Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff you should know from House Stuff Works
Speaker 1: dot com. Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh
Speaker 1: Clark with me as always as the lovely and talented
Speaker 1: Charles W. Chuckers Bryant. Hi, Hey, Chuck. Hi. See you
Speaker 1: switched hats uh from When to Win from the Chicago
Speaker 1: Bears hat to the Atlanta Braves hate. That was yesterday
Speaker 1: today today. You're a man of many hats, John, many
Speaker 1: fan allegiances. I'm not a Bears fan. You know what
Speaker 1: that was all done? Punkin's Yes, punkin Chunkin, Yes, Josh.
Speaker 1: We are going to mention once again. The Discovery Channel
Speaker 1: are awesome. Parent company is releasing two television shows on
Speaker 1: Thanksgiving night. Don't confuse people, Chuck. They're gonna be on
Speaker 1: the Science Channel well on Thursday, November twenty six, which
Speaker 1: is Thanksgiving. That's a dead dead turkeys that day, The
Speaker 1: Road to Punkin Chunkin and Punkin Chunkin Right. The Road
Speaker 1: to Punkin Chunking comes on eight pm Eastern Time on
Speaker 1: the Science Channel, followed by the Real punkin Chunking at
Speaker 1: nine pm Eastern. I would follow it up with a
Speaker 1: show called The Road from Punkin Film Right Going back
Speaker 1: home after punkin chunking in Delaware. No less, So that's
Speaker 1: that right? Sure? Alrighty so Chuck, Yes, Josh, Um, this
Speaker 1: I have like a little this seems vaguely familiar. We're
Speaker 1: talking about mutual assured destruction. Okay, well, how does that
Speaker 1: seem familiar? Because I did it with Candice many many
Speaker 1: moons ago on Stuffy miss in history class, back when
Speaker 1: it was called factor fiction. Dude, that was another lifetime,
Speaker 1: wasn't it. It really was. I have so many more
Speaker 1: gray hairs now, and like my posture is much more
Speaker 1: stooped the Seattle slump I do. Actually, nice one, Chuck.
Speaker 1: We've talked about this, I think here there we've mentioned it.
Speaker 1: Remember we did a podcast on how easy is it
Speaker 1: is steal a nuclear bomb? We concluded that if the
Speaker 1: Jamaicans are buying it and you steal it en route
Speaker 1: to Maka, you can probably get away with it. Um.
Speaker 1: This podcast is specifically on a Cold War strategic doctrine
Speaker 1: called mutual issued destruction, which was abbreviated as MAD appropriately enough. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's funny. It's like it's scary as I'll get out,
Speaker 1: but it's also comforting in the same breath, it's weird.
Speaker 1: Well yeah, because I mean, if you think about it,
Speaker 1: you and I grew up we were Cold War babies,
Speaker 1: and we grew up with the express knowledge that at
Speaker 1: any moment nuclear wark breakout and if that happened, everyone
Speaker 1: on the planet was debt. And like, that's how we
Speaker 1: were raised, like kids that were born like what in
Speaker 1: like mid eighties today, which is just nuts to me
Speaker 1: that there's people walking around that are sentient that we're
Speaker 1: born in the mid eighties. But kids that were born
Speaker 1: in the mid eighties and after did not grow up
Speaker 1: with that specter looming over him, and I imagine are
Speaker 1: completely different people personality wise than like you and I. Well,
Speaker 1: that's like everyone else on our staff almost agreed. Do
Speaker 1: you ever think about that? I did not. There are
Speaker 1: a few old folks like us, although I'm much older
Speaker 1: than you. Obviously. You definitely point out checks wearing right
Speaker 1: now a Jeane jacket with a sharpie marker used to
Speaker 1: to do the Journey logo on the back. It's pretty
Speaker 1: pretty cool. Check you burnout. Um, So Chuck, as I
Speaker 1: was saying, we grew up as as Cold War kids, um,
Speaker 1: and every once in a while you have to stop
Speaker 1: and think, why didn't the US and the USS are
Speaker 1: blow one another up? Are you asking me that? Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: let's talk about the Cold world, because the answer is
Speaker 1: the end of the podcast, all right, So let's save that,
Speaker 1: all right, The Cold War, Josh, I had a couple
Speaker 1: of really scary moments. If you want to talk about those,
Speaker 1: I do. The Cuban missile crisis was a pretty tense
Speaker 1: a couple of weeks. Probably the first one in nine two,
Speaker 1: President Kennedy threatened to strike once he found out that
Speaker 1: Russia had moved or I guess the Soviet Union had
Speaker 1: moved missiles to Cuba, and we're pointing them at his face.
