I think 80-120 Mk3/Mk4 atomic bombs dropped on 40 Chinese cities would have forced them to surrender.
Saved many American lives.
I forget the value ratio of white to non-white lives. Is it 10 to 1 or 100 to 1? I was never good at math.
This is a pretty messed up thing to say. Really? Whites are worth ten times as much as non-whites? Everyone knows a non-white is worth three-fifths as much as a white.
And accomplished what exactly? China was not going to surrender just because a few cities were destroyed, they did not in WWII with many of their largest cities under Japanese control.
Millions of people would be dead or injured, millions more left homeless and even more with radiation sickness.
The Manchurian industrial zone would be destroyed and the Chinese would be unable to supply the troops in Korea.
There was this minor skirmish about a decade prior, you might’ve heard of it - nobody was very keen on a sequel.
Assuming you *could *cripple resupply from China, you’ve still got the USSR to deal with, and they were also playing around with things that make you go boom. Getting into direct conflict with them would probably not stay localized, and then it could be back to game-on in Europe and probably elsewhere.
Brilliant plan… woulda saved lots of lives! :rolleyes:
The Soviet Union exploded their first atomic bomb on 29 August 1949. China intervened in the Korean War on 1 November 1950. You do the math.
Yes but the Soviet nuclear arsenal was small.
In 1949 the USSR built 3 RDS-1 type atomic bombs (one was expended at the Semipalatinsk Test Site on 29 August 1949).
In 1950 the USSR built 9 RDS-1 type atomic bombs and another 4 in January-February 1951.
On 1 March 1951 the USSR only had 15 RDS-1 type atomic bombs.
http://www.proatom.ru/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2352
And the first Soviet bomber capable of carrying nuclear weapons, the Tu-4A, was not introduced until 1951.
The Tu-4A would have been undoubtedly ready by 1951, which is when McArthur wanted to employ nukes.
The Soviet Union also shared a border with N Korea and China and would mightly displeased about the whole nuke em till the glow bit. And ready for some comeuppance. In say Europe.
Also the Soviet Programme of the time was proceeding on a peace time rate priority but not balls to the wall type effort, which a nuclear Korea would have let to.
It would have turned them from a not-especially friendly nation into an implacable enemy for pretty much forever. And marked America as a greater enemy to the world than Hitler in the process.
I expect the result would be the Cold War wouldn’t be about the USSR against the US, but about the US against everyone else on the planet.
It doesn’t seem likely that the Soviets would attack anything when they were at such a disadvantage.
The United States had over 15 times as many atomic bombs, many more bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons and many more nuclear trained combat crews.
On 1 January 1950 SAC had 34 nuclear-capable B-36 bombers which could bomb the USSR from bases in the continental United States.
The Soviets didn’t have any bombers capable of reaching the continental United States.
We firebombed 67 Japanese cities killing 500,000+ people and also nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing 200,000+ people.
But the Japanese not been an enemy, instead they have been a close ally and good trading partner for over 50 years.
I think the same would happen with China.
What a tragedy, such a perfect opportunity to nuke another country lost.
How widely was this known at the time? What were American estimates of Soviet nuclear resources at the time?
You mean, like Japan? Anyway, might not a significant nuclear strike on China have opened the way for the return of the KMT?
Nuclear Weapon statistics are meaningless. You don’t need to match a country weapon for weapon, launcher for launcher. Just have enough to make anything you can do unacceptable.
Do you really think that the US would accept possible nuclear strikes on its Eastern Seaboard as being acceptable?
The CIA estimated the Soviets would have 10-20 atomic bombs in mid-1950, 25-45 in mid-1951 and 45-90 in mid-1952.
http://www.foia.cia.gov/docs/DOC_0000258838/DOC_0000258838.pdf
The CIA overestimated significantly but even if their high estimates were correct, the United States would still have over 8 times as many atomic bombs from 1950-52.
Yes, rather like the Japanese -of whom the Chinese are not at all fond.
Frankly at this point I wish the Japanese and Germans had spent the last few decades talking about how much they hated us; perhaps it would have kept America from developing this idea that slaughtering people makes their friends and relatives love you.
After all, what’s a few nukes among friends?
Missed Edit
The Tu 4 had a radius of 5400 Km with 3000 KG bomb load. Murmansk to NYC is 6500 km. A reduced bomb load, aerial refuelling or even landing or ditching on return would have been enough. As it is, the first Soviet Intercontinental bomber was ready by 1949, the Tu85. Historically it was abandonded in favour of the Tu 95, which would not occur had there been a necessity for a bomber here and now.
They really didn’t have to, with all of Western Europe hostage to American good conduct.