US Plans after a best-case scenario Cuban Missile War

[Erizium]

In a scenario where the US manages to completely neutralize nukes on Cuba and suffers minor (less than ten) hits on the fifty states via other means (bombers, etc), how would the US deal with a world ravaged by nuclear war from London to Pyongyang?

I imagine Europe and the USSR would be utterly glassed. Major damage to the PRC from both sides, and certain locations in Korea and Japan, among others.

What would US policy afterwards look like in a Cold War gone hot scenario where it could say it "definitively" won the Cold War? Of course, a larger Marshall-plan esque effort to allied nations would be discussed, if said nations dont utterly despise the US for dragging them into the conflict.

Is the US going to double down on its role as a world policeman and even possibly threaten nuclear weapons against expansionist, the last Communist, or "non-democratic" states? Or would it simply turn isolationist?

 

[Thomas Jefferson]

I suspect even if only a few nukes struck the continental US, there would be a pretty strong backlash against the incumbent government. Either you get a pacifist president elected in 1964, or the US turns hard right and basically establishes a policy of preemptively nuking any foreigh power that looks like they might develop nuclear weapons in the near future.

 

[Blue cat]

In a scenario where the US manages to completely neutralize nukes on Cuba and suffers minor (less than ten) hits on the fifty states via other means (bombers, etc), how would the US deal with a world ravaged by nuclear war from London to Pyongyang?

I imagine Europe and the USSR would be utterly glassed. Major damage to the PRC from both sides, and certain locations in Korea and Japan, among others.

What would US policy afterwards look like in a Cold War gone hot scenario where it could say it "definitively" won the Cold War? Of course, a larger Marshall-plan esque effort to allied nations would be discussed, if said nations dont utterly despise the US for dragging them into the conflict.

Is the US going to double down on its role as a world policeman and even possibly threaten nuclear weapons against expansionist, the last Communist, or "non-democratic" states? Or would it simply turn isolationist?

I would suggest the US best case out come may well have envisioned minimal use of nuclear weapons by the Soviet Union.

 

[marathag]

I suspect even if only a few nukes struck the continental US, there would be a pretty strong backlash against the incumbent government. Either you get a pacifist president elected in 1964, or the US turns hard right and basically establishes a policy of preemptively nuking any foreigh power that looks like they might develop nuclear weapons in the near future.

JFK seen as blunting a Pearl Harbor attempt by the USSR, would win in a landslide

 

[Sam R.]

Capital reproduces the value form in an expanded form, but the degredation of capital goods and advanced labour power in other areas gives you a UK in 1815 scenario, with no European rivals, and a collapsed imperial system. So you see a reboot of imperialism without comparators. Also the US working class is politically liquidated because its desires stand in the way of imperium.