Speaker 1: And Cuba seems like a world away, but it's really
Speaker 1: just ninety miles off the southern coast of Florida, a
Speaker 1: short boat ride, right, And so if you have nuclear,
Speaker 1: long range nuclear warheads pointed at the US, they can
Speaker 1: hit their mark, probably as far as Kansas City, let's say,
Speaker 1: and they could definitely hit temperature. That was a scary
Speaker 1: couple of weeks. Sure it was because there was a standoff. Basically,
Speaker 1: we were saying, hey, we're gonna nuke you if you
Speaker 1: don't remove these missiles and the Soviet Union said, oh yeah,
Speaker 1: well we'll nuke you back. And actually you can, actually
Speaker 1: you can. You can point to this is perhaps the
Speaker 1: beginning of the mad doctrine. And the other scary one
Speaker 1: was in weird Chuck, This actually happened like several times.
Speaker 1: This is probably the worst. That's some bad communication going on.
Speaker 1: What happened was, Uh, nora Ad got some information that
Speaker 1: the Soviet Union had launched two thousand, two hundred and
Speaker 1: twenty nuclear missiles our way. So chuck, Yeah, UM in
Speaker 1: nora Ad, which is like our the command center for
Speaker 1: our missile system defense deep in Shyenne Mountain in Colorado. UM,
Speaker 1: on some computer screen, some guys computer screen that that
Speaker 1: tracks UM Soviet missile movement. All of a sudden, it
Speaker 1: was just peppered with missiles that were coming this way.
Speaker 1: And and UM National Security Director of Brasniski. Nice jobs that, right,
Speaker 1: I think it's right. I can't remember a lot of continants.
Speaker 1: And it's not that I can't remember, it's that I've
Speaker 1: never heard it. Prasinski, We're going with Prasinski. Um, he
Speaker 1: was alerted. It's pretty early in the morning, right, yeah,
Speaker 1: two am. He was alerted and woken up and they're like, hey,
Speaker 1: there's a Soviet missile strike and all out missile strike,
Speaker 1: twenty missiles coming our way, sir, and he is picking
Speaker 1: up the phone to call President Carter, who I don't
Speaker 1: know what Carter would have done. Carter wasn't exactly um,
Speaker 1: the most militant president we've ever had. Great guy, great statesmen,
Speaker 1: great diplomat. He might have pooped his pants and gone
Speaker 1: back to bed, you know, maybe so um, but the
Speaker 1: terrible um he he never got that phone call because
Speaker 1: Brazinski was informed that, oh wait, it's a computer glitch.
Speaker 1: They whacked the side of the monitor and it all corrected.
Speaker 1: That said. What shocked me was it was a seven
Speaker 1: minute window that we had to decide what to do. Well,
Speaker 1: it's a long way from the Soviet Union to the US,
Speaker 1: even by way of Alaska. Seven minutes. S Yeah, you
Speaker 1: have to make up your mind in seven minutes whether
Speaker 1: or not you're going to destroy the world. Basically, I'm saying,
Speaker 1: you would think that it would be less than seven minutes. Okay,
Speaker 1: so so, and I'm telling you like that was probably
Speaker 1: the worst case. But that happened many times during the
Speaker 1: course of the Cold War. And from what I understand,
Speaker 1: the Soviets had similar incidents too, right, yeah, so we
Speaker 1: have these incidents, we have the human missile crisis. Why
Speaker 1: didn't either side pull the trigger? Because of the doctrine,
Speaker 1: the mad doctrine basically, which indicates that everyone will die.
Speaker 1: So the uh, you know, we blow everybody up on
Speaker 1: both sides, So let's not do that, right, And the
Speaker 1: U s SR In the United States could actually very
Speaker 1: quickly from seven and nineteen forty one, both nations were
Speaker 1: building up their nuclear arsenals, which is called nuclear proliferation. Right,
Speaker 1: I think I got that out, um in the nuclear
Speaker 1: proliferation Do you take that one for the rest of
Speaker 1: the podcast. Okay, okay, okay, um? And uh they so
Speaker 1: each side had this arsenal and we're keeping up in
Speaker 1: step with one another. You know what. That's called nuclear parity,
Speaker 1: which is ideally what you want. Strangely, yes, in this case,
Speaker 1: you definitely do. So both sides had more than enough
Speaker 1: nuclear missiles to wipe out not just the other side,
Speaker 1: but the tire planet. Several times over. That's a really
Speaker 1: important point. Several times over. Why would you need a
Speaker 1: nuclear arsenal that could wipe out the world, the planet
Speaker 1: several times over. Now, maybe if they destroyed some of
Speaker 1: our weaponry with their strikes, that's part of it. But
Speaker 1: another part of it is because if one side adds
Speaker 1: a missile, you gotta add a missile. Well if you
Speaker 1: if you're seeking nuclear parity, which is really important, um,
Speaker 1: then you there can't be. It can't be out of whack.
Speaker 1: How did they did they release all this information to
Speaker 1: each other? Was it? No? It was intelligence guesses that
Speaker 1: kind of stuff, Like all of a sudden, there's like
Speaker 1: a metal hole in the ground in Wyoming that wasn't
Speaker 1: there before. The Soviets probably assumed, well, they have a
Speaker 1: new nuclear warhead there. They didn't I m each other
Speaker 1: and say built new messile. L o O click you're
Speaker 1: going to say that. I knew you were going to
Speaker 1: say that. So both sides are building up their arsenal.
Speaker 1: And early on, Chuck Um, I was reading another article
Speaker 1: on game theory which will see plays into this, written
Speaker 1: by our steem colleague and might be ff Tom sheeve Um,
Speaker 1: and he talks about how early on, apparently Eisenhower, who
Speaker 1: is uh what, the second president to have the bomb,
Speaker 1: but really the first president to manage like an amassed
Speaker 1: nuclear arsenal. He yeah, he stopped worrying. Um. He looked
Speaker 1: at them as like any other type of weapon, because
Speaker 1: he was a military man. Um. But luckily there was
Speaker 1: a game theorist named Thomas Shelling, who had the ear
Speaker 1: of Eisenhower, managed to convince him that no, no, no,
Speaker 1: these things are way way more powerful and destructive than
Speaker 1: anything else in our arsenal. They exist in this in
Speaker 1: this vacuum that has to be kept separate, and therefore
Speaker 1: they should be viewed only as deterrence. And he managed
Speaker 1: to change Eisenhower's view, and from that point on it
Speaker 1: was the presence of a nuclear arsenal was a weapon
Speaker 1: in and of itself. It was the preventative and not
Speaker 1: only to nuclear war. But the point that did you
Speaker 1: write this one, uh, The point that you made, which
Speaker 1: I found interesting was that it also was a deterrent
Speaker 1: to conventional war. Excellent point, because conventional war they're really after.
Speaker 1: After the arms race, there was no such thing as
Speaker 1: conventional war. No, and um, not between the U S
Speaker 1: and the U S s R. Right, or a guaranteed
Speaker 1: conventional war. It might start out that way, but it
Speaker 1: would escalate and all of a sudden the button is
Speaker 1: pushed at some point, right, because our nuclear arsenal did
Speaker 1: exist and say, a vacuum outside of the rest of
Speaker 1: our arsenal. But once you exhausted the rest of the arsenal,
Speaker 1: then the inevitable conclusion was that that nuclear arsenal being deployed. Right,
Speaker 1: or even if you didn't exhaust it, even if you
Speaker 1: just said you just got man, let's just end this
Speaker 1: game exactly. Um. So, as a result, the US and
Speaker 1: the USS are just fought a Cold war. They never
Speaker 1: directly engaged with another, but they fought one another through
Speaker 1: proxy wars in places like Nicaragua in Afghanistan. Right, um
Speaker 1: got a lot of good movies out of the Cold War,
Speaker 1: definitely Rambo three and a good some good James Bond
Speaker 1: movies in that time. I liked it when the Rooskies
Speaker 1: were the villain. It was you like the James Bond
Speaker 1: movies of the Cold Well, okay, yeah, maybe the early ones.
