The fact that Johnson overruled Westmoreland actually shows the power of the so-called taboo in this case.https://twitter.com/kroenig/status/1048599315193778176 …
-
-
Replying to @NarangVipin
I mean, the argument I think that would be made is, did LBJ overrule because he felt some strong, not-purely-strategic reason that nukes shouldn't be used? Or was it pure strategy? The non-tabooers usually try to make latter argument.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @wellerstein
Absolutely. My basic point though is that just because Westmoreland may have wanted to use, it doesn’t necessarily undermine either tradition of non use or taboo.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @NarangVipin @wellerstein
Was also that moment during Gulf War where SecDef requested plan for usage of tactical nukes. From ”Destiny and Power” by Jon Meacham.pic.twitter.com/rGvwbv1f5w
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ZCarlander @NarangVipin
Tannenwald's book (which I highly recommend even if you don't want to believe that there's a "taboo" motivating decisions) goes over instances in many Presidential administrations where someone pushed for thinking about nuclear use in war. It was disturbingly common.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I think it's almost MORE interesting to talk about the administrations where it was just clearly 100% off the table. I get the sense that this is how it was seen in Clinton admin (just totally unthinkable), and guess that Obama admin probably was similar.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.