History YMMV / TheBigOne

* DeliberateValuesDissonance: ''The Big One'' reflects the values and perceptions of the 1930s and 1940s, not those of the 21st century. This particularly comes out in the treatment of strategic bombing. Back then, strategic bombing was seen as a humane alternative to the horror of trench warfare on the western front. It was only during and after the war that the reality of strategic bombing campaigns became apparent and opposition to the concept grew. Likewise, when atomic bombs were first conceived and used, they were seen as just being very powerful bombs and nobody really thought that much about the implications of their use other than the fact they made bombing much more effective. Today, our attitudes about strategic bombing and using nuclear weapons are very different. In the world of ''The Big One'', this cavalier attitude towards nuclear warfare persists much longer than it did in real life, and nuclear bombs are accordingly used much more often.
* NightmareFuel:
** The author doesn't scrimp on the description of a nuclear attack's aftermath, nor on lesser horrors like what napalm and conventional explosions do to people.
** The description of biowarfare in ''High Frontier'' is equally horrifying. It's also TruthInTelevision, being based on the events following a mycotoxin attack in Laos.
** The fate of the ''Z-24'' in ''Winter Warriors''. The destroyer was making her first cruise in the Atlantic, she dug in the bow-and broke apart due bad design. Admiral Lindemann, [[IgnoredExpert who had objected multiple times to the precise bit of design that caused the failure]], was looking at her when it happened, and was horrified.

** The description of biowarfare in ''High Frontier'') is equally horrifying. It's also TruthInTelevision, being based on the events following a mycotoxin attack in Laos

* DeliberateValuesDissonance: The Big One reflects the values and perceptions of the 1930s and 1940s, not those of the 21st century. This particularly comes out in the treatment of strategic bombing. Back then, strategic bombing was seen as a humane alternative to the horror of trench warfare on the western front. It was only during and after the war that the reality of strategic bombing campaigns became apparent and opposition to the concept grew. Likewise, when atomic bombs were first conceived and used, they were seen as just being very powerful bombs and nobody really thought that much about the implications of their use other than the fact they made bombing much more effective. Today, our attitudes about strategic bombing and using nuclear weapons are very different. This fundamental difference in attitudes between 'Then" and "now" seems to have escaped some critics.

** The description of biowarfare (in the to-be-published sequel ''High Frontier'') is equally horrifying.

** The fate of the ''Z-24'' in ''Winter Warriors''. The destroyer was making her first cruise in the Atlantic, she dug in the bow-and broke apart due bad design. Admiral Lindemann, [[IgnoredExpert who had objected multiple times to the precise bit of design that caused the failure]], saw it happening and was horrified.

** The description of biowarfare (in the to-be-published sequel ''High Frontier'') is equally horrifying.

** The description of biowarfare (in the to-be-published sequel ''High Frontier'') is equally horrifying.
* ValuesDissonance: The Big One reflects the values and perceptions of the 1930s and 1940s, not those of the 21st century. This particularly comes out in the treatment of strategic bombing. Back then, strategic bombing was seen as a humane alternative to the horror of trench warfare on the western front. It was only during and after the war that the reality of strategic bombing campaigns became apparent and opposition to the concept grew. Likewise, when atomic bombs were first conceived and used, they were seen as just being very powerful bombs and nobody really thought that much about the implications of their use other than the fact they made bombing much more effectve. Today, our attitudes about strategic bombing and using nuclear weapons are very different. This fundamental difference in attitudes between 'Then" and "now" seems to have escaped some critics.

* HighOctaneNightmareFuel: The author doesn't scrimp on the description of a nuclear attack's aftermath, nor on lesser horrors like what napalm and conventional explosions do to people.

