Quite a lineup on nuclear weapons in today's @washingtonpost Outlook section!
-
-
Replying to @Joshua_Pollack @washingtonpost
First,
@vermontgmg on the deep, ingrained reluctance to order a nuclear first strike:https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/would-the-president-actually-order-the-use-of-nuclear-weapons/2017/08/18/a7ff0ed8-837d-11e7-ab27-1a21a8e006ab_story.html?utm_term=.9d967f9e3815 …9 replies 3 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @Joshua_Pollack @WardHayesWilson and
In both cases, Trump can easily be a counter-example if you want him to be. Not clear he has Truman's taboo. Not clear he cares about allies
5 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @wellerstein @Joshua_Pollack and
They (taboo and deterrence) are unmeasurable, untestable, and not scientific in any serious sense.
6 replies 2 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WardHayesWilson @Joshua_Pollack and
The evidence we do have on deterrence is that it is not 100% perfect as a strategy — it can fail for many reasons.
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wellerstein @Joshua_Pollack and
Was Khrushchev deterred by the danger of nuclear war in Cuba? Or did he just get a deal he liked? We can’t know.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
We can also say that the willingness of the US to strike a "deal" with him definitely gave him the means to diffuse situation on his end.
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.