- cross-posted to:
- historymemes@piefed.social
- cross-posted to:
- historymemes@piefed.social
You must log in or # to comment.
Explanation: After the election of President Eisenhower in the USA during the ongoing Korean War, Eisenhower opted to, considering the position of China in North Korea, prefer making peace to a continuation of the war. While the war goals had expanded and contracted over the two years of the Korean War, it could be credibly argued that the core cause of the war at the start - UN forces preventing the North Korean invasion of South Korea - had been achieved, with the frontline settled roughly at the pre-war borders.
US General MacArthur was… less inclined towards peace. He actually successfully scuttled a previous peace negotiation by the previous US president, Truman, in 1951 by his public posturing. He also advocated for the nuclear obliteration of the Chinese border as a means of ‘winning’ the war. He was removed from command by Truman for his… many missteps in this vein.
As a Chinese American, I kinda WTFed at it when I first read the history about it online 💀
I’m glad nowadays we have more countries with nukes to balance each other…
Can you imagine if only ONE country has nukes… We’d be at the mercy of either: USA or France or Russia or UK (British Imperialism flashbacks 👀) or CCP-Controlled PRC…
More nukes makes a more peaceful ironically lol
For 5 years the US was the only country with nukes.
funny as usa was responsible for china obtaining hydrogen bombs, by causing the chinese/communist persecution. 1 nuclear scientists fled to china and helpe developed thier own hydrogen bombs, and like wise china helped pakistan obtained thier own nukes to buffer against INDIA.
Truman wanted to carpet bomb Russia with nukes. The only thing stopping him was not enough bombs could be made.
MacArthur was a stupid sonofabitch, but it is hard to say which one is the worse timeline so far. I feel like we’ve been at the precipice of nuclear annihilation for my entire life, that perhaps striking while China was weak could have been fortuitous. For me personally, the election would come down to social policy differences.
This might be a controversial opinion, but fucking nuking the border of China and escalating nuclear tensions with the Soviet Union, at best, would not have resulted in the decrease of nuclear tensions in your lifetime. Exempting the scenario where a full-scale nuclear exchange might have already occurred before or during your lifetime.
Maybe, maybe not. The Soviet’s first (successful) atomic ballistic missile test was in 1949, exactly one year before the Korean War. China had theirs in 1964. They were at that moment in time far behind the USA.
Now we have to deal with the USA, Russia, and China all pointing nukes at each other and sabre rattling. North Korea literally launches ballistic missiles into the ocean as a method of threatening Japan.
And all the while, people are suffering under the rule of cruel dictatorships.
P.S. I can tell you with great confidence that the controversial take on the Fediverse is my willingness to fight against autocratic despots.
Maybe, maybe not. The Soviet’s first (successful) atomic ballistic missile test was in 1949, exactly one year before the Korean War. China had theirs in 1964. They were at that moment in time far behind the USA.
… okay? Unless your plan is to follow that up with an invasion of both the Soviet Union and China, that doesn’t fucking change my point? Normalizing the use of nuclear weapons to achieve political goals at the very start of the Cold War is not going to result in a less tense environment for the possibility of nuclear exchanges between nuclear powers.
Now we have to deal with the USA, Russia, and China all pointing nukes at each other and sabre rattling. North Korea literally launches ballistic missiles into the ocean as a method of threatening Japan.
And how would glassing the Chinese border have changed any of this except for North Korea?
I could be underestimating how constantly drunk Stalin was, but I like to think he wouldn’t engage in battles that he has absolutely zero chance of winning. A world where China has been taken off the board is a world where USSR has less allies and is surrounded on all sides. Just like China is doing as Russia is losing, the USSR would have done next to nothing while China lost.
Any alternate reality where the CCP doesn’t exist is enviable to some degree. We should have brought the entirety of China to a knee when we could have.
I could be underestimating how constantly drunk Stalin was, but I like to think he wouldn’t engage in battles that he has absolutely zero chance of winning.
The US public was tired of the Korean War in 1953. How would Stalin estimate, do you think, the American public supporting an unprovoked nuclear assault and invasion against a much larger and more dangerous enemy in Communist China and the Soviet Union simultaneously, with probably the withdrawal of the entirety of our major allies from the war?
A world where China has been taken off the board is a world where USSR has less allies and is surrounded on all sides.
… which is exactly why the USSR would not have let China fall at that juncture. “Just let your enemies isolate you, just stand by and do nothing” is not a very likely course of action for the USSR.
Any alternate reality where the CCP doesn’t exist is enviable to some degree.
Fuck no. There are always worse scenarios on every aspect of reality. That’s the same kind of campism tankies use when they say that “any” outcome to mass unrest is better than the status quo. It reflects a distinct and severe lack of imagination, or else an irrational disposition towards the status in question that is entirely divorced from actual moral or strategic concerns.
We should have brought the entirety of China to a knee when we could have.
…
In the early 1950s, we’ve already established that the USSR lacks the means to put up much of a retaliation even if they wanted to. Every moment after that point was too late, it’s why the USA has effectively lost the Cold War to China with the reelection of their favored candidate Trump.
In the early 1950s, we’ve already established that the USSR lacks the means to put up much of a retaliation even if they wanted to.