* AlphaStrike: The Big One is the ultimate example of an Alpha Strike; the bombers hit every single target in Germany in a single, massive, coordinated blow. This becomes the SAC operational dogma for the rest of the series. However, it is worth noting that in WW2 the atomic bombs were used as they came off the production lines, not saved for a single massive blow. The difference is explained by differing strategic circumstances and by the dominance of General LeMay in the planning process (LeMay being the leading proponent of nuclear alpha strikes). Still, it's a debateable point of operational doctrine

* MoralDissonance: The inherent contradiction between a strategic bombing policy and the nature of American society becomes steadily more obvious and less comfortable as the series of novels progresses. In the 1982-era story Lion Resurgent, [[spoiler: this reaches a crisis point when the U.S. deters an Argentine attack on Chile by a very overt and specific strategic nuclear threat. Later in the story, the Argentine government is taken down by a popular revolt following a British victory in the Falklands.]] President Reagan points out that the earlier threatened nuclear strike would have taken out the very people who eventually solved the problem and demands that United States policy be changed to provide a more varied range of responses.
* PeaceThroughSuperiorFirepower: Very explicitly U.S. policy in the TBOverse from 1947 onwards. Essentially, minor wars and conflicts are permitted as long as they are fought for limited purposes in restricted areas and don't involve bystanders. Breaking those rules means the US ensures the aggressor nation ceases to exist. Depending on one's point of view, this has the U.S. either acting as a global peacemaker or a tyrant. The dichotomy in perceptions is explored in the stories.

* MoralDissonance: The inherent contradiction between a strategic bombing policy and the nature of American society becomes steadily more obvious and less comfortable as the series of novels progresses. In the 1982-era story Lion Resurgent, this reaches a crisis point when the U.S. deters an Argentine attack on Chile by a very overt and specific strategic nuclear threat. Later in the story, the Argentine government is taken down by a popular revolt following a British victory in the Falklands. President reagan points out that the earlier threatened nuclear strike would have taken out the very people who eventually solved the problem and demands that United States policy be changed to provide a more varied range of responses.

* ValuesDisssonance: The Big One reflects the values and perceptions of the 1930s and 1940s, not those of the 21st century. This particularly comes out in the treatment of strategic bombing. Back then, strategic bombing was seen as a humane alternative to the horror of trench warfare on the western front. It was only during and after the war that the reality of strategic bombing campaigns became apparent and opposition to the concept grew. Likewise, when atomic bombs were first conceived and used, they were seen as just being very powerful bombs and nobody really thought that much about the implications of their use other than the fact they made bombing much more effectve. Today, our attitudes about strategic bombing and using nuclear weapons are very different. This fundamental difference in attitudes between 'Then" and "now" seems to have escaped some critics.

* PeaceThroughSuperiorFirepower: Very explicitly U.S. policy in the TBOverse from 1947 onwards. Essentially, minor wars and conflicts are permitted as long as they are fought for limited purposes in restricted areas and don't involve bystanders. Breaking those rules means the US ensures the aggressor nation ceases to exist. Depending on one's point of view, this has the U.S. either acting as a global peacemaker or a tyrant. The dichotomy in perceptions is explored in the stories.

* Alphastrike: The Big One is the ultimate example of an Alpha Strike; the bombers hit every single target in Germany in a single, massive, coordinated blow. This becomes the SAC operational dogma for the rest of the series. However, it is worth noting that in WW2 the atomic bombs were used as they came off the production lines, not saved for a single massive blow. The difference is explained by differing strategic circumstances and by the dominance of General LeMay in the planning process (LeMay being the leading proponent of nuclear alpha strikes). Still, it's a debateable point of operational doctrine

* DidNotDoTheResearch: Suffice to say that the Caliphate makes about as much sense as American Southern Baptists, Russian Orthodox Christians, and Scandanavian Lutherans creating a government ruled by a council of popes. I could go on for hours about how militant Islam in its modern form didn’t have much going for it in the time the book's set in, that exposure to WWII Germany would make them more secular, not less (and result in Baath-esque regimes ruling), that secular nationalism would persist longer without the rude awakening of defeat in the Arab-Israeli wars, and that Arabs or Sunni extremists are not going to want to join up with Iranians or Shiites. Of course, there's also the fact that the structure of the Caliphate is both blasphemous (Theology is extremely clear that the caliphate has only one caliph), and a copy-paste of the Taliban even when it doesn't make any sense.