The Case for the Nuclear Option

[maxparrish]

The excellent analysis by Edward Luttwak in the August 1982 issue of Commentary Magazine (link), (which I will send a PDF copy of upon DM request) makes a case for a vital nuclear option in the Ukraine War (special military option) and indeed illustrates it. Ukraine is not a perfect country by any means but it is certainly better than Russia as controlled by Putin. Our response should be effective, and not limited to the "coordinated cries of anguish and nicely orchestrated hand-wringing" (original phrase by William Safire, a New York Times columnist (link to Safire article)

He wrote those words relating to similar Soviet aggression against Poland, now playing out in similar manner as the unprovoked attack by Putin against Ukraine. Conventional defense, as we have seen in Mariopol, is allowing atrocities. As Luttwak pointed out, “the European system of peaceful construction needs is a preclusive method of protection, not ultimate victory after much destruction and millions of deaths.” P. 14 of Luttwak article. As the article further points out “If NATO could not hold the front by non-nuclear combat, it would warn the Soviet Union that (small-yield) nuclear weapons would be used to strike at the invading Soviet forces. And then it would strike with such weapons if the warning went unheeded.”

With regard to actual casualties of such an approach “(t)he entire "software" of discipline, of morale, of unit cohesion and esprit de corps and all the practices and habits that sustain the authority of sergeants, officers, and political commissars, are simply not built to withstand such terror as nuclear weapons would cause-even if at the end of the day it were to be discovered that the dead on all sides were surprisingly few.

One of the reasons that opposition to nuclear methodology is almost entirely on the liberal side of the political spectrum is that the Soviet Union and now the Russians have stoked fear of full-scale nuclear winter. The Russians are, from a practical standpoint, the only logical aggressors. The West is the only logical user of defensive nuclear weapons. That is why I favor the “nuclear option” being alive and well. We do not need to fight this conflict to the last Ukrainian.

Apparently the wisdom I discovered in Luttwak's article is slightly different than your own. He wrote: "Whether nuclear or not, the workings of deterrence depend on threats of punishment that others will find believable."

Assuming one could get NATO members to agree (and they would not) would it have been believable to Putin that NATO threats to "punish" his invasion with the use of tactical nuclear weapons in the face of Russia's ten to one advantage in tactical nuclear warheads?

I think not. Unlike the cold war NATO no longer has nuclear tipped cruise and regional ballistic missiles. Nor do NATO warships. All it has are 200 or so free fall bombs compared to Russia's vast array of 2500 tactical nukes on long range ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and perhaps field artillery. Keeping such a war on a tactical level would be self-defeating, and quickly present the US with a choice...to use larger strategic nuclear weapons from submarines and land based silos, over the issue of Ukraine?

Foolishly the US/Nato has given up its ability to defend itself on a tactical level by retiring its vast nuclear inventory. The bottom line is in a conventional war NATO wins, in a tactical nuclear war Russia wins, and in a strategic war both sides lose.

Luttwak wrote in an era where the roles were reversed. Which is why Russia has promised first use of tactical or greater nuclear weapons if it fears its "existence" is threatened.

 

[Ahlevah]

You do realize there’s a whole lot of options between “start a global thermonuclear war” and “surrender” right?

Yeah. Talk to the nice totalitarian. Invade. Send partisans weapons and hope they can defeat the guy with the tanks. Your turn.

We fought World War Two because we were attacked by the forces of Imperial Japan. Most Americans were perfectly happy sitting on the sidelines up until that point.

Yeah. And then we invaded North Africa, Sicily, France. Europe was the main theater of that war for the United States. Turns out letting Hitler play fuehrer almost into 1942 wasn’t a good plan.

Ah yes, “free”. The Greeks, to name just one example, might have a thing or two to say about that

Following WWII, the Greek government asked Truman for aid because it faced a communist insurgency. Do you think the Greeks would have been better off being behind the Iron Curtain and firmly within the Soviet orbit? So yeah, Marshall Plan aid as opposed to starvation and the wonderful world of communism living under the Soviet thumb for almost have a century. Seems like a no-brainer.

