US nuclear monopoly after WWII

Discussions on other historical eras.
Posts: 216
Joined: 19 Apr 2002 14:38
Location: Stockholm

US nuclear monopoly after WWII

Post by Pumpkin » 08 May 2002 11:25

Why couldn't the US make its nuclear monopoly after WWII permanent? More specifically, why couldn't they prevent Stalin from getting the bomb? Not managing to avoid the threat of total destruction through nuclear war, must've been the worst foreign policy/geostrategical setback in history! The mutual arms race came at tremendous costs and we are lucky that the bomb never has been used in large scale (yet!)

The US could have taken control over potential Uranium mines of the world, by treaties against Soviet, would've won greatly on that!

Why was no attempt in that direction made? I can imagine three kinds of explanaitions:

1) Ignorance: Until nuclear proliferation was a fact, noone understood what a nuclear war would mean, or noone thought that Soviet would ever manage to construct a-bombs.

2) Misdirected moral: It is no business of the US to interfer in other countries military strength. This is holy principle that must be uphold at any cost, even the extermination of human kind. (Although such a principle in no way has been followed consistently!)

3) Failure of power: Some powerful interest group (Soviet, industry...) deliberately passified US foreign policy and won on nuclear proliferation. Or the US was administrationally unable to do anything about it (shortsightedness, dependance on uneducated public opinion etc).

Any thoughts on this crucial turning point in the history of humanity (the US loss of nuclear hegemony) would be welcomed!

Benjamin Fanjoy
Posts: 1723
Joined: 10 Apr 2002 10:53
Location: Canada

Post by Benjamin Fanjoy » 12 Jul 2002 16:51

Probaly your first point.

Return to “Other eras”