Yes I've already addressed that it's conjecture you can't prove it. I fully understand the theory behind byoyr thoughs to. I just disagree personallyi think the Russians would fold and not do a damn thing. Certainly a gamble but I think a good one the Russians backed down alot. We'll never know though so it's all just smoke in the wind.
By that idiotic talking point, you can't prove your theory either. And thus this entire line of discussion, hell,
every line of discussion on this forum
ever is a waste of time; as anything with even a hint of conjecture can't be proven 100%. Thus, there is no point to any of this. Might as well just pack it up and shut it all done.
Like that's such an asinine talking point, "You can't prove it 100% because it's alternate history, so neererneerer, I can ignore it"
Talking about the US nuking China in the past
itself opens up a divergence, meaning even
your theory is conjecture without substance. No one
truly would know how the Soviets would react to such an event. Both the "will use nukes" and the "won't use nukes" lines of thoughts are both conjecture. We have no data points to use as evidence of how the Soviets would react. Bringing up the WW2 bombings isn't relevant, because at the time the US was the sole possessor of nuclear weapons. Once the Soviets had them, the paradigm shifted; everyone was worried what would happen if either the US or Soviets used a nuke offensively after that point.