, your entire perspective changes. And that is why I believe he was willing to go on the record. You really get the sense that things are precarious once they begin, and decisions follow that are out of everyone’s control.
Right. And our continued existence depends not only on our internal communications and processes, but those of our adversaries, about which we know little.
Absolutely.
Your book busts some common myths, for instance the belief that the US could shoot down an incoming nuclear missile. We really can’t defend against nuclear weapons, can we?
We can’t. That is pure fantasy. During the final fact-checking incantations, I had the book read by a lieutenant general who ran these scenarios for NORAD. I was almost hoping someone would say, Annie, you should take this part out of the book, because we have a secret Iron Dome that you can’t report on. No. The truth is that the United States relies upon 44 interceptor missiles to stop any incoming missiles. Russia alone has 1,674 nuclear warheads in “ready to launch” position. Adding to that, according to congressional reports, the interceptors are only approximately 50 percent effective.
Under the best of circumstances.
Absolutely, like when you’re doing a test and you know precisely where the missile is going to be. It’s a curated test. So people have this idea that we have an Iron Dome–type shield. And we don’t.
The Reagan Reversal bit reminds me of a moment from your scenario. Your secretary of defense is sworn in as president because the president and others in the line of succession are dead or AWOL, and he has this moment of humanity. Russia has launched all its ICBMs at us, so we know we’re goners. And the new guy asks: Why respond now if all it will do is kill millions more people? The STRATCOM commander is like, Nope, we’re doing this. Humanity is already doomed, yet Russia and the United States keep launching their weapons until practically none are left. It’s nonsensical. But is it realistic?
It is if you talk to the sources I spoke to. A lot of the decision-tree situations involving the defense secretary came from my multiple discussions with former Secretary of Defense Bill Perry, who has thought a lot about this—and what an individual’s thought process would be. The point of including that question was to demonstrate how the madness of MAD—mutual assured destruction—takes over.
I asked [retired weapons engineer] Glen McDuff—the curator of the classified museum at the Los Alamos National Laboratory—the question you’re kind of asking me: What did he think, as an insider, about the notion that people would not follow orders? He basically said: Annie, I would suggest betting on Powerball, because you’d have a better chance of winning than betting on a high-ranking individual in the nuclear command and control system not following orders.
Right. It seems like folks in the nuclear command and control structure have rehearsed these scenarios over and over. They’re on autopilot to a degree. Which gets at the notion of “apes on a treadmill” that you write about late in the book: We’ve made this plan, and we’re going to follow it—even if it’s completely bonkers.
Apes on the treadmill was just such a brilliant concept. It goes back to the Cold War when it was used as a metaphor for people slavishly following away in this nuclear arms race.
But even more interesting was the present-day anecdote I found. It was a scientific experiment having nothing to do with the original metaphor but was literally apes on a treadmill. The researchers were studying bipedalism: They put humans on the treadmill and they put apes on the treadmill. Anecdotally, one of the scientists said, and I’m paraphrasing, that some of the apes got fed up with walking to nowhere and got off the treadmill.
I thought, my god, the apes are smarter than the humans when it comes to mutual assured destruction.
51区:封存60年的美国绝密军事基地档案
Uncensored history of America's top secret military base
(美)安妮·雅各布森(Annie Jacobsen)著 ;王祖宁译
重庆 :重庆出版社 ,2012
http://opac.stlib.cn/bookInfo_01h0309315.html
亲历见证51区秘史的先驱之作，大量从未破解的机密信息 。51区，是美国政府从未承认其存在的军事禁地。很多人以为51区的命名出于随机，实际上它与1947年罗斯威尔坠毁飞碟的残骸有关。机舱内印着一行从未对外公开的文字，残骸旁还有几具畸形尸体，它们是外星人还是飞行员？安妮对此深入调查，竟然牵扯出第三种触目惊心的答案……
目录
无论是科学家、工程师还是保安人员、清洁工，能在51区工作都是一种荣耀与特权，都必须进行严格的保密宣誓；没有最高安全级别或军方最高邀请，谁也别想得到关于51区的丁点真相；
51区究竟是什么，它究竟有着什么样重要的作用，无人知晓。然而，鲍勃·拉扎尔的出现却让51区长达40多年的秘密神话戛然而止。
豆瓣内容简介：
亲历见证51区秘史的先驱之作
大量从未破解的机密信息
51区，是美国政府从未承认其存在的军事禁地。
很多人以为51区的命名出于随机，实际上它与1947年罗斯威尔坠毁飞碟的残骸有关。机舱内印着一行从未对外公开的文字，残骸旁还有几具畸形尸体，它们是外星人还是飞行员？安妮对此深入调查，竟然牵扯出第三种触目惊心的答案……
雅可布森走访74位拥有“按需知密”权的官员、军事情报人员、科学家、飞行员以及工程师等，首度披露51区秘史。
? 二战后，美苏大肆掠夺前纳粹科学家，为何德国工程师霍顿兄弟是关键猎物？
? 51区竟与古巴导弹危机有着极深的渊源？将二者联系起来的竟是领先时代40年、惊世骇俗的新型飞机？
? 1969年以前，每九架美军飞机就有一架被苏联米格战斗机击落，让美军闻风丧胆的米格-23缘何出现在51区的跑道上？
? 当51区附近的居民投诉，当地供水系统中出现核裂变的致命放射性物质，原子能委员会竟将其归咎于中国人？
? 21世纪的高空侦察成了无人机的天下，但技术的高速发展缘何又给五角大楼和中情局带来新的“有害问题”？
无疑，51区已经变成一个举世瞩目的符号。经由此书，严守60年的国家机密就此炸开……
豆瓣作者简介：
安妮•雅各布森
? 《洛杉矶时报杂志》特约编辑
? 全球知名的调查记者
? 全美最畅销图书作家
毕业于普林斯顿大学。在大学期间，曾与美国作家乔伊斯•欧茨以及保罗•奥斯特合著出书。
在美国多本国际杂志上发表关于商业、金融和恐怖主义的文章。曾在《国民评论》和《达拉斯晨报》工作。在洛杉矶时报网站上有“幕后故事”专栏。《纽约时报》、《外交政策杂志》、《每日电讯报》、《上海日报》上都有刊登关于她的报道。她曾受邀参与超过600个广播、电视节目，包括ABC、CNN等。
其作品《通往51区之路》被《洛杉矶时报杂志》评为全美最畅销图书之一。
目录：
目录
权威推荐 1
序 言 2
第1 章 勇闯51 区 1
无论是科学家、工程师还是保安人员、清洁工，能在51 区工作都是一种荣耀与特权，都必须进行严格的保密宣誓；没有最高安全级别或军方最高邀请，谁也别想得到关于51 区的任何真相；51 区究竟是什么，它究竟有着怎样重要的作用，无人知晓……然而，鲍勃•拉扎尔的出现却让51 区长达40 多年的秘密神话戛然而止。
1. 直击内幕
2. 罗斯威尔事件始末
3. 飞碟还是飞机？
第2 章 “ 世界争霸战”真实上演 27
“火星人入侵地球，星际大战一触即发”“见血封喉的死光、杀戮成性的外星人会给人类带来灭顶之灾”……你还认为这是广播剧，或者科幻小说描述的场景吗？从20 世纪40 年代开始，当美苏以各种手段争夺德国科学家、争相进行核试验、研发原子弹时，一场真正的世界争霸战正在以科学的名义拉开序幕……
4 不是科学幻想，而是科学真相
5 “十字路”行动
6 谁掌握了空中悬停技术？
7 争夺前纳粹科学家
