AHC: MacArthur's Korea "Coup"

I can't really speak to the politics of it, but a few thoughts on the technical aspects.

"SILVERPLATE" atomic-capable B-29s and non-fissile A-bomb components were sent to Guam IOTL in early August 1950, around the time of the battles you mentioned. However, I don't believe the weapons would ever be transferred to Korea even if they were intended for use there. B-29s used in support of operations in Korea were based out of Okinawa. Also, IOTL the weapons were no longer under control of the AEC once they left the CONUS; they were under USAF control, and likely would be ITTL as well.

Edit to Add: I mean they were held by the USAF, in their custody, not that the USAF could decide to use them without Truman's say-so. I think I may have been a bit unclear earlier: the AEC was not going to transfer weapons to the military without Truman's instructions. But, once the weapons were sent to Guam, they were pretty much out of the AEC's hands.

I wonder if, rather than physically seize the weapons, MacArthur might instead suborn the base communications, replace the radio operators with personnel loyal to him and issue a phony order to attack. I don't know how the Air Force's communications were set up in 1950, so I don't know if that's plausible.
 
"SILVERPLATE" atomic-capable B-29s and non-fissile A-bomb components were sent to Guam IOTL in early August 1950, around the time of the battles you mentioned. However, I don't believe the weapons would ever be transferred to Korea even if they were intended for use there. B-29s used in support of operations in Korea were based out of Okinawa. Also, IOTL the weapons were no longer under control of the AEC once they left the CONUS; they were under USAF control, and likely would be ITTL as well.

Edit to Add: I mean they were held by the USAF, in their custody, not that the USAF could decide to use them without Truman's say-so.

Well, that settles two issues -- on the one hand, the bombs are definitely not going Korea and will not be physically seized by MacArthur; on the other, we don't have to worry about the AEC mucking up the moves within the military.

Perhaps the answer then is the simplest -- that in April of 1951, the Joint Chiefs of Staff agree that MacArthur shall be, for the time being, granted authority to use the nuclear weapons even without specific Presidential authorization. Then they just pass the orders down USAF Chain of Command...
 
Well, that settles two issues -- on the one hand, the bombs are definitely not going Korea and will not be physically seized by MacArthur; on the other, we don't have to worry about the AEC mucking up the moves within the military.

Perhaps the answer then is the simplest -- that in April of 1951, the Joint Chiefs of Staff agree that MacArthur shall be, for the time being, granted authority to use the nuclear weapons even without specific Presidential authorization. Then they just pass the orders down USAF Chain of Command...

How can they do that without the Presidents approval?
 
Damn -- unless, by any chance, it would be in character to leave the weapons purely under the military chain of command, to allow for deployment at a moment's notice? Or is that part also out of character?
No.
This entire scenario is ASB under Truman I'm happy to say.

You could have Truman shot by the Puerto Ricans and Barkely go into a coma maybe... Truman thought he would die three months into the Presidency.
 
A broader question of civil-military relations:
I think it's clear that a full scale military coup is out of the question by the time of the proposed POD. Wouldn't it be possible that, much as the the Korean conflict exceeded its initial limits in the crossing of the 38th parallel, an American general (in that or another war) could seize the initiative from civilian leadership by exceeding orders (but not directly defying them) and managing to be successful?
e.g You're merely supposed to launch a raid into Eastern Slobovia but once the photos come back of the commanding field marshal of the Slobovian People's Militia surrendering to you, are the politicians really going to tell you to have him un-surrender?
 
Top