Author Topic: Nuclear Weapons: The Only Way America Would Have Won the Vietnam War?  (Read 240 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DemolitionMan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,379
by Steve Weintz

Nuclear weapons still engender deep contradictions. The most powerful weapons ever devised serve no other purpose but to prevent their use by others. Some people in Washington, Moscow and Islamabad may still view them simply as extraordinary munitions and tilt towards their use, but the arguments the JASONs made in 1966 still hold up. And casual talk about "tossing a few nukes around" is as crazy now as it was then.

By February 1966, frustration with the U.S. bombing campaign against North Vietnam rose high enough to spur talk of going nuclear. Throughout the Vietnam War, such talk was mostly just that, but in 1966, it worried certain people enough to gin up a classified study of tactical nuclear weapons use in Southeast Asia. The study's authors—members of the JASONs, the Pentagon's "wise men"—concluded that any way you looked at it, nukes in 'Nam were a very bad ider

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/nuclear-weapons-the-only-way-america-would-have-won-the-22469
"Of Arms and Man I Sing"-The Aenid written by Virgil-Virgil commenced his epic story of Aeneas and the founding of Rome with the words: Arma virumque cano--"Of arms and man I sing.Aeneas receives full treatment in Roman mythology, most extensively in Virgil's Aeneid, where he is an ancestor of Romulus and Remus. He became the first true hero of Rome