|
|
|
|
|
|
by aaron-lebo
3223 days ago
|
|
|
What do you mean is it real? Of course skepticism is real as it should be for all claims about history. The author tells us what Nixon is admitting and to do so uses an out of context quote which at best suggests escalation. That's a low standard for concrete proof. Actually having pulled up that section of the memoirs, "escalation" is used repeatedly. The nuclear option is never even mentioned (though whether Nixon avoids mentioning this is something else entirely). Furthermore, the author doesn't just assert that Nixon considered nuclear weapons, they assert they are directly responsible for avoiding a nuclear war. Maybe a bit too self-congratulatory and subjective: What would have been the world’s second nuclear war was averted by our action, though we couldn’t have known it at the time... more: http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/uhic/ReferenceDetailsPage/Referen... In addition, away from the public eye, Nixon’s negotiation strategy in 1969 consisted primarily of a threat to North Vietnam that if they did not become more conciliatory at the peace table, he would unleash the full fury of American power as they had never seen it. Their deadline was 1 November 1969. Consistent with this, Nixon considered escalating the war in various ways in a proposed assault known as Operation Duck Hook. According to historian Marilyn Young, Duck Hook “explored a new range of options [intended to end the war], including a land invasion of the North, the systematic bombing of dikes so as to destroy the food supply, and the saturation bombing of Hanoi and Haiphong.” Huh, that does sound like non-nuclear escalation. |
|
|