AH discussion: Phnom Penh nuked in the 1970/1980s by various nations

As we all know, the government of Democratic Kampuchea, led by Pol Pot, caused a genocide, killing millions of Cambodians, most of them being ethnoreligious minorities. What if these scenarios happened instead?

1. The Soviet Union drops a nuke in Phnom Penh, with the reason being DK being an ally of the (Maoist) People's Republic of China, and is therefore a rogue state
2. Vietnam develops its own nuclear program and drops a nuke in Phnom Penh, establishing a puppet regime in the process
3. China, antagonizing the Khmer Rouge regime halfway through the genocide, "liberates" the Cambodian Chinese by dropping a nuke in Phnom Penh, then occupies other cities, using Laos as a proxy
4. The United States drop a nuke in Phnom Penh, then invades Cambodia to counter Vietnamese influence in the Indochina Peninsula
 
The question this raises is, "Why would anyone do something so completely stupid, pointless, and insane?"
 
Why even bother nuking poor and weak nation if you can invade that directly? Politicians during Cold War weren't so stupid.

1. The Soviet Union drops a nuke in Phnom Penh, with the reason being DK being an ally of the (Maoist) People's Republic of China, and is therefore a rogue state

That would mean WW3. And Brezhnev surely knew that.

2. Vietnam develops its own nuclear program and drops a nuke in Phnom Penh, establishing a puppet regime in the process

Vietnam hardly has resources begin its own nuclear program and finish that on end of 1970's/early 1980's due almost two decades lasted warring. And even in OTL Vietnam was able expel Red Khmers with conventional warfare. And nuking would be extremely stupid. Say goodbye to Saigon and Hanoi.

3. China, antagonizing the Khmer Rouge regime halfway through the genocide, "liberates" the Cambodian Chinese by dropping a nuke in Phnom Penh, then occupies other cities, using Laos as a proxy

Why China even would care about poor nation? And even if it would care, it could easily win that without using nuclear weapons and it even don't need whole strenght of its PLA.

4. The United States drop a nuke in Phnom Penh, then invades Cambodia to counter Vietnamese influence in the Indochina Peninsula

That is hellish stupid. For president it would be immediate political suicide and USA would be pretty much international pariah. And guess what propaganda victory it would be for Commies, no matter are they Leninists or Maoists.
 
Why even bother nuking poor and weak nation if you can invade that directly? Politicians during Cold War weren't so stupid.

SNIP

In that case, how about a conventional bombing/invasion in the cases of the Soviet Union, the PRC or the USA? Since it's clear that a direct nuclear strike on Phnom Penh won't do the job.
 
why would anyone do that? dropping a nuke in a country in such a situation would turn a horrible situation into something impossible to fix.
"yeah they were killing everyone with glasses, they were about to send the country back to the stone age!"
"so what did you do?"
"we bombed them back to the stone age to give them a hand with that!"
OTL vietnam kicked their ass, no canned sunshine needed.
 
It does seem far fetched. THe use of Nuclear weapons would need earlier precedence.

we waited for Cambodia, but didn't use it in Vietnam or Korea.. or as a show of force in other potential spots of contention.

Assuradly using one against a nation that doenst have them is a tactic that is likely not to get you nuked in return, but the seriously bad PR from doing so? yikes...

now lets take on the fact and I agree with @markus meecham
glassing phnom pen would only make things worse
 

BigBlueBox

Banned
Every single one of those nations can swiftly defeat Cambodia through conventional warfare. Vietnam just ended two decades of warfare and would have no capability to develop nuclear weapons anyways.
 
It does seem far fetched. The use of Nuclear weapons would need earlier precedence.

We waited for Cambodia, but didn't use it in Vietnam or Korea.. or as a show of force in other potential spots of contention.

Assuredly using one against a nation that doesn't
have them is a tactic that is likely not to get you nuked in return, but the seriously bad PR from doing so? Yikes...

Well, Korea and Vietnam were united, and only separated because geopolitical factors. Cambodia on the other hand, was a pariah state altogether.

Nuking Pyongyang/Hanseong/Hanoi/Saigon would trigger the other party to glass you in return. Why would you do that?

Also, the USA already had bad PR during the Cold War, no problems for a worse image (OTL 1986, see Nicaragua v. United States, that was probably as bad the USA can get). As for the Soviet Union, they probably don't care at all; why else would they invade a secular Afghanistan. China, before 1977, would likely not care either.
 
Almost the entire population of Phnom Penh was removed to the countryside by the Khmer Rouge soon after their seizure of power. What would be the purpose of nuking a crumbling ghost town?
 
Well, Korea and Vietnam were united, and only separated because geopolitical factors. Cambodia on the other hand, was a pariah state altogether.

Nuking Pyongyang/Hanseong/Hanoi/Saigon would trigger the other party to glass you in return. Why would you do that?

Also, the USA already had bad PR during the Cold War, no problems for a worse image (OTL 1986, see Nicaragua v. United States, that was probably as bad the USA can get). As for the Soviet Union, they probably don't care at all; why else would they invade a secular Afghanistan. China, before 1977, would likely not care either.
I think anyone not tossing nukes around would care. its the precedence. I just cant see either group dropping an a-bomb on Cambodia. Not with out making the cold war become a much colder event. If china were too do it, that would set back relations that were only recently opened IF china does it, that gives the Indians and Pakistanis reasons later to lob a few around. an unstable world like that would not be a pretty one.


Korea was divided, Vietnam was just a political mess, but divided in a way that people still traveled north and south. on the same token the south Vietnamese government wasn't exactly a symbol of internal democracy. ;)
The soviets rolled into Afghanistan to support the spread of communism, and while the government they supported wasn't great, most of these governments were not. they were all just geo-political pawns.

I'm just going to say no, no one is going to nuke phnom pen with out a very hardcore reason that can be backed in the court of international opinion.


note: we didn't use the bomb in Iraq, we didn't use the bomb in Afghanistan or in Iraq 2.0 or in Operation Mission not accomplished. There is no reason to use the bomb besides a show of extreme power, that is not accomplished by conventional and or precision bombings ( and I would suffice to say, a targeted precision strike is sends a deeper message.
 
Almost the entire population of Phnom Penh was removed to the countryside by the Khmer Rouge soon after their seizure of power. What would be the purpose of nuking a crumbling ghost town?
Quite true, its possible that no-one would actually notice it for several weeks?
 
Top