 

[Tigerace117]

Yeah. Talk to the nice totalitarian. Invade. Send partisans weapons and hope they can defeat the guy with the tanks. Your turn.



Yeah. And then we invaded North Africa, Sicily, France. Europe was the main theater of that war for the United States. Turns out letting Hitler play fuehrer almost into 1942 wasn’t a good plan.



Following WWII, the Greek government asked Truman for aid because it faced a communist insurgency. Do you think the Greeks would have been better off being behind the Iron Curtain and firmly within the Soviet orbit? So yeah, Marshall Plan aid as opposed to starvation and the wonderful world of communism living under the Soviet thumb for almost have a century. Seems like a no-brainer.

Gee, all of which have a MUCH lower likelihood of leaving America glowing in the dark.

Considering what laughably pathetic shape the US military was in, going to war any earlier wouldn’t actually have helped one bit.

Gee, and then we sponsored a coup by a bunch of psychotic thugs who tortured and murdered numerous Greeks in the name of “anti communism”.

Greek junta - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

“ The military government was given support by the United States as a Cold War ally, due to its proximity to the Eastern European Soviet bloc, and the fact that the previous Truman administration had given the country millions of dollars in economic aid to discourage Communism. U.S. support for the junta, which was staunchly anti-Communist, is claimed to be the cause of rising anti-Americanism in Greece during and following the junta's undemocratic rule.[65]”

But hey, I’m sure the thousands thrown in prison would be delighted to know that at least they weren’t behind the Iron Curtain

 

[Ahlevah]

Gee, all of which have a MUCH lower likelihood of leaving America glowing in the dark.

The thing about military strategy is it’s full of paradoxes. We avoid destroying the world by promising we will destroy it. You have a weapon but promise not to use it if you need it. In your desire to avoid destruction, you invite it. Don’t you think there’s a possibility that if an invader knows he’ll be met with a nuclear wall of death he might refrain from attacking you in the first place? On the other hand, what would stop him if he had overwhelming conventional power and he knows you won’t revert to using anything else? That realization seems to be working with Joe Biden at the moment. But that knowledge only comes from a credible threat.

Considering what laughably pathetic shape the US military was in, going to war any earlier wouldn’t actually have helped one bit.

So pencil you in the “surrender” column then?

Gee, and then we sponsored a coup by a bunch of psychotic thugs who tortured and murdered numerous Greeks in the name of “anti communism”.

Leftists like to consider everything in a vacuum. Greece today is a democracy. It IS free. In an alternate reality without the U.S., there is a strong possibility that wouldn’t have happened. But I guess you would have preferred we support the people attacking and killing people like the Greek communists who murdered our CIA station chief in front of his wife. I’ve seen the same argument leveled against the U.S. for its support of Chun Doo-huan in South Korea. But who gave that nation a chance at democracy in the first place at the cost of almost 40,000 Americans lives? And take your pick as to who’s better off today: North Koreans, or South Koreans.

But hey, I’m sure the thousands thrown in prison would be delighted to know that at least they weren’t behind the Iron Curtain

Then there are the tens of millions who’ve died under communist totalitarianism, but then we’re faced with the realization that they can’t know anything because they’re all dead.

 

[iguanaman]

Well there you go: New York City "Very Liberals" are in the bag for launching nukes.

What about pikes with heads on them? Is that on the table?

If it is Putin's head on a pike then yes by all means, He richly deserves the fate of Mussolini.

 

[Schism]

If it is Putin's head on a pike then yes by all means, He richly deserves the fate of Mussolini.

You can't beat the Putin's of this world by becoming the Putin's of this world.

 

[Tigerace117]

The thing about military strategy is it’s full of paradoxes. We avoid destroying the world by promising we will destroy it. You have a weapon but promise not to use it if you need it. In your desire to avoid destruction, you invite it. Don’t you think there’s a possibility that if an invader knows he’ll be met with a nuclear wall of death he might refrain from attacking you in the first place? On the other hand, what would stop him if he had overwhelming conventional power and he knows you won’t revert to using anything else? That realization seems to be working with Joe Biden at the moment. But that knowledge only comes from a credible threat.



