I don't think so. But that situation will never arise anyway. Unless they disarm by firing them all.The Mad Hatter wrote: The US can't disarm, nukes put the world at a stand-still. A country without nukes, or without the support of another nation's unclear arsenal, is hostage to the world. The US will disarm when it's nukes are no longer necessary.
The emperor's role in the war was whitewashed from history. The process started even before the war was over. The generals were lying their heads off, and some committed suicide, to gloss over the emperor's part in the war. And the Yanks were complicit, because they knew that Japan would be easier to control with an Emperor in place.The Mad Hatter wrote: Thirdly, mistermack, the Emperor was contemplating surrender but there was a 'mini revolution' to overrule him by some of the lead generals.
That's a bit of an optimistic assumption. No-one knows who the US leadership will be. Who could possibly be more dangerous than Bush? Palin, that's who. Don't forget the Cuban missile crisis. That sort of thing hasn't gone away. It's just retreated, but it could so easily flare up again. It only takes two to refuse to budge, and we're all in big trouble.The Mad Hatter wrote: Finally, The US is no more likely to drop a nuke than marry Russia. Unlike Suddam, the US leadership has a self-preservation instinct and knows when to give up.
.
cheeky neo-progs! 
you missed your anal bleaching appointment?
