Should America Atomic Bomb China?

That's why they call it MAD.

 

If you knew anything about nuclear weapons and the strategies employed you would know that developing "higher yield" nuclear weapons hasn't been a priority for more than 50 years.

 

OK. Who did start it then?

 

That too, but it was mainly to know the missiles were coming, and you could obviate they whole thing just by sending yours first

ICBM survival was to blunt the effectiveness of a nuclear first strike.

AFAIK MAD hasn' been a real tactic for about that much time, nor has the pre-emptive strike been a part of it. But it was at that time, and it would be again with Russia now if we were ever so insane as to atom bomb China for no reason I can see

China is our biggest market, and we are theirs. Basically, you're saying we should bomb ourselves.

 

Ho Chi Minh

 

The U.S. doesn't need China as either a buyer or a seller.

 

Alex, the concept of MAD is Mutual Assured Destruction. At its core is the idea that both sides can absorb a full on first strike from the other sides nuclear arsenals and still have enough nuclear weapons left over to destroy the other side.

Thus "MAD" that you crow about, is effectively based on absorbing a nuclear strike prior to retaliation.

 

Why not?

 

Yes and no. Having enough weapons left to destroy the other side and having enough society left to be a viable victor are two very different things. It's why both sides had arsenals that could destroy the other several times over.

 

According to everything I've read by experts on the subject, the United States is the one major power on Earth that if it was absolutely necessary could (literally) seal itself off from the rest of the world and survive only on its internal resources. It would be inconvenient and involve sacrifices but it would be doable.

Well stocked Walmarts are not really necessary for the survival of the modern U.S.

 

Actually that is a complete and utter myth.

 

Should America Atomic Bomb China?
America should Atom bomb no one--now, or ever. Atomic weapons should be outlawed for everyone, dismantled everywhere & trashed. War is already horrible without them. Using them turns winning a war into another nightmare altogether. Having nuclear weapons is a sign of weakness. Using them is a verification of insanity.

 

Why? The firebombing of Tokyo killed more people than died at Hiroshima. Twice as many that died at Nagasaki.

 

WRONG. Ho Chi Minh wasn't bothering anybody. He was in his own country, minding his own business.
The USA started out by sending advisors over there, then they started sending troops. The Vietnamese people wanted to unify their country, but certain people in our country didn't want them to unify. So---it became North Vietnam and South Vietnam.
Read up on it. A good book to read is "Rolling Thunder in a Gentle Land" I forgot who the author is---sorry. If you ask for it at your local library I'm sure they'll have it.

 

I teach history and I consider myself an expert on the Cold War. The idea that Ho Chi Minh was simply "minding his own business" is simply false. He and his communist government had been deliberately undermining the government of South Vietnam for years. Basically ever since the French withdrawal.

 

Bloody hell too. I NEED cheap candy

 

I think it was before that. Ho chi minh had attended Communist Internationals in the 1920's as a young revolutionary working to overthrow the French

Maybe we should have helped Ho out when he asked for it instead of supporting the French Colonial return in 1945. He had said that one of the men he most admired was Abraham Lincoln.

Instead, we later signed on with a guy who said that the best government man in the 20th century had been Adolf Hitler.

Isn't conservatism wonderful?

 

The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs were in the smallish kiloton range. Megaton bombs are qualitatively different. Agenda based attacks on Carl Sagan et al notwithstanding you would still likely have continental firestorms and at least one year if not decades of nuclear winter from even a small nuclear exchange

Thank god this is nothing more than the ravings you normally find wasting bandwidth here.

 

nuclear weapons in the megaton range in size are very rare.

The most common U.S. nuclear warhead is the W76 which is roughly 100 kilotons.

And both continent sized firestorms and nuclear winter are physically impossible. Even Sagan admitted that the evidence did not support his claims of nuclear winter prior to his death and that he had exaggerated the danger due to his beliefs on nuclear arms.

 

The U.S. felt it had to support the restoration of both French and British colonialism due to the sacrifices they made during World War Two. The U.S. also wanted those western European powers to serve as counterweights to the Soviet Union so the U.S. wouldn't have to as this was just about the last thing the U.S. wanted. To win the war but then inherit a huge set of obligations overseas.

 

Atomic bombs are sooo 1960. Why not neutron bomb them! Then we can take all their stuff after they die!

Seriously though, how bout we stop killing average folks in response to things their govt did largely without their consent?

 

Most governments can't survive without at least the general consent of the bulk of its population. There is nothing special about so called "neutron bombs" (actually enhanced radiation weapons). Basically almost any existing nuclear weapon can become what amounts to an enhanced radiation weapon if their yield is "dialed down" sufficiently. At low enough yield, eventually the lethal radiation radius of a nuclear weapon exceeds the blast radius.

 

see below and:

Yes say many, and I guess it depends on your historic time line. Some do not think the initial confrontations between the US and North Vietnam were the start of the war but the time when the French and Vietnamese started their conflict where again Ho Chi Minh initiated armed conflict with France to get out of Vietnam. Using that reference, some argue your analysis is correct but the Vietnam war with the US was a ear the US took over from France. Using that historic time line, no Westerners would argue the war started when France took over Vietnam.

Of course prior to that China invaded Vietnam and conquered it as well at one point and ironically China was never a friend of Vietnam until Mao Tse Tung felt North Vietnam was an essential proxy in fighting the West in Asia.

No one should be surprised today, China illegalhy invaded Vietnam and seized many of its oil fields and by doing so invaded Vietnam and has started yet another war this time with the Us siding with Vietnam against China and forming part of the on-going tensions in the South Pacific seas between Vietnam South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Indonesia, South Africa, the Philippines, North Korea, Australia, the US.

Asia and specifically the corridor with the great opium caravans that flow through Vietnam, Cambodia, Mynamar-Burma, Laos have always been unstable as has the Korean peninsula and all of the South China seas sector. Do you blame the West, Russia, China, all depends n your political biases and your take on who is a colonialist invader and an oppressed invaded nation.

China's expansion in the South Pacific is a response to Russia and Japan as much as it is the US. Its always felt the three have invaded on its zone of control. However China has gone much further than regional disputes with Japan and the Russians over specific islands but to the point now of trying to impose a right to access the coastal natural resources of all these nations ignoring international laws.

Having a nasty altercation in the South China seas is quite possible. There is a lot of naval fire power in that region and hair trigger tempers.

 

Actually, FDR liberated a ton of colonies, right up until he died.

So we weren't trying to restore colonialism. State caved to France when they threatened to go Commie. We prob caved to some other countries, I don't remember the specifics, but it wasn't policy.

After the war, we had no idea what to do about Russia. George F Kennan came with the idea of a Cold War. Since it was the only halfway decent idea, we jumped on it. That included resisting Russian ambitions. Which mean serving as a counterweight. That became policy.

 

Neutron bombs used the neutron flash

Not to be confused: