If there's a Russian fleet that's concentrated. I think that would work.
What Nixon needs at that time is something which will look good to an enraged public. So, maybe nuking rather than simply destroying the missile sites, or nuking the Soviet forces, or a naval base, but probably not Soviet soil.
After all, Krushchev isn't completely autonomous. He as a Central Committee to which to report, and he has many of the same concerns.
Whatever it is, hopefully if the local guy uses a nuke, by then the two commanders in chief can talk, and arrange tit-for-tat which will localize the conflict.
But at the point the Soviet commander lets fly with one, I think Nixon needs to keep the population happy. There's no question the US can "take" Cuba. But there have to be some assurances nukes can be kept from US and Soviet soil.
At least that's how it seems to me.
Arf (often wrong, never in doubt)
Off Topic » in reply to very good points
Sure.
The whole thread (96 posts)
- What the hell do conservatives want? An alternate history project
- Points of divergence...
- But, but, but
- A couple of suggestions. No Social Security, and no Pearl Harbor
- The irony of it all
- This is what I think you're proposing.
- ( A hint for 'em.) Tony Blair would be speaking German. (n/t)
- re: What the hell do conservatives want? An alternate history project
- Not gonna happen: Conservatives have no imagination.
- I wish I was that good
- Have faith
- I'm so damned tired....
- Have faith
- There seems to have been a "Publius" back there. (n/t)
- A problem
- I'll go, if someone will lead.
