WI: UN/SK Victory in the Korean War with nukes?

[KuboCaskett]

People often talk about what if the Korean War ended in a Southern victory (that basically reunifies the peninsula) or one where nukes get used on China but why not both? Granted this would have to take either the reluctance of Truman to accept the usage of nuclear weapons or his absence to accomplish this. And it's already been pointed out that Stalin would not necessarily attack the West in response to the atomic bombings unless his mentality takes a beating from say a stroke or a slip on the floor.

If the nuclear weapons do get used on China which prompts them to back off from attacking the UN and basically allows Seoul to reunify the peninsula, how can this affect geopolitics? how will this nuclear victory affect the UN itself?

Will this set a precedent for other conflicts where the UN would intervene?

 

[Vikingstar]

I think it would both accelerate the nuclear arms race, and open the door to more frequent use of tactical nuclear weapons. And the various bad actor countries would see that only by possessing nukes themselves would thay have a chance against the United States.

 

[KuboCaskett]

I think it would both accelerate the nuclear arms race, and open the door to more frequent use of tactical nuclear weapons. And the various bad actor countries would see that only by possessing nukes themselves would thay have a chance against the United States.

Yet somehow I can see that it would ironically make both the Western and Eastern blocs less willing to rely on nukes in their warplans by the 60's.

 

[ppaul16]

The amount of nukes used on China might lead to other actions, if China gets hit really hard maybe Chiang Kai-shek decides it's a good time to try to invade the mainland?

 

[KuboCaskett]

The amount of nukes used on China might lead to other actions, if China gets hit really hard maybe Chiang Kai-shek decides it's a good time to try to invade the mainland?

Maybe, but the US would be hesitant to use him considering his corrupt track record; my best bet is using a "Free China" movement to destabilize the PRC in the midst of a war.

 

[The Byronic Hero]

If the US wins the Korean War and decimates China, what happens to MacArthur? Does he stay in the Army influencing forces and Cold War conflicts or does he make a successful run at the Presidency in '52?

 

[pattontank12]

If the US wins the Korean War and decimates China, what happens to MacArthur? Does he stay in the Army influencing forces and Cold War conflicts or does he make a successful run at the Presidency in '52?

"I like Mac" anyone?

 

[KuboCaskett]

If the US wins the Korean War and decimates China, what happens to MacArthur? Does he stay in the Army influencing forces and Cold War conflicts or does he make a successful run at the Presidency in '52?

My guess is that MacArthur is hailed as a "hero" even though he ended up setting a bad precedent for mankind regardless of how legit his concern of defeating Red China was; not that the Chicoms shouldn't be kicked out of Korea mind you.

And speaking of kicked, I can't imagine the USSR would be comfy with an international organization (which is the UN) that basically allowed the West to trash not just North Korea but the PRC with atomic weapons; if anything the USSR would end up leaving the organization for good, perhaps as a protest of sorts.

 

[Download]

Yet somehow I can see that it would ironically make both the Western and Eastern blocs less willing to rely on nukes in their warplans by the 60's.

How exactly? They would have both set a precedent for it and shown they can be used in the tactical role.

 

[KuboCaskett]

How exactly? They would have both set a precedent for it and shown they can be used in the tactical role.

I suppose you're right, previously I thought that the nuking of China would somehow scare off both sides from using nukes but at least with what you're saying, that nukes would stay being tactical, i.e. less chance of being strategic which means cities are less likely to be nuked.