Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BigBearJohn

(11,410 posts)
Sat Sep 14, 2019, 03:20 AM Sep 2019

Trump's Acting National Security Adviser Said Nuclear War With USSR Was Winnable

Questioning “mutual assured destruction,” Charles Kupperman called nuclear conflict “in large part a physics problem.”

President Donald Trump’s acting national security adviser, former Reagan administration official Charles Kupperman, made an extraordinary and controversial claim in the early 1980s: nuclear conflict with the USSR was winnable and that “nuclear war is a destructive thing but still in large part a physics problem.”

Kupperman’s suggestion that the U.S. could triumph in a nuclear war went against dominant theories of mutually assured destruction and ignored the long-term destabilizing effects that such hostilities would have on the planet’s health and global politics.

Kupperman, appointed to his new post on Tuesday after Trump fired his John Bolton from the job, argued it was possible to win a nuclear war “in the classical sense,” and that the notion of total destruction stemming from such a superpower conflict was inaccurate. He said that in a scenario in which 20 million people died in the U.S. as opposed to 150 million, the nation could then emerge as the stronger side and prevail in its objectives.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/charles-kupperman-nuclear-war-trump-nsa_n_5d7b9809e4b03b5fc88212fd

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump's Acting National Security Adviser Said Nuclear War With USSR Was Winnable (Original Post) BigBearJohn Sep 2019 OP
We must not allow..... Turbineguy Sep 2019 #1
is he insane? rampartc Sep 2019 #2
JHC Cosmocat Sep 2019 #3
So somehow this genius found someone crazier Cosmocat Sep 2019 #4
Yeah, shocker. WINNING! SammyWinstonJack Sep 2019 #5
Sure, let's have ONLY 20 million people die. DFW Sep 2019 #6

rampartc

(5,403 posts)
2. is he insane?
Sat Sep 14, 2019, 04:47 AM
Sep 2019

20 million casualties in a war (3 or 4 big cities) might be survivable, but winning?

20 million casualties might occur in an exchange with, oh, n korea or iran, but Russia or the ussr? maybe a few thousand or a million Alaskans and Navajo and a scattering of back woodsmen and preppers will not rebuild civilization from post apocalyptic destruction.

DFW

(54,349 posts)
6. Sure, let's have ONLY 20 million people die.
Sat Sep 14, 2019, 08:36 AM
Sep 2019

OK, so we lose the entire populations of Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana and Kentucky. Does that still sound so good?

Maybe I shouldn't ask. Take the entire populations of those states, add on the entire populations of Nebraska, Kansas, South Dakota, North Dakota and Wyoming, and borrow another 525,000 people from Oklahoma and you have an idea of how many Americans are still without any health care coverage. Keep in mind: THAT statistic doesn't seem to bother Republicans in the slightest.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Trump's Acting National S...