What if MacArthur called for nukes in the first month of the Korean War?

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
What if MacArthur called for use of nukes in the first summer of the Korean War, as US and ROK forces were being driven south? Probably after the 4 July North Korean defeat of the US forces at Osan.

[I figure this is not an unreasonable question to ask, because, MacArthur did call for nukes after the Chinese entered the war. But, the US and ROK were also losing in the midsummer of 1950 in Korea, with the North Koreans ultimately pushing further south that August than combined North Korean and Chinese forces would ever get at any later period]

What would MacArthur and his staff advocate as targets? Pyongyang? North Korean spearheads, now within the south? Is there any target of high tactical/operational utility still within North Korean borders?

What would the JCS think of this from a military point of view?

I don't know what the number of deliverable US atomic bombs was at the time, but I would imagine the JCS, if they consider the merits of atomic bombs, will want to ensure that very few are used so the rest are available to deter the USSR.

Is Truman guaranteed to have the same determination to not use atomic bombs at this point in the war?

On the one hand, he may see it as a bad precedent, bad for image, and disproportionate to the issue at hand. However, in this early stage of the war, with it clear there is no open Chinese and Soviet involvement, there may be less concern about escalation risk than after the Chinese entry.

If the US does use atomics in the summer (If Truman would never approve if the idea is MacArthur's, we could change the PoD to have the POTUS, be it Truman or Dewey or someone else, be the one to originate the idea of atomic escalation), what is the effect?

Before we consider escalation, how are the North Koreans going to react? And would atomic bombs only be used in conjunction with a demand that North Korea submit to UN occupation, or would there be room for North Korea to retreat or surrender in place without submitting occupation being demanded like after the the 1991 Gulf War?
 
I can safely bet my whole wallet that they wouldn't drop a nuke at the KPA if they are at South Korea's territory.
 
>Before we consider escalation, how are the North Koreans going to react?

Politically intransigent. The party survived the failure of political guerrilla war and deindustrialisation by terror bombing historically. While maintaining political control of the areas under their military control.

From the military perspective they're already far beyond their culminating point and will disintegrate as historically.

So it comes down to PRC CCP military interest.

The "new imperialist war" line is incidentally proved right and the Tankies appear justified in the fraternal parties. Peace fronts outside the US are likely to pull better than historically.

And there's no need for friendly journalists to publish about fleas.

Yours,
Sam R.
 
The germ war allegations.

Regardless of whether biological weapons were deployed in 1952, there will be no reason for journalists and states to promulgate the claims, as the atomic genie will be out of the bottle preempting any potential deployment and the need for a propaganda campaign from peace-loving peoples world wide will be obviated by the propaganda campaign regarding atomic weapons made by peace-loving peoples world wide.

North Korea might end up LESS deindustrialised incidentally.

yours,
Sam R.
 
There's also a question of how many nukes you'd use. Just spitballing, they had about 300 warheads at this point, but you don't want to use them all in Korea and China when you're still using them to provide a general deterrent against any kind of USSR aggression in Western Europe. These are also relatively smaller weapons, at least as far as we think of them, because they're pre thermonuclear devices.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
There's also a question of how many nukes you'd use. Just spitballing, they had about 300 warheads at this point, but you don't want to use them all in Korea and China when you're still using them to provide a general deterrent against any kind of USSR aggression in Western Europe. These are also relatively smaller weapons, at least as far as we think of them, because they're pre thermonuclear devices.

Indeed they are smaller weapons, and mostly being saved "for the senior prom"- the JCS would probably be wary of any proposal to use more than 10 tactically, or attacking more than one or two large cities as a terror weapon.
 
There's also a question of how many nukes you'd use. Just spitballing, they had about 300 warheads at this point, but you don't want to use them all in Korea and China when you're still using them to provide a general deterrent against any kind of USSR aggression in Western Europe. These are also relatively smaller weapons, at least as far as we think of them, because they're pre thermonuclear devices.
1950 369
1951 640
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Regardless of whether biological weapons were deployed in 1952, there will be no reason for journalists and states to promulgate the claims, as the atomic genie will be out of the bottle preempting any potential deployment and the need for a propaganda campaign from peace-loving peoples world wide will be obviated by the propaganda campaign regarding atomic weapons made by peace-loving peoples world wide.

North Korea might end up LESS deindustrialised incidentally.

yours,
Sam R.

Got it, after all, why talks about germs when you can talk about atomic destruction plain for all to see.


Would employment of nuclear bombs in the short-term kill #s exceeding the civilian casualty total’s of OTL’s war?


If nuclear “taboo” is broken, and the U.S. considers them a weapon of first-resort, who will “apply” them to military challenges next, and where? Where will the USSR first use those weapons, if at all?

Do Japan and Western Europe remain in alliances with the U.S. or decouple themselves from this American “wild card”?
 
Top