Other than the overwhelming concern of conventional fucking war, the Soviet Union had several dozen nuclear weapons ready to go during the Korean War. Or are we going to glass the Soviet Union now too, with our early 1950s stockpile and delivery systems?
Every moment after that point was too late, it’s why the USA has effectively lost the Cold War to China with the reelection of their favored candidate Trump.
… China’s favored candidate was by no means Trump, in any of the three elections.
It’s funny that today the general idea of the rest of the world is “we should have stopped the US when it was weak, fighting the British”.
If you dislike the USA to such an extent then surely you should be happy about such hypothetical conflicts, yes? Perhaps you simple dislike the idea of certain countries losing?
Given that the USA is the leader of the world’s largest mutual self defence pacts, and that almost all of China’s allies are non-democracies, I would feel extremely comfortable wagering that the world at large prefers the USA and at the very least considers them a necessary evil.
The US WAS the leader of NATO. Now it’s just the bully and everyone is starting to think that maybe it wasn’t that good of a deal depend on them.
perhaps striking while China was weak could have been fortuitous
If China had gotten nuked by foreign powers, China today would’ve been more authoritarian, people would be a lot more nationalistic, and poverty would’ve been a lot worse, which in turn means that CCP would’ve cracked-down even harder on any dissent in order to try to maintain their grip on power and probably do more executions instead of today where they merely detain you or make you do those forced apologies
Being anti-CCP is fine, but don’t forget about the civillians under their jurisdiction that are innocent to geopolitical conflicts.
How do you get more authoritarian than a military expansionist dictatorship that recently finished a round of guillotine musical chairs with his top generals and sponsors other smaller dictatorships across the entire earth.
“External Threats” and “National Security” are reasons why hardliners get into power…
As someone who was fortunate enough to leave the regime, if that insane “nuking China” thing happened, PRC would never have opened the borders (or if it ever did, it’d be very controlled and not as open as current timeline) and it’d be another North Korea situation (but more massive) and mass poverty and mass starvations well into the 21st century.
This timeline, Chinese people can actually leave. I mean my family is one of the many that left.
So… If that nuking happened, then do you think PRC would still allow people to leave in that timeline?
That timeline would have a lot of Anti-Chinese sentinment (as in hatred of Chinese People, not just the government)
There’s no chance I can even get in the US, I mean just look at how the west closed borders to Russians… so now Russian dissidents have a hard time trying to escape.
I mean perhaps it’d satisfy a lot of US White nationalists, but there’d be a Billion people suffering… that’s not good…
But disclaimer: I’m Chinese American so perhaps I’m biased and have sympathy for people in China that have nothing to do with the CCP.
Doesn’t that whole argument kind of hinge upon the notion that China would not lose against USA even after nuclear bombardment? I’m not saying that dropping nukes on Japan was justified, that was horrific and it to this day creates animosity among the Japanese, but at the same time you cannot deny Japan is a better nation today than the empire was.
That consequentialist in me has to weigh atrocities as impartially as possible.
Perhaps, but I’m trying to defend this timeline lol.
Because I really do not like the “I get stuck in PRC” timeline, even just the thought of it makes me have an existential crisis.
I like my Youtube, and video games, and the open internet (open for now at least, who knows about the future 🤷♂️), the idea of living behind that firewall sounds kinda depressing (VPNs are not exactly reliable).
But the again with something as drastic as one country nuking another… China might not even have any internet at all, and become like North Korea…
Like what do people even do for fun in that timeline? Play with rocks? 😭
No thanks, I like to keep the ability to bingewatch my “Non-Approved” “Counterrevolutionary” western media. (I mean like… did you hear, they limit video games to 1 hour for those under 18, like bruh wtf, anything fun is banned)
“The US after the second civil war is a better country. It’s a shame there has to be millions of dead people and some nuclear wastelands but now it’s a nicer neighbor”
Does this sound right to you?
You won’t see my ass complaining if a large enough group overthrew the Trump admin and made senate representation proportional. That sounds fucking right as rain.
Doesn’t that whole argument kind of hinge upon the notion that China would not lose against USA even after nuclear bombardment?
It would ‘win’ the Korean War, but how would that change the Chinese government unless you’re also proposing an invasion of China to go along with the border you’ve just nuked?
I never said anything about the boarder, and I think nuking is way past the stage of discussing whether or not to invade.
I never said anything about the boarder,
That’s MacArthur’s suggestion, which is what the topic started on.
and I think nuking is way past the stage of discussing whether or not to invade.
… so your proposal here is to start an indefinite war and occupation which will alienate us from every major ally in the 1950s, kill literal millions of Chinese civilians and God knows how many American and Chinese soldiers, risk the Soviet Union directly entering the war to defend China, especially as this was before the Sino-Soviet split, and normalize the use of nuclear weapons, in exchange for…
… the possibility of overthrowing the PRC?
How do you get more authoritarian than a military expansionist dictatorship that recently finished a round of guillotine musical chairs with his top generals and sponsors other smaller dictatorships across the entire earth.
It can always get worse. Fuck, just looking at North Korea shows that it could very easily be worse.
China literally enables the existence of North Korea. That exists because of and as an extension of China.
Okay, that doesn’t change the fact that China itself could very much be worse, as the much worse polity of North Korea shows by how horrific it is.
