I know it's unlikely but say MacArthur was elected President in 1952 during the Korean War. What would have happened from 1952 to 2000?
I know it's unlikely but say MacArthur was elected President in 1952 during the Korean War. What would have happened from 1952 to 2000?
World War Three assuming he meant what he said about stopping China.
In about 1953, we would have busted a nuke on Beijing. This is okay, though: in 1953 we have like 10 times more nukes than everyone else combined, and the only H-bombs in the world.
I don't think you do. And I think that's a false either/or scenario you're setting up.
MacArthur once called for nukes to be used on the battlefield vs the Chinese. If he chose that, it's fallout over US troops and to a lesser extent, even Japan. That itself sends butterflies into their history as a country which already'd been nuked, probably sending it politically to the left and/or neutral or pacifist inclined.
You're also probably talking about an even more polarized or fearful US society, an even more extreme McCarthyism that we'd today be calling MacArthurism.
And if MacArthur is regarded as a hero, there's far less reason he or his successor wouldn't choose to use them every time US goals were frustrated by other means. In Vietnam, in Angola, Nicaragua, etc.
And why would China necessarily collapse from a single nuke in the capital? (Remember Mao's famous "paper tiger" boast about nukes.) If they can survive tens of millions lost against the Japanese, one city bombed won't make them back down.
If Mao were not in the city, it'd possibly spur Chinese intervention in Indochina, guerillas sent to British Malay colonies, aid to the Huks in the Philippines, a whole host of other ways they'd want to retaliate.
If you're talking about a full scale nuclear series of attacks, even with China's limited number of nukes, you're still talking nuclear assaults on US troops in Korea and/or Japan, or the nuking of Taiwan.
Oh sure...it's only a "limited" nuclear war, which sets a precedent for nuke use to become routine in superpower wars or even proxy wars. If he'd do it against China, then maybe use nukes against Egypt under Nasser...then against...
China's "limited number of nukes"? Limited meaning NONE? The PRC didn't even test until 1964.
MacArthur beat Japan, he wasn't stupid, McCarty couldn't claim that, he was a politician. If MacArthur sees communists somewhere, believe me they are probably there.I don't think you do. And I think that's a false either/or scenario you're setting up.
MacArthur once called for nukes to be used on the battlefield vs the Chinese. If he chose that, it's fallout over US troops and to a lesser extent, even Japan. That itself sends butterflies into their history as a country which already'd been nuked, probably sending it politically to the left and/or neutral or pacifist inclined.
You're also probably talking about an even more polarized or fearful US society, an even more extreme McCarthyism that we'd today be calling MacArthurism.
More the pity for Vietnam, Angola, and Nicaragua, I think they'd be less likely to cause trouble for us, if they think the US will nuke them. MacArthru would probably destroy the Soviet Union too, and have American troops occupy the place, and reestablish democracy there. Guerilla resistance? Boom, one less troublesome Russian city!And if MacArthur is regarded as a hero, there's far less reason he or his successor wouldn't choose to use them every time US goals were frustrated by other means. In Vietnam, in Angola, Nicaragua, etc.
Communism is a central command economy, its controlled from the center in say Peking, if Peking goes up in a mushroom cloud, the communist command economy collapses as there is no one to write those five-year plans anymore. I think if MacArthur was sufficiently bloodthirsty, we could have a world situation similar to Harry Turtledoves In the Presence of Mine Enemies except with the USA in charge instead of the Third Reich - they basically have to stay on top and nuke anybody who looks like their developing nuclear weapons.And why would China necessarily collapse from a single nuke in the capital? (Remember Mao's famous "paper tiger" boast about nukes.) If they can survive tens of millions lost against the Japanese, one city bombed won't make them back down.
If MacArthur is operating in a total war frame of mind, the guerilla resistance will prove futile as if they give US troops too much trouble, ole Mac will pull them out and nuke the problem away. Probably by this time he really would be an "American Caesar".If Mao were not in the city, it'd possibly spur Chinese intervention in Indochina, guerillas sent to British Malay colonies, aid to the Huks in the Philippines, a whole host of other ways they'd want to retaliate.
If you're talking about a full scale nuclear series of attacks, even with China's limited number of nukes, you're still talking nuclear assaults on US troops in Korea and/or Japan, or the nuking of Taiwan.
In about 1953, we would have busted a nuke on Beijing. This is okay, though: in 1953 we have like 10 times more nukes than everyone else combined, and the only H-bombs in the world.
There was no love lost between Stalin and Mao, or between any leader of the PRC and the USSR. The hottest fight either country go into between 1954 and 1979 was with each other. It was only Western misunderstanding that made the two countries appear to be allies.
This is not to say that MacArthur would have been anything but an end of the world disaster for the U.S., but reality is reality. The U.S. during the time period in question was overwhelmingly strong. Even if we gave Ivan a LOT more credit than he deserved, Moscow knew the real score.
. MacArthur would've made Nixon look like a great president even considering Watergate, IMO.
Perhaps the Soviets knew how far they could push the US without going too far. Stalin and Krushchev both seemed to be fairly fond of brinkmanship.Moreover, if Ivan knew the real score, why all the provocations? Korea, Berlin, the Greek Civil War...
If not for Watergate he would have a much better reputation; certainly re-opening relations with China was a major accomplishment that ended up being overshadowed by later scandals.Nixon was a great president.