Dwarkesh Patel: prediction

Transcript context

…Because I don’t think you’ve got the political will in the United States to do that, frankly. I think that, yes, you have a nominal majority in both houses, but especially with your lower house at the moment, what’s going on there, you don’t have the sense of national will to do that. And so, as a result, these poor Ukrainians are fighting and dying. When you do give them stuff, it’s extremely helpful and useful. But as I say, the key point is that they will carry on fighting and dying even if you didn’t give them the stuff because they’re not going to have America essentially dictating to them what their national destiny is. Now, speaking of the Korean War, the chapter you wrote about this in your book was really interesting and great. And I wonder if Truman had decided to use a nuclear bomb in Korea, had agreed with MacArthur to do so, whether the taboo that we have against nuclear weapons—against tactical nuclear weapons—would not have emerged in the first place. So, the Soviets would have used it in Afghanistan, we would have used it in Vietnam, and Thatcher would have used it in the Falklands. No, I wouldn’t go that far because that would have wiped out the Falklands, and we were trying to win back the Falklands. But yeah, you’re quite right. Of course, if MacArthur had used nuclear weapons against the Chinese crossing the Yalu River, then yes, he might well have actually won that war, but it would have lowered the moral barrier so significantly that nuclear weapons would have been used an awful lot more. As it is today, although there’s lots of saber rattling by Lavrov and Putin, it doesn’t really look as though, I mean, yes, there might be a catastrophic disaster at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, but it’s very unlikely for Putin actually to use tactical nuclear missiles in Ukraine, not least, of course, because the Chinese don’t want him to. But had they been a regular feature of warfare in the 1950s, so on, then yeah, he might well do it. I just think it’s important when you’re looking back in history, to give credit at decisions that are not often discussed like this, where Truman just decided to lose Korea rather than, at the time the taboo didn’t even exist, but rather than to create a taboo against nuclear weapons. Exactly. He did create it, as did Clement Atlee, actually, to give him his due. The British Prime Minister flew over to Washington very concerned about this talk, MacArthur’s talk about using the nuclear bomb, and so he needs to get some credit as well. And also actually, Truman needs credit for sacking MacArthur in the first place, because MacArthur did have some, I mean, he was a charismatic and impressive figure whose island hopping policy in the Second World Wars was inspired and so on. But he was the classic example of the general who becomes too powerful, an overmighty subject, who had political ambitions himself, who got the Chinese involvement in the war completely wrong, got the big ideas wrong, essentially, and had to be sacked.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.