So pencil you in the “surrender” column then?



Leftists like to consider everything in a vacuum. Greece today is a democracy. It IS free. In an alternate reality without the U.S., there is a strong possibility that wouldn’t have happened. But I guess you would have preferred we support the people attacking and killing people like the Greek communists who murdered our CIA station chief in front of his wife. I’ve seen the same argument leveled against the U.S. for its support of Chun Doo-huan in South Korea. But who gave that nation a chance at democracy in the first place at the cost of almost 40,000 Americans lives? And take your pick as to who’s better off today: North Koreans, or South Koreans.



Then there are the tens of millions who’ve died under communist totalitarianism, but then we’re faced with the realization that they can’t know anything because they’re all dead.

Gee bud, your threats only work though if the other side can’t easily obliterate you…..which makes a NATO first strike as dumb as ever. Furthermore, a NATO first strike would also kill a rather large number of the civilians we would supposedly be fighting to protect in the first place.

Yep, and a substantial amount of the populace absolutely despises us to this day for helping taking away their freedom. Greece was under absolutely no danger of a “communist takeover” once the civil war ended, which makes your excuses both pathetic and meaningless. But Greece was far from the only place we destroyed freedom in the name of “protecting” it.

I’ll give you a hint; up until South Korea democratized and the USSR fell apart, there wasn’t a whole hell of a lot of a difference between the two Korean states. So right up until 1990 or so that question would have been a wash. Once those who screamed hysterically about “communism” and thought that gave them the right to brutally murder their own people were booted out of power, South Korea finally developed into the country it is today. That’s despite the actions of people like you, not because of them.

Gee bud, I wasn’t aware a communist bullet kills you any more dead than one fired by Pinochet’s thugs….or those of the apartheid regime in South Africa…..or the Indonesian regime in East Timor….or any one of dozens of other examples.

 

[Tigerace117]

If it is Putin's head on a pike then yes by all means, He richly deserves the fate of Mussolini.

One of the nice thing about having nukes is not having to worry about that, funnily enough.

 

[iguanaman]

One of the nice thing about having nukes is not having to worry about that, funnily enough.

Hardly. The people of Italy sealed Mussolini's fate and the Russian people can do the same with Putin. If they don't they have doomed themselves to generations of isolation and poverty. That is the "nice thing" about having the world shun you.

 

[Tigerace117]

Hardly. The people of Italy sealed Mussolini's fate and the Russian people can do the same with Putin.

Mussolini only met his fate after the Allies had effectively overrun the entirety of Italy. That’s not happening any time soon in Russia.

 

[iguanaman]

Mussolini only met his fate after the Allies had effectively overrun the entirety of Italy. That’s not happening any time soon in Russia.

It depends on how long the Russian people will tolerate the total isolation and poverty that the world will inflict on Russia as long as Putin still has his head. You do not understand the resolve that Putin has instilled in the world. He resurrected the evil empire with a vengeance.

 

[Tigerace117]

It depends on how long the Russian people will tolerate the total isolation and poverty that the world will inflict on Russia as long as Putin remains with a head.

“Total isolation”? Most of the world doesn’t want to get involved. The South African president outright blamed NATO for the war. Likewise, the countries in Southern Africa Russia supported against apartheid and European colonialism all have abstained, rather than condemned, Russia’s actions.

China, notably is only firming up its support for Russia. Americans really need to figure out that “the world” is larger than NATO member countries.

 

[iguanaman]

“Total isolation”? Most of the world doesn’t want to get involved. The South African president outright blamed NATO for the war. China, notably is only firming up its support for Russia. Americans really need to figure out that “the world” is larger than NATO member countries.

Yes you can dream of Putin being forgiven but it will never happen. Russia is done as a country.

 

[Tigerace117]

Yes you can dream of Putin being forgiven but it will never happen. Russia is done as a country.

As I already pointed out, most of the world doesn’t want to get involved.

And considering that America has more or less been “forgiven” for Iraq(outside of the “Third World”, that is) arguing that Russia is “done as a country” is laughable. The precedent says otherwise....rather clearly.

 

[Ahlevah]

Gee bud, your threats only work though if the other side can’t easily obliterate you…..which makes a NATO first strike as dumb as ever.

That’s why, in addition to tactical nukes, you possess a massive strategic arsenal so you can obliterate him, which makes THAT threat only effective if it’s credible as well.

Furthermore, a NATO first strike would also kill a rather large number of the civilians we would supposedly be fighting to protect in the first place.

So would an invasion of the entire continent. Why do you seem to think conventional weapons can’t kill people? We destroyed sixteen square miles of Tokyo and 100,000 Japanese in one night using incendiaries.

Yep, and a substantial amount of the populace absolutely despises us to this day for helping taking away their freedom. Greece was under absolutely no danger of a “communist takeover” once the civil war ended, which makes your excuses both pathetic and meaningless. But Greece was far from the only place we destroyed freedom in the name of “protecting” it.

“Absolutely” no danger? Have you ever heard the saying, “One man, one vote—once”? How about Venezuelans? Nicaraguans? Are they “absolutely under no danger of a communist takeover,” I mean considering that they’re “democracies” with no civil wars in sight? Let me clue you in on a secret: their citizens are fleeing these “democratic” regimes by the millions. And where do they want to flee to? Where else? To their “oppressors.” Next I suppose we’ll see Chileans fleeing north in a few years, since Latin Americans seem to have a love affair with Marxist-Leninist-inspired authoritarianism. And it will be our fault, just like it always is.

I’ll give you a hint; up until South Korea democratized and the USSR fell apart, there wasn’t a whole hell of a lot of a difference between the two Korean states.

What a ludicrous statement. So during that period, how many South Koreans defected to North Korea? I mean, since there were so many plump North Koreans celebrating life in their Asian Tiger paradise, you know? What would have stopped them?

Gee bud, I wasn’t aware a communist bullet kills you any more dead than one fired by Pinochet’s thugs….or those of the apartheid regime in South Africa…..or the Indonesian regime in East Timor….or any one of dozens of other examples.

Yeah, I know. We’re responsible for every ill l facing the planet. Ukrainians are already blaming us out of one side of their mouths for Putin’s invasion while thanking us out of the other for the aid we’ve given them. Just give it more time, though. In a few years leftists like you will have figured out a way to make us worse than Putin. But I harbor no doubt that the world is better off with an America in it than it would be without it.

 

[Tigerace117]

That’s why, in addition to tactical nukes, you possess a massive strategic arsenal so you can obliterate him, which makes THAT threat only effective if it’s credible as well.



So would an invasion of the entire continent. Why do you seem to think conventional weapons can’t kill people? We destroyed sixteen square miles of Tokyo and 100,000 Japanese in one night using incendiaries.



“Absolutely” no danger? Have you ever heard the saying, “One man, one vote—once”? How about Venezuelans? Nicaraguans? Are they “absolutely under no danger of a communist takeover,” I mean considering that they’re “democracies” with no civil wars in sight? Let me clue you in on a secret: their citizens are fleeing these “democratic” regimes by the millions. And where do they want to flee to? Where else? To their “oppressors.” Next I suppose we’ll see Chileans fleeing north in a few years, since Latin Americans seem to have a love affair with Marxist-Leninist-inspired authoritarianism. And it will be our fault, just like it always is.



What a ludicrous statement. So during that period, how many South Koreans defected to North Korea? I mean, since there were so many plump North Koreans celebrating life in their Asian Tiger paradise, you know? What would have stopped them?



Yeah, I know. We’re responsible for every ill l facing the planet. Ukrainians are already blaming us out of one side of their mouths for Putin’s invasion while thanking us out of the other for the aid we’ve given them. Just give it more time, though. In a few years leftists like you will have figured out a way to make us worse than Putin. But I harbor no doubt that the world is better off with an America in it than it would be without it.

None of which changes the fact that a NATO first strike would automatically receive a massive counter strike......even if we tried emptying our entire nuclear arsenal at them. It’s a flat out dumb idea.

