Afghanistan

[roo_ster]

There's not need to shut it down, as its been mostly civil.  I was just giving a warning to keep it so.

Yes, but you have no idea what sort of language I was using with my ACME Mind Ray Projector.

My understanding is that LeMay also wanted to launch a nuclear first strike against the USSR.

Would have been no need if we followed Patton's advice and took care of the other totalitarian regime that needed eradicating in Europe.  As it was, we fought a war and lost hundreds of thousands of men to preserve Russian communism.

[Tallpine]

Would have been no need if we followed Patton's advice and took care of the other totalitarian regime that needed eradicating in Europe.  As it was, we fought a war and lost hundreds of thousands of men to preserve Russian communism.

I have to agree with you there.

Of course, Russsia was our "ally" 

[TommyGunn]

My understanding is that LeMay also wanted to launch a nuclear first strike against the USSR.

I am not sure exactly what you are refering to....
As I recall, during the Cuban Missile Crisis under JFK's watch, LeMay wanted a full blown out assault against Cuba.  Kennedy, while he'd blundered badly at the Bay of Pigs fiasco, was a little more seasoned and realized that Lemay's suggestion was far too aggressive a stand and would mean nuclear war.
Is this what you mean?
Anyhow, LeMay served well during WW2 and later took charge of the Strategic Air Command as I recall.  It does seem almost axiomatic, however, that just because a well respected military officer achieves a position of command and leadership, that does not necessarily mean he will offer sane, well reasoned advice to a president during a boiling-hot international crisis .... unfortunatly.....

[Seenterman]

Sure nuke a bunch of civilians to show the terrorists how big and bad we are 

Its not like that's what the terrorists have been goading us into killing civilians the entire war to maintain their PR war that we are the "great satan". We should play right into there hand! Piss off the ENTIRE ME by contaminating it with fallout, there's no possible way pissing off Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and the other dozen or some countries around there would end up bad for us 
It's not like that's exactly the recruiting tool jihadist's everywhere would love to have.

Do you guys consider Mai Lai as a great victory against the VC?

We defeat terrorism by killing terrorists. Killing civilians creates terrorists.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

the diplomatic strategic version of "the ugly american"

just because you can do something  does NOT  mean you should   or need to

[Tallpine]

I am not sure exactly what you are refering to....
As I recall, during the Cuban Missile Crisis under JFK's watch, LeMay wanted a full blown out assault against Cuba.

You know, I read a lot of stuff, and I don't keep a stack of note cards at my elbow to refence every tidbit of information that I come across, so I can't quote you a source.

But my recollection is that I read that LeMay wanted to beat Russia to the draw as well as take care of the Cuban Problem.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

i remember it that way too.  though unlike you i was VERY VERY young back then

[TommyGunn]

You know, I read a lot of stuff, and I don't keep a stack of note cards at my elbow to refence every tidbit of information that I come across, so I can't quote you a source.

But my recollection is that I read that LeMay wanted to beat Russia to the draw as well as take care of the Cuban Problem.

Tallpine, you may very well be correct....
For a few years after WW2 there existed a time when WE had the BOMB and the Soviets didn't.  In this period there was a discussion about whether we should put an end to the threat of communism via the USSR.  The threat of communist expansion was understood even then.  Recall the Soviets moved into eastern europe in WW2 and did not leave; even Patton wanted to shove 'em back but our political leaders said no.
Curtis LeMay may very well have been amongst those agitating to use the bomb on Moscow.  It would be like him from what I recall, as he was a very aggressive fighter as witnessed by his Pacific Theater service.  As I intimated in my last post, this aggressive stance may work very well in an actual war, but in a peacetime circumstance it may also prove to be the wrong type of action.  
In the debate on how to deal with the communist threat, it was eventually determined by heads more sober that from a moral point of view we had no right to nuke the USSR pre-emptively, so, for better or worse, we chose a path of containment and mutual co-existance ... as well as the much vilified "mutual-assured-destruction" theory, AKA "M.A.D."  

[Tallpine]

In the debate on how to deal with the communist threat, it was eventually determined by heads more sober that from a moral point of view we had no right to nuke the USSR pre-emptively, so, for better or worse, we chose a path of containment and mutual co-existance ... as well as the much vilified "mutual-assured-destruction" theory, AKA "M.A.D."

Well, as they say, "an armed society is a polite society".

Should work for a society of nations as well.