Speaker 1: I'm thinking like Timothy Dalton there, yeah, I mean, trust me,
Speaker 1: Roger Moore is kind of a laughable Bond. Now that
Speaker 1: I'm older and looked back, You're crazy. Roger Moore is
Speaker 1: the best team because we grew up with him. But
Speaker 1: looking back, I mean, come on, Roger Moore was kind
Speaker 1: of a dufe maybe, but that was I think that
Speaker 1: was his director that he was working with. I kind
Speaker 1: of like Pierce bros And and and he was good. He
Speaker 1: was okay, I'm pretty hip on the Daniel Craig. He's
Speaker 1: all right, Well that's the only direction they could take.
Speaker 1: That really left blonde. No, just uh more realistic butt
Speaker 1: kicking with fists and that kind of thing. You don't
Speaker 1: think Moonraker was realistic, you know, he was constantly like
Speaker 1: winking at the camp. Yeah, it's like Jonathan Strickland is
Speaker 1: James Bond. I guess good one. Alright, so sorry about
Speaker 1: the sidetrack. Yeah, what happened was we created a detent.
Speaker 1: It wasn't like, Okay, we all have the same amount
Speaker 1: of weapons, so we're BFFs now and it's all good.
Speaker 1: It was a day tome, meaning it was sort of
Speaker 1: a what's the best description, an uneasy truce. Yeah. Yeah, so, um, basically,
Speaker 1: the US and the USSR had our weapons and we're
Speaker 1: keeping an eye on one another, and anytime one added
Speaker 1: a new missile or some new capability, the other scrambled
Speaker 1: to catch up and vice versa, and we just basically
Speaker 1: went to sleep with one eye open for the next
Speaker 1: several decades. Right. Uh So, Josh, what two things have
Speaker 1: to take place in order to achieve this uh weird stability. Well,
Speaker 1: the weird stability the very fact that it existed. It's
Speaker 1: not it wasn't an organic Um, it wasn't organically created
Speaker 1: by the presence of nuclear weapons. Right. Um. Henry Kissinger,
Speaker 1: who was Secretary of State throughout much of the Cold War, Um,
Speaker 1: he actually was a huge fan of game theory. He
Speaker 1: took a lot of game theory classes when he was
Speaker 1: an underclassman at Harvard, and he kept in touch with
Speaker 1: game theory and hung out with game theorists, and he
Speaker 1: actually was one of the people who was responsible for
Speaker 1: applying game theory to nuclear strategy. Yeah, and other people
Speaker 1: kind of caught on and saw that there was a
Speaker 1: lot of merit and validity to to viewing um, nuclear
Speaker 1: strategy through game theory. Right. Um, So the two things
Speaker 1: really are having that I'll answer my own question that
Speaker 1: what's key is a to have the weapons to begin with.
Speaker 1: And then, as Robert McNamara points out, the Defense Secretary
Speaker 1: in nineteen sixties was that you have to believe that
Speaker 1: the other guys actually has the cojones to pull the trigger, right,
Speaker 1: And apparently both the US and the USS are like
Speaker 1: to leak false information about how crazy their leaders were.