The idea that Paris or Rome getting nuked would be no big deal “because conventional weapons kill people too!” is laughably dumb.

Ah, so in your fairy tale world the solution is to get rid of both the man AND voting, since that could lead to communism, ya know Nicaragua was a pretty blatant case of a karma coming back to bite a brutal tyrant in the ass and the US wetting it’s pants because we literally never learn from our mistakes and keep propping up the same old scumbags and then wondering why the locals don’t like us.

Venezuela, meanwhile, isn’t actually communist and never was, even under Chavez.

You do realize that people are fleeing places like El Salvador and Guatemala, where we sponsored all manner of psychotic thugs in the name of fighting communism, en masse......right?

What a joke. Chile isn’t “Marxist Leninist” either, and given what our guy Pinochet did there your hysterics ring hollow.

Almost as funny, in fact, as your desperation to defend South Korea’s dictatorship.

 

[Ahlevah]

“Total isolation”? Most of the world doesn’t want to get involved.

“Most of the world” is billions of people who live on a few dollars a day. Maybe Putin can buy computer chips from them? Get Zimbabwe to advance the Russian economy?

China, notably is only firming up its support for Russia. Americans really need to figure out that “the world” is larger than NATO member countries.

China has a lot more to lose than to gain by supporting Putin. But Xi will take China on a road to ruin, too, I imagine, if not now then down the road. He can’t help it. He’s a totalitarian just like his twin brother.

 

[WillyPete]

MAD doctrine answers these questions pretty directly.

Its a variant of the Prisoner's Dilemma, and the game theorists say the solution is to always mirror your opponents last move.

They escalate, we escalate, they launch, we launch. It's very simple, and it works for both sides.

On the nuclear front they have not escalated. So what do we do?

 

[Tigerace117]

“Most of the world” is billions of people who live on a few dollars a day. Maybe Putin can buy computer chips from them? Get Zimbabwe to advance the Russian economy?



China has a lot more to lose than to gain by supporting Putin. But Xi will take China on a road to ruin, too, I imagine, if not now then down the road. He can’t help it. He’s a totalitarian just like his twin brother.

Gee, between China and India I don’t think he’s too worried about Zimbabwe.

What, are we going to launch a nuclear first strike on them too? China’s a genocidal dictatorship and yet the West is still happily trading with them. Xi doesn’t seem to much care what the US says.

 

[Credence]

I'm not so sure that sitting in NYC, I would be all for nuclear war.

You may very well have a front-row seat to the consequences of that.

Exactly. Should a nuclear war ever happen; NYC will be the #1 target and I am on Long Island so it would affect me as well.

I did not vote; I would hope that whatever happens nukes would not be used and if they are I hope I die in the first attack as I would not want to live in a post nuclear world.

Having said that I do believe we should risk WWIII and the US and NATO fight with Ukraine. I would also hope Putin would not want to use nukes; no matter his threats

 

[Tigerace117]

Exactly. Should a nuclear war ever happen; NYC will be the #1 target and I am on Long Island so it would affect me as well.

I did not vote; I would hope that whatever happens nukes would not be used and if they are I hope I die in the first attack as I would not want to live in a post nuclear world.

Having said that I do believe we should risk WWIII and the US and NATO fight with Ukraine

“I hope there won’t be a nuclear war but I support the thing most likely to cause a nuclear war”.

Heck of a take

 

[Ahlevah]

Gee, between China and India I don’t think he’s too worried about Zimbabwe.

Oh, I thought you were pointing out how critical Africa is in the grand scheme of things.

China’s a genocidal dictatorship and yet the West is still happily trading with them. Xi doesn’t seem to much care what the US says.

Yes, we’re still trading with them, but I’m not so sure “happily” is the word I’d use to describe it. Corporations are starting to weigh the geopolitical risk and diversifying supply chains outside of China even as they continue to sell into it. It’s basically trade with the totalitarians at your own risk. China has a lot more to lose giving up access to the economies of the West than we do potentially losing access to China.

