[grey_whiskers]

Doesn't matter. Even a Minuteman would be able to get there in...oh, half an hour.

WE should've nuked Stalin in 1946 when we had the chance. Talk about your peace dividend!

[mkjessup]

WE should've nuked Stalin in 1946 when we had the chance.

In 1946, the U.S. had only a handful of atomic bombs in the inventory, and at the time that MacArthur was calling for atomic bombing of the ChiComs, we only had 13 atomic bombs and those weapons were needed to deter the Soviet Union from invading Western Europe.

Had Truman agreed with MacArthur, the ChiComs would very likely have absorbed as many atomic strikes as we could toss at them, because they had (and have) a population surplus that is the perfect definition of "cannon fodder". But in such a hypothetical situation, it would have allowed the Soviets to sweep clear to the Atlantic coast because neither the U.S. or any of our allies in Europe had sufficient forces to slow down, let alone stop the Soviet Red Army.

Nuking Stalin would have been a "feel good" operation (just like nuking Chairman Mao) but the results would have been unfavorable for the West, to put it mildly.

At least in 1946 thru 1950.

[sam_paine]

WE should've nuked Stalin in 1946 when we had the chance. Talk about your peace dividend!

Such a peace dividend could well have been that a guilty US conscience would've even more widely embraced Socialism.

The Stalinists would've gladly sacrificed the Rodina to gain such a massive world-wide anti-capitalist propaganda coup.