[fogarty]

So you think we would abandon the restriction on first-use of nuclear weapons? Do you think Bush will initiate such a major change of national strategy, and what affects will first-use nuclear weapon use have around the world with regards to our diplomacy abroad?

[the_doc]

Yes, I think so. See my #115. It's a matter of realism. We can't conscript 700,000 men at the drop of a hat--so we won't.

Either we go nuclear, or we give away South Korea and 35,000 American soldiers.

Of course, if the whole thing just smolders for a while and we see that we have time to put a couple hundred thousand more troops in S.Korea (not a good idea, IMO), we might do that in the chess game.

I like William Safire's proposal--which is to pull all of our troops out of South Korea (out from under the NK guns). If NK attacks the South, we defend the South with stand-off weapons. In other words, we incinerate the North.

The US has always taken the position that our nuclear arsenal exists for a reason--and it's not just to respond to a nuclear attack. It's to win wars we have to win but can't win any other way.