The List the possible courses of action of "Theodore C. Sorensen's memorandum, October 18, 1962.", includes two big questions which must be answered, and in conjunction with each other:
1. Which military action, if any:
Limited air strikeFuller air strike
2nd Choice
Blockade
2. Should political action - in particular a letter of warning to Khrushchev precede military action?
YesNoUndecided
Explanation:
1. Which military action, if any should be adopted:
Limited Air Strike which was disadvantageous: Rusk favors the limited or "surgical" air strike without prior political action or warning. This is opposed by 3 groups.
By the diplomats (Bohlen, Thompson, probably Martin) who insist that prior political action is essential and not harmful;
-- By the Military (McNamara, Taylor, McCone) who insist that the air strike could not be limited which was disadvantageous.
-- By advocates of the blockade route, Bohlen favours a prompt letter to Khrushchev, deciding after the response whether we use air strike or blockade -- All blockade advocates would support this, and some of the air strike advocates which was advantageous.
-- Taylor would oppose this, unless the decision had already been made to go the blockade route
-- If you accept the Bohlen plan, we can then consider the nature of the letter to Khrushchev which for me is very advantageous.
2. Should political action -- in particular a letter of warning to Khrushchev -- precede military action? - By the diplomats (Bohlen, Thompson, probably Martin) who insist that prior political action is essential and not harmful.
If blockade or invasion, everyone says yes which is advantageous because advocates of the blockade route Bohlen favours a prompt letter to Khrushchev, deciding after the response whether we use air strike or blockade -- All blockade advocates supported this, and some of the air strike advocates. It conserves lives and property.
If Air Strike -- Yes: By the military (McNamara, Taylor, McCone) who insist that the air strike could not be limited is disadvantageous because it is a wanton destruction of lives and property.
