« "Drugs and Thugs" | Main | Coup in Madagascar »

March 16, 2009

Comments

J.

I was reading Keith Payne's "The Great American Gamble" in which he also tries to pit Kahn versus Schelling. He overwhelming supports Kahn's view as the more rational one, although in his opinion the various American administrations all went with Schelling and were lucky that nuclear holocast didn't happen. I found his argument very weak, and fortunately I didn't have to buy his book.

Both analysts had their pros and cons, but I agree with you, I'd rather err on the side of Schelling. I always thought his perspective on convetional warfare was pretty good stuff ("Arms and Influence").

A.E.

I've read Arms and Influence, and it does have an interesting perspective on conventional warfare. The problem is that I found the specific link between Schelling's nuclear escalation strategy and the military developments to be somewhat underdeveloped.

Have you read Krepon's last book?

The comments to this entry are closed.