Again, the USSR was not going to go to war over Vietnam anymore than they would have gone to war over Cuba.
Any war with North Korea, unless North Korea launches a nuke will involve a dramatic response from China. China does not want a fully unified Korea, unless it's fully unified under North Korea. We created the China mess and should have cleaned that up a long time ago. Too many weak US Presidents.
Haha I was going to troll you again but I'm refraining. The only war we'll have with China in the near future will continue to be cyber. In my opinion, one of the most dangerous. My guess is that we'll eventually impose a cyber blackout in China if they continue their BS. Lock them down. They will probably respond with something serious. And THAT would provoke the nuclear war.
Their Soviet allies did. And that was true every year until the Sino-Soviet Split, after which China had it own nuclear deterrent.
China didn't and the Soviets were not going to Nuke the Korean Peninsula, much less the United States. The US could have easily dealt with China but weak leadership kept the war regional.
No, instead Russia would have seized West Berlin. Then back and forths from that add up until it's nuclear war.
You went from discussing Nukes (that China didn't have) to the Soviets taking Berlin. The Soviets were not going to risk WW3 over Korea or over China. Much less nuking anyone. China could have been dealt with more harshly while keeping the Soviets on the sidelines and selling military hardware, which was their only motivation. Recall at the time, the Soviet nuclear arsenal and delivery systems were no where near what the US had. Technically, they were way behind us. Documents after the fall of the Soviet Union show this. Also, the Soviets trying to fight the entire world (Korea was a UN action) would have suffered serious cash flow issues. It was the US that helped them fund their resistance to the German invasion in WW2.
Just like how the US would have sat by and done nothing if the Soviets invaded West Germany, right? You act as if the UN would have stood by the US if the US unilaterally tried to turn the mission into regime change in China.
That would have been a direct attack on US troops. More akin to describing what the Soviet Union would have done if the West invaded Poland. It's not even comparable to Korea.
The Russians could have attacked West Germany without attacking US troops. Would we have sat by and let them do it "because we wouldn't risk WW3 over Germany"? China was a Soviet ally. A direct attack on China with the intention of regime change, would have resulted in a Soviet entry into the war. And while their nuclear capabilities may have been less, here is the big question: How many million Americans would you have been willing to murder with your totally unnecessary war in order to get rid of China?
There is NO WAY the Soviet Union rolls into West Germany without kicking off WW3 and risking a United States and a world response. Not to mention the attack into the British and French zones! No way in hell. Dealing more harshly with China doesn't mean you would have to invade them or commence a regime change. There are other ways to do it and no, bringing the war to China, especially bombing doesn't mean the Soviets enter the war.
Why would invading a US ally kick off WW3? After all you are claiming that countries won't fight for their allies if the risk is WW3. Bombing China with anything less than nukes isn't going to stop it. Bombing them with nukes brings the Soviets into the war.
You are not making any sense whatsoever. If the Soviets invade Western Germany, it kicks off WW3 and a response by the United States as we ( as well as the British and French and other nations) had troops in West Germany. Period. As far as China goes, the Soviets were fearful of showing any direct involvement. Dealing with China more harshly would not have changed this stance at all. And no, I am not discussing nuking the Chinese.
The Soviets had troops in China. They had Soviet pilots flying aircraft based in Manchuria. Any attack on China to "deal harshly with China" sufficient to "clean up the China mess" would have involved killing Soviet soldiers just as much as a Soviet attack on West Germany would have meant killing US soldiers.
Yes, the 64th. I am well aware. They also had technical crews there as well and other "personnel" for things like running searchlights, etc. They did not have infantry nor did they supply armored units as requested by China. The Soviets refused. The simple fact is that the Soviets were merely there to get paid for their support and technical assistance. The Soviets racked up something like $650 million from China by the end of the war. They did supply pilots (which they tried to hide) but they played a limited role. They stayed mostly around the Yalu River as I recall and running interference on UN Interdiction missions. Stalin had his own limitations and could not even fulfill Chinese requests for arms. He was still recovering from WW2 at the time. No matter how the war was going in China, Stalin was not getting directly involved, unless an attack was perpetrated directly on the Soviet Union, or possibly if Nukes were used. The Soviets did not want direct confrontation nor could they mass produce the material in the early 50's to challenge the United States and it's allies in Germany. China was requesting arms at a rate that they could not even keep up with: Escalation of the conflict in Korea would create for both Beijing and Pyongyang further excuses to press Stalin for more assistance that already had exceeded Soviet economic limitations. The Soviet leadership had agreed to outfit 16 Chinese army divisions with Soviet arms and equipment in 1951, but by April 1952, China had received equipment for only four divisions, of which three would be transferred to the KPA. In August 1952, Peng Dehuai requested that the Soviet Union supply the Chinese Air Force with new Tu-16 medium jet bombers. The Soviets found it difficult to fulfill the order, and first asked the Chinese to buy 120 outdated Tu-4s. A strained economy forced Moscow to keep the war in Korea, as well as its assistance to China, within strictly limited parameters, and let the burden of the war weigh ever more heavily on its East Asian allies. When the guns fell silent on the Korean peninsula, the Chinese had not only sustained great physical losses in the conflict, but also found themselves with a huge war debt to the Soviet Union totaling about $650 million. This would magnify China's economic difficulties for years to come. The Soviets and the Chinese did not work well together at all. China kept pushing for Stalin's involvement, but Stalin kept refusing. Even air operations that involved Soviet aviators, the Soviets refused cooperation with both the Chinese and the North Koreans. Also, Stalin saw the Chinese as inferior and his belief was reaffirmed by the Chinese struggling even with Soviet equipment and training. With a little more effort, the UN forces could have bled the Chinese of willpower and money, to continue the fight. The outrageous debt they were accumulating with the Soviet Union was not sustainable much longer. The US just wanted out though and was looking for a satisfactory ending to the war. In hindsight, this was a very bad and the Chinese should have been dealt with accordingly.
http://thebulletin.org/how-us-nucle...tability-burst-height-compensating-super10578 I would think this new technology shows if anyone is daft enough to fire a nuke at us, they better be afraid of our response, we now have more and our submarine missile leg of our deterrent force is suddenly getting three times more destructive, and under Trump I suspect our air and land delivery systems will get better. That said if North Korea went there we would have to then talk to China they could deal with this or we can and our option is to go back to war and this time we will keep going until we march troops into the capital of North Korea and replace it with an elected government at some point and we might decide and might have to go nuclear to stop the North Korean military from overrunning the south. It might be in their best interest to invade and annex North Korea to China then letting us do what we must do.
All this is rather moot at this point. The US, North Korea, China and Russia all have or are developing the technologies to disrupt each other's political, financial and physical infrastructure through the use of "computers". It's all so much more civilized than nukes.