Speaker 1: Do you remember how we were brought up viewing like
Speaker 1: the Russians like they were all nuts, right, and they
Speaker 1: would just push the button at any second. Yeah, they
Speaker 1: wanted American blood. Apparently that was planted by the Russians,
Speaker 1: because you have to believe that the other guy is
Speaker 1: willing to strike and and not just create a first strike,
Speaker 1: but definitely a counter strike as well. Right, sure, So
Speaker 1: if you are assured that if you launch a first
Speaker 1: strike that the next the other sides going to launch
Speaker 1: a retaliatory strike, what you've just done by launching that
Speaker 1: first strike is committed suicide. Pretty much. The basis of
Speaker 1: mutual assured destruction is that nobody wants to die, right Okay? Yeah, yeah, okay?
Speaker 1: And uh also at the time, I mean, at first,
Speaker 1: the way the nuclear warheads um developed over the years
Speaker 1: is pretty cool because, like you pointed out, at first,
Speaker 1: it was just a big, huge, dopey bomb that would
Speaker 1: just blow up everything. Yeah, have you seen pictures of
Speaker 1: Fat Boy and Little Man. They really do they do?
Speaker 1: The money would drop out of the back of a plane. Yeah,
Speaker 1: did you know they weren't the same type of bomb.
Speaker 1: Fat Man, which was dropped on Nagasaki was plutonium and
Speaker 1: a Little Boy, which was dropped on Hiroshima was uranium. Interesting,
Speaker 1: I didn't know that, and they were. They were working
Speaker 1: on both of these. So basically we split the atom
Speaker 1: in the like for the late thirties and all of
Speaker 1: a sudden, we're just working on any kind of atomic
Speaker 1: bomb we want nuts. So over the years though that
Speaker 1: it became very precise and much more strategic, so you could, um,
Speaker 1: let's say, send your nuclear warheads to specific military targets
Speaker 1: at first, obviously to wipe out, you know, some of
Speaker 1: that capability. Hold on, you're talking about escalation. Let's talk
Speaker 1: about the nuclear proliferation. It wasn't just a ladder of escalation. Well,
Speaker 1: hold on, let's talk about where the nukes were, right,
Speaker 1: and so at the height of the Cold War, it
Speaker 1: wasn't just missile silos and wyoming and you know this Ukraine,
Speaker 1: it was um, there was the European theater, Eastern and
Speaker 1: Western we had nuclear warheads all over the place there
Speaker 1: um at any given time, both the Soviets and the
Speaker 1: US had aircraft in the air at any point in
Speaker 1: time with nuclear with nukes, right, we had nuclear submarines
Speaker 1: all over the globe, so lancey and air both sides
Speaker 1: had it covered. Right. So okay, we're the world is
Speaker 1: completely covered with thermonuclear devices, very high tech delivery systems
Speaker 1: specific and both sides have enough to wipe the other
Speaker 1: one off the planet several times. We're at a day time, right,
Speaker 1: So what happens if somebody does launch a first strike
Speaker 1: because it's no longer a holocaust where we're just shooting
Speaker 1: missiles anymore, we have the capability to launch precise surgical strike. Well,
Speaker 1: there will be a counter strike, there is. But this
Speaker 1: is where the ladder of escalation you were talking about
Speaker 1: comes in. Well, yeah, you like in it to a
Speaker 1: chess game, there's a strike than a counter strike, and
Speaker 1: then you know increasing levels of of strikes as they
Speaker 1: climb up the ladder. Right now, So basically, yeah, it's
Speaker 1: like trading punches, right, right, So you start out, you
Speaker 1: start out soft, and I hit you. I don't you
Speaker 1: bring it all from the beginning. Then I'm really glad
Speaker 1: you weren't at the helm of the United States or
Speaker 1: the uss are during the Cold War. But let's say
Speaker 1: let's say we were evenly matched, right, and I punch you,
Speaker 1: you punched me a little harder, I punch you a
Speaker 1: little harder, and then uh, it keeps going on until
Speaker 1: finally one of us like, okay, stop. But what we've
Speaker 1: done is we've escalated the damage we're doing to one another.
Speaker 1: But there's something very important that that's easily overlooked in
Speaker 1: that trade of punches. There's a moment that comes after
Speaker 1: each punch where someone might quit, where somebody has the
Speaker 1: options to quit right or trade another punch. And if
Speaker 1: you trade another punch, you're gonna escalate. Right. So if
Speaker 1: in the case of nuclear arms that are real precise
Speaker 1: at this point, they take out a few of our
Speaker 1: military bases, we take a few of their's are out,
Speaker 1: and all of a sudden, one of the leaders steps
Speaker 1: back and says, wait a minute, we're gonna annihilate everybody.
Speaker 1: We have to stop. You win, right exactly. Um, And
Speaker 1: what's crazy is it's like the fact that there would
Speaker 1: even be a retaliatory strike is all based on saving face,
Speaker 1: which is kind of disgusting in and of itself. But um, yeah,
Speaker 1: both sides had this kind of agreement. I can't remember
Speaker 1: it was called where it's It's like in the ladder
Speaker 1: of escalation. First to start with like say nuclear silo,
Speaker 1: and then you the next the next wrong on the
Speaker 1: ladder is you know, actual troops, right, and then the
Speaker 1: next wrong after that is like maybe a rural area.
Speaker 1: Then after that it is like a city, and it
Speaker 1: keeps you going and I aming each other between give up.
Speaker 1: Yet both sides knew what was coming next. It was
Speaker 1: part of the ladder of escalation. Yeah, luckily we never
Speaker 1: engaged in that. Luckily there was no instant messaging back
Speaker 1: then too. I know it would have been fun or
Speaker 1: it could have saved us that well, I guess we
Speaker 1: we were saved. But chuck, um, I know you recognize
Speaker 1: the ladder of escalation because your favorite movie or one
Speaker 1: of them had this factor heavily into four games. What
Speaker 1: did we talk about this one in the Steel Nuclear Bomber?
Speaker 1: Was it another one we've talked about at least one
Speaker 1: other time. Yeah, it's a great movie. What are we
Speaker 1: up to? Like ten thousand and ninety podcast? So far?
Speaker 1: I think so. We've mentioned four games in about half
Speaker 1: of the I would say, uh, in three Matthew young
Speaker 1: Matthew Broderick, although he still looks exactly the same thing,
Speaker 1: it really does, doesn't He doesn't age. Sarah Jessica Parker
Speaker 1: has an aged either. Yeah, but if you look at
Speaker 1: square pegs her versus Sex in the City her, there
Speaker 1: was quite a difference. Okay, although I still don't find
Speaker 1: her very attractive. To be honest, I'm gonna hear from
Speaker 1: the ladies on that one. And Sara Jessica Parker, Dude,
Speaker 1: if she listen to the show, they'd be great. You're
Speaker 1: really hot, Sarah Jessica Parker. Yeah. Josh and war Games, Uh,
Speaker 1: Matthew Broderick um hacks into the Norad system and to
Speaker 1: play some games, and what he chooses to play is
Speaker 1: thermonuclear war and the computer constantly at the end of
Speaker 1: the movie, you know, it's like the only way to
Speaker 1: win is not to play, which is actually correct, and
Speaker 1: that is right on the money. It's um. It's also
Speaker 1: akin to uh, an actual game theory exercise called the
Speaker 1: prisoners Dilemma. Yeah, that's cool, tell us about that, Josh, Well,
Speaker 1: the prisoners Lemma. Let's say you have two accomplices in
Speaker 1: a crime that are separated. Let's say to you and me,
Speaker 1: all right, so Chuck, you're being interrogated in room A.
Speaker 1: Josh did it. That's well, we're both in trouble, right, Um, Well,
Speaker 1: I'm in trouble and you're not right. But let's say
Speaker 1: we're we're actually buddies and we like each other outside
Speaker 1: of the podcast be and we we've committed a jewel heist.
Speaker 1: So we've been caught, but nobody said anything yet. You're
Speaker 1: an interrogation room A. I'm an interrogation room beat. The
Speaker 1: problem is I have no idea what you're doing. You
Speaker 1: have no idea what I'm doing. If you implicate me,
Speaker 1: I go to jail. You go free. If I implicate you,
Speaker 1: you go to jail. I go free. We both implicate
Speaker 1: each other, we both go to jail. What's the best
Speaker 1: option here to not say a word? Not say a word,
Speaker 1: and then either one of us is implicated and we
Speaker 1: both go free. That's a classic TV and movie thing too.
