Magazine Article - Slate
The Real Nuclear Option
As President Trump rails against North Korea, threatening to rain down “fire and fury like the world has never seen” if it so much as tests another long-range missile, the world can’t help but wonder: Would he really do this? Would he order a nuclear strike, the ultimate fire and fury, against a country that hadn’t attacked us first?
Many are doubtful. His top security advisers would oppose such a move. So would the American people who, though they have no formal say in the matter, would impose constraints on a president’s actions—or so goes the conventional wisdom. Some scholars have written of a “nuclear taboo” ingrained in our sensibilities since the bombing of Hiroshima. Others detect a growing revulsion against the killing of noncombatants even with conventional weapons.
However, a new study suggests that these comforting notions are mistaken.
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.
For more information on this publication:
Belfer Communications Office
For Academic Citation:
Kaplan, Fred. “The Real Nuclear Option.” Slate, August 14, 2017.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
The Great Military Rivalry: China vs the U.S.
Analysis & Opinions
- Project Syndicate
What Caused the Ukraine War?
Analysis & Opinions
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Significance of the Iran-Saudi Arabia Agreement Brokered by China
As President Trump rails against North Korea, threatening to rain down “fire and fury like the world has never seen” if it so much as tests another long-range missile, the world can’t help but wonder: Would he really do this? Would he order a nuclear strike, the ultimate fire and fury, against a country that hadn’t attacked us first?
Many are doubtful. His top security advisers would oppose such a move. So would the American people who, though they have no formal say in the matter, would impose constraints on a president’s actions—or so goes the conventional wisdom. Some scholars have written of a “nuclear taboo” ingrained in our sensibilities since the bombing of Hiroshima. Others detect a growing revulsion against the killing of noncombatants even with conventional weapons.
However, a new study suggests that these comforting notions are mistaken.
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
The Great Military Rivalry: China vs the U.S.
Analysis & Opinions - Project Syndicate
What Caused the Ukraine War?
Analysis & Opinions - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Significance of the Iran-Saudi Arabia Agreement Brokered by China