第3 章 瞒天过海 53
一个飞机库、几座防水帐篷和肮脏的临时餐厅，这便是51 区的真实写照。但是在这个糟透了的地方，却在进行着人类有史以来最具野心的征服高空项目……而在UFO 问题上，中情局煞费苦心地想要在国会和公众眼皮底下瞒天过海，媒体却大事渲染，以获得报纸、杂志的销量大增。公众对UFO 的恐慌程度已超出了政府的控制范围，甚至威胁到国家安全。就这样，一场阴谋正在悄悄酝酿……
8. 高空侦察的黑色预算
9. 遁词与虚假信息
10. 阴阳中情局
第4 章 破解谜中谜 81
51 区是一个难以索解的谜中之谜。就像虚构小说中的情节，飞行员不知道谁雇了自己，不要说“51 区”，连“格鲁姆湖”的名字都没听说过。每个人都有自己的假名，与世隔绝，生死未卜。他们永远也不会知道，有一股敌对势力，正在地图上另一个不存在的“51 区”，通过榨干“第三帝国”科学家，企图把他们的坐骑化成会飞的棺材……
11. 翻版“51 区”
12. 死尸测验
13.“脏鸟”能飞多高？
14.“旅行者”升空
第5 章 鬼城复活 105
1957 年，美国开始进行迄今为止最野心勃勃的一系列核试验。工作人员封锁了一片毗邻51 区的场地，开始为之作准备。此时退役兵明格斯被雇用为第一个保安人员，他守卫的正是美国的第一枚脏弹。然而，一场意外即将发生，这个盛极一时的秘密基地很可能霎时间化成一座阴森恐怖的鬼城……
15. 铅锤行动
16. 引爆毁灭性核弹
17. 开拓反雷达技术
第6 章 终结猫鼠游戏 139
鲍维斯是中情局最出色的U-2 飞行员，他一共执行过27 次飞行任务。在这次飞往苏联领空前，他接过上校手中带有自杀毒针的银币，心中有种不祥的预感。在苏联五一大阅兵之际，鲍维斯驾驶的U-2 却在苏联高空畅行无阻。赫鲁晓夫备感羞辱，暴跳如雷，他将亲自指挥作战以终结这场猫鼠游戏……
18. U-2 侦察机与SA-2 导弹的较量
19. 马赫3 诞生
20.“月球阴暗面”的神秘任务
21. 炸开臭氧层
第7 章 核战一触即发 173
古巴导弹危机首先是发生在美国和苏联之间的一场冲突，在对峙过程中，两个超级大国走向了热核战争的边缘。自由世界危在旦夕之际，美国国内的两股敌对势力——中情局和美国空军，能否同仇敌忾、共同化解危机？始终隐藏在公众视野之下的51 区，竟与古巴导弹危机有着极深的渊源，而将二者联系起来的则是领先时代40 年、惊世骇俗的新型飞机……
22.“牛车”侦察机试飞
23. 触发古巴导弹危机
24. 命运就像一个猎手
25. 隐形飞机 VS 超音速侦察机
26. 51 区总指挥遇刺
第8 章 侵犯中国假想敌 199
51 区的高原沙漠生存训练还包含了中国假想敌及其实施的心理战术。20 世纪60 年代，中情局秘密开展“黑猫行动”，他们认为获得有关中国核设施的确凿信息是关系国家安危的当务之急。然而“黑猫”中队飞行员接二连三被中国击落，对中情局和美国空军在51 区的下一步计划产生了深远的影响……
27. 中国击落“黑猫”飞行员
28. D-21 无人机坠毁西伯利亚
29. 飞进蘑菇云
第9 章 血染高空 215
美国总统的“红色梦魇”一直阴魂不散。1964 年夏，当美国总统大选拉开帷幕时，生性好战的赫鲁晓夫宣布，如果有U-2 侦察机胆敢飞入古巴境内，苏联会不惜一切手段将其击落。在中情局看来，苏联独裁者发出的威胁无疑乃天赐良机，“牛车”侦察机终于可以大显身手了！唯一的问题是，51 区作好准备了吗？
30. 解密“牛车计划”
31. 筹建电子反制部门
32. 权力与荣誉
33. 沃尔特惨剧
第10 章 黑盾行动和普韦布洛号事件 249
“牛车”侦察机在51 区历尽了九年的艰辛，即将被永久封存。突然时局扭转，3 架“牛车”侦察机被运往了东海……这只世界上飞得最高、体型最大的飞鸟，终于可以离开樊笼，展翅翱翔了。众所周知，美国在越南战场上一败涂地，损失惨重；此时对于“牛车”侦察机和51 区而言，前面有什么样的命运等待着它们？
34.“牛车”出笼
35. 侦察照片阻止了另一场朝鲜战争？
36. 解散第1129 特别行动队
第11 章 逆向分解米格战斗机 265
有人宣称，51 区的工程师曾秘密地逆向分解外星飞船。毫无疑问，间谍与反间谍，雷达与隐形，工程与逆向工程……一切匪夷所思的行为都与51 区紧密联系。更匪夷所思的是，在战场上让美国人闻风丧胆的苏联米格战斗机，竟然停在了51 区的跑道上！这一个天降的“甜甜圈”是否将成为高空技术的又一个突破口？
37. 逆向工程
38. X-15 火箭动力飞机
39.“吃甜甜圈”间谍反击战
第12 章 疯狂机制 281
20 世纪50 年代为了避免因冲突而导致地球毁灭，制订了“相互保证毁灭机制”。实际却做出更为疯狂的毁灭行动。在疯狂制造核污染的同时，美国人是否学会了收拾残局？中国真如五角大楼所宣称的那样，要为美国供水系统出现的核裂变物质负责吗？由疯狂机制产生的安全隐患，影响的不只是一个国家，而且是整个地球……
40. 热核弹失踪
41.“蠢驴谷”载人飞船事故
42. 美国政府掩盖了多少核事故？
第13 章 登月阴谋 303
登上月球的宇航员为何几次三番在录音中提到内华达试验场的核弹坑？登月阴谋论究竟与51 区有什么样的联系？数以百万计的人确信51 区关押了被俘的外星人和UFO，另一些人则提出51 区的地下隧道和地堡通向美国的其他军事设施与核试验室的证据。然而，谁也不曾想到，51 区的三大阴谋论分别指向美国的三大政府机构，并构成了揭开51 区真相的重大线索。
43. 登月阴谋论
44. 51 区真相浮出水面
第14 章 秘密开拓52 区 319
在隐形技术问世前，战争策划者需要预计发动多少次突击才能拿下一个目标；当F-117 隐形轰炸机出现以后，他们的决策变成了“发动一次突击能够拿下多少个目标”。空军部门为了掩人耳目，为隐形轰炸机项目规划了另一片秘密基地52 区。突然有一天一架直升机向防卫站的卫兵扫射。敌人对安全防线的突破，极有可能将耗资数十亿美元的隐形项目以及官方否认的51 区和52 区对全世界曝光……
45. 核弹组装区“遇袭”
46. F-117 隐形轰炸机
47. 开发新型无人机
第15 章 51 区大揭秘 335
从反恐战争打响之日起，51 区和52 区的新型无人机计划就开始全速推进。2001 年，一架“掠食者”无人机被派往坎大哈，寻找并消灭世界上最危险的悬赏要犯。21 世纪的高空侦察成了无人机的天下，但这种技术的高速发展又给五角大楼和中情局带来新的“有害问题”……
48.“掠食者”无人机定点刺杀行动
49. 间谍卫星战
50. 新型核武器
51. 51 区的魔鬼交易
后 记 358
致 谢 366
访谈人物 371