 

[Tigerace117]

Oh, I thought you were pointing out how critical Africa is in the grand scheme of things.



Yes, we’re still trading with them, but I’m not so sure “happily” is the word I’d use to describe it. Corporations are starting to weigh the geopolitical risk and diversifying supply chains outside of China even as they continue to sell into it. It’s basically trade with the totalitarians at your own risk. China has a lot more to lose giving up access to the economies of the West than we do potentially losing access to China.

Oh, South Africa certainly is, but I was more pointing out the fact that claiming Russia is or will be in “total isolation” is silly.

Slowly, grudgingly trying to potentially figure out what they might do if things heat up and they lose access to the Chinese consumer base is hardly a great sign of progress, and at the end of the day the CPC figures we need them a hell of a lot more than they need us.

 

[Ahlevah]

None of which changes the fact that a NATO first strike would automatically receive a massive counter strike......even if we tried emptying our entire nuclear arsenal at them. It’s a flat out dumb idea.

So maybe we should just hit them first anyway to forestall the massive conventional invasion that we know is coming because we’re foresworn the first use of nuclear tactical nuclear weapons? I mean, why wait?

Basically, up to this point you’ve said a lot about what you would not do in such a war, but you’ve said squat about what you would do. So I guess your default answer is to do nothing, which would make surrender the preferable option since it would minimize deaths. Hell, why not just invite them in? In that case we wouldn’t kill anybody. They would get the privilege.

Ah, so in your fairy tale world the solution is to get rid of both the man AND voting, since that could lead to communism, ya know

The fairy tale is thinking nations lacking the institutional framework to support democracy can somehow become democratic in a day. They can’t.

Nicaragua was a pretty blatant case of a karma coming back to bite a brutal tyrant in the ass and the US wetting it’s pants because we literally never learn from our mistakes and keep propping up the same old scumbags and then wondering why the locals don’t like us.

Yeah, they don’t like us. That’s why they’re coming here by the millions.

Venezuela, meanwhile, isn’t actually communist and never was, even under Chavez.

Yeah, I’ve heard that said over the years. Even the communists said they weren’t communists, rather they were “socialists.” For people who did enough crying about the evils of capitalism, you could have fooled me. I mean, how many Che posters and Cuban doctors do you need to see before you start to think that maybe these guys aren’t Jeffersonian democrats?

 

[Tigerace117]

So maybe we should just hit them first anyway to forestall the massive conventional invasion that we know is coming because we’re foresworn the first use of nuclear tactical nuclear weapons? I mean, why wait?

Basically, up to this point you’ve said a lot about what you would not do in such a war, but you’ve said squat about what you would do. So I guess your default answer is to do nothing, which would make surrender the preferable option since it would minimize deaths. Hell, why not just invite them in? In that case we wouldn’t kill anybody. They would get the privilege.



The fairy tale is thinking nations lacking the institutional framework to support democracy can somehow become democratic in a day. They can’t.



Yeah, they don’t like us. That’s why they’re coming here by the millions.



Yeah, I’ve heard that said over the years. Even the communists said they weren’t communists, rather they were “socialists.” For people who did enough crying about the evils of capitalism, you could have fooled me. I mean, how many Che posters and Cuban doctors do you need to see before you start to think that maybe these guys aren’t Jeffersonian democrats?

Gee, or maybe rather than starting a global thermonuclear war we actually use our brains, especially since we supposedly know all about this oncoming invasion.

Well gee, for starters I wouldn’t get American cities incinerated because the idea of nuking Russia gives some folks a boner

No, the fairy tale is thinking supporting brutal tyrants is a good thing “because communism”. I hate to break it to you but the despots we sponsored were not some “necessary step on the road to democracy”; they were just brutal despots.

Well gee, they need some way to escape the civil wars and death squads created as a result of American foreign policy, and America is relatively safer than home(unless, of course, you happen to make the mistake of speaking out against those despots).

Funnily enough, political ideologies have actual meanings. I get that to people like you anyone to the left of Pinochet is a “commie”, but that doesn’t actually change the facts, funnily enough.