Speaker 1: In the you always split them up, and you and
Speaker 1: you always go into the one room and say your
Speaker 1: partners in there singing like a bird. Yeah, Willie. Yeah,
Speaker 1: see Rocky's gonna fixture saying, and then all of a
Speaker 1: sudden they get that prisoner too or that criminal to
Speaker 1: uh rat out the other guy because they think that
Speaker 1: they're being read at, which is stupid. Man. They should
Speaker 1: just keep your here's the lesson to our younger viewers.
Speaker 1: Keep your mouth shut. Yeah, that's good. That's always good.
Speaker 1: Never wrat people out. All right, So if you want
Speaker 1: to read more about mutual assured destruction, frankly, I think
Speaker 1: that I wrote this a little flowery, but it was
Speaker 1: one of my my UM favorite ones. It was just interesting.
Speaker 1: You can type in mutual assured destruction on the cite
Speaker 1: will also bring up UM Tom Sheaves game theory article,
Speaker 1: which is definitely worth reading as well. Uh and you
Speaker 1: will type that into the handy search bar, which means
Speaker 1: that it's time for listener mail. Indeed, Josh, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: call this our first genuine unicorn email, all right, sort
Speaker 1: of what about the ones where people send a pictures
Speaker 1: of unicorns? It's not genuine? Okay, that's falsome. Hi, Chuck
Speaker 1: and Josh, you mentioned that you wanted some unicorn stories,
Speaker 1: and I couldn't resist sending me this one. It might
Speaker 1: be a good lead into a podcast on traditional medicines.
Speaker 1: This alam makes sense in a minute. I just got
Speaker 1: back from a trip to Vietnam, and as a part
Speaker 1: of my trip, I went into the hill country and
Speaker 1: northern Vietnam called Sapa. This is where many minority tribes
Speaker 1: are residing, and part of their way of life is
Speaker 1: selling their wares to tourists and offering homestays. Kind of
Speaker 1: cool um. After a day hike, a group of us
Speaker 1: ended up at a family home and they served us
Speaker 1: a delicious dinner of traditional food and something they called
Speaker 1: happy water. I liked some of them. Some made rice wine.
Speaker 1: You can imagine why it's called nappy water. Got us
Speaker 1: a little giggly to begin with, and what really got
Speaker 1: us going was seeing the lady of the house nonchalantly
Speaker 1: walk out of the kitchen with a cow's horn stuck
Speaker 1: to her forehead as if she were a unicorn. When
Speaker 1: we finally contained ourselves, we all felt like sleps because
Speaker 1: our guide explained that this was a traditional way of
Speaker 1: getting rid of headaches. You put on the you put
Speaker 1: the horn in the fire, you brand it to your forehead,
Speaker 1: and then after a short time, you take it off
Speaker 1: for the next two weeks you have to run. Uh,
Speaker 1: you have the round red mark on your forehead. Maybe
Speaker 1: it hurt more than the headache and therefore took remind
Speaker 1: uf of it. I'm not sure, doesn't that sounds like anyway?
Speaker 1: This is my semi unicorn story. Thanks for the great
Speaker 1: podcast from Ang. It was a Canadian listening in Indonesia
Speaker 1: and say Vietnam again Vietnam and am well, thanks Ang
Speaker 1: for that. UM. Actually, yes, that is definitely the closest
Speaker 1: thing to an actual unicorn UM listener mail we've gotten
Speaker 1: so far. Indeed, if you have any Cold War stories
Speaker 1: or any unicorn stories, or your name is Ang or
Speaker 1: contains those letters in that same arrangement, send us an email.
Speaker 1: You can send it to Stuff podcast at how stuff
Speaker 1: works dot com. For more on this and thousands of
Speaker 1: other topics, visit how stuff works dot com. Want more
Speaker 1: how stuff works, check out our blogs on the how
Speaker 1: stuff works dot com home page. M