No Pershing II?

"Iron Destinies, Lost opportunities (Charles Morris)" which I read several months back, mentioned that the Carter then the Reagan administrations had serious misgivings about the Pershing II IRBM because it interfered with the "flexible response" doctrine preferred in Washington. It was felt that by insisting on a dual key system for the missiles, the W. German gov welded the USA to them; it just might have meant "trading Chicago for Hamburg", in the parlance of the day.
IMO the only beneficial role they played was when they were ceded via the INF treaty in 1987.
In light of how controversial the missiles were in Europe (99 luftballoons etc.), what if they were never deployed?
 
The Peace Movement wouldn't be crying blood, murder and the 4th Reich whenever a German Tornado makes a refuelling stop at an Italian Airfield.
 

Cook

Banned
The Peace Movement wouldn't be crying blood, murder and the 4th Reich whenever a German Tornado makes a refuelling stop at an Italian Airfield.

Nah, they’d still be doing that, right up until the money from Moscow dries up.
 
US-USSR relations might be better. Maybe we'd see more, earlier arms control treaties. ABLE ARCHER 83 might have been just an uneventful war game rather than (possibly) a nuclear near-miss, but that would be pushing things.
 
Top