Insanity at the helm?

chappy

What the hell is this guy thinking!?

(Reuters) - Citing a classified Pentagon report, the Los Angeles Times reported on Saturday that the Bush administration has told the Defense Department to prepare, on a contingency basis, plans to use nuclear weapons against at least seven countries. The military was also directed to build smaller nuclear weapons for use in certain battlefield situations, the newspaper reported. The countries named in the secret report -- provided to Congress Jan. 8 -- were China, Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria, the Times reported.

later, (I hope)
chappy

DakotaRed

In your banal efforts to continually bash George Bush you neglect to continue reading and report just part of a report as if Bush plans doomsday tonight. Shall we see a bit more of the article?

"According to the Times report, nuclear weapons could be used against targets able to withstand non-nuclear attack, in retaliation for attacks by nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, or "in the event of surprising military developments."

There was no response on the newspaper's report from the Pentagon or the White House, and no indication if the copy of the report obtained by the Times was a final or a draft version. The report, a congressionally mandated "nuclear posture review," is conducted every six years."

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/03/09/nuclear.weapons/index.html

Next question: When did this forum become a bash Bush board? I came here thinking it was exJWs supporting exJWs. Lately, though, it seems to be an outlet for some disgruntled Gore supporters to vent their frustrations at their boy losing an election. Too bad that they cannot at least be a bit more accurate when they report things they perceive as going on!

If God's Spirit is filling a Kingdom Hall, how is it that Satan can manuever the ones within that Kingdom Hall at the same time?

Introspection

I remember watching footage of the hearings on the Waco, TX thing with the Branch Davidians and this one ex-Delta Force big shot guy said they (the gubment guys) basically had an "oh sh*t" contingency. Atleast it's more intelligent than that. Whether it's good or bad, who knows.

Hey, that's a bit more on topic anyways.

SYN

Every sufficiently large military force in the world with nuclear weapons has plans like this. Why single out the Americans? France, Russia, China, Pakistan, India - they ALL have similiar plans.

To sum it up, we're all screwed if somebody accidently pressed the BIG RED BUTTON.

The earlier in the forenoon you take the sun bath, the greater will be the beneficial effect, because you get more of the ultra-violet rays, which are healing. - The Golden Age

LB

At least Bush is thinking about these things, rather than thinking about where to shove a cigar.

Never Squat With Yer Spurs On

Xander

we're all screwed if somebody accidently pressed the BIG RED BUTTON.

You're missing the point.

Why this review is dangerous is because it is redefining the 'big red button'. During the Cold War the 'big red button' meant firing tons of BIG nukes at enemy cities to wipe them out, with the expected return fire.

This review indicates Bush's administration is considering using battlefield (tactical) nukes AS A MATTER OF COURSE. Essentially, this proposal is suggesting that MAD only applies if the nukes used are big enough and targeted at civilians - that smaller nukes CAN BE USED FREELY without triggering WWIII.

The point of this review is that in the 'post cold-war world', various members of the government feel that nukes no longer need to be considered as a weapon of last resort.

That ANYONE in the government could take such a report seriously is VERY BAD.

A fanatic is one who, upon losing sight of his goals, redoubles his efforts.
--George Santayana

gravedancer

This is a plea to all the world leaders:

"When you guys wage war please do it in a nice way. We do not want wars to get a bad reputation."

Why should people fight nicely? Is it worth sacrificng one Amaerican life in a ground combat when you could just use a tactical nuke and destroy the enemy, while causing minimal damage to the environment?

When you have a war...fight to destroy your enemy; when you have a war....try and minimize the casualties of your own soldiers.

What rules of war would you propose we setup? How much more or less powerful is a tactical battlefield nuke than plane flown into the side of a skyscraper?

Xander

When you guys wage war please do it in a nice way.

I'm not saying we must fight 'in a nice way'. I'm not a pacifist, and I realize war can be ugly. There is, however, a chasm between 'ugly' and 'nuclear'.

you could just use a tactical nuke and destroy the enemy

Do you really and honestly think the free world would tolerate the US using nuclear weapons openly in combat? Of ANY kind?!

How much more or less powerful is a tactical battlefield nuke than plane flown into the side of a skyscraper

Last I checked, the Hiroshima bomb would fall into the catagory we now call 'tactical nukes' (1-20kt). A big TacNuke, to be sure, but still merely a TacNuke.

Do you really want those going off all over a battlefield?

Have you read of the effects nukes have? Browse to www.fas.org and go to their 'weapons of mass destruction' page. Make no mistake - nuclear weapons are and should always be A WEAPON OF LAST RESORT.

This new report is a terrible change in perspective.

"in the event of surprising military developments"

Like, say, when the Chinese troops came into North Korea during the Korean War? If this new policy is accepted, that war would have gone nuclear then.

Or when N. Vietnamese armor actually started entering S. Vietnam cities. Okay to go nuclear then?

As I mentioned, I am not a pacifist. We MUST fight for our beliefs, we MUST maintain enough nuclear arsenal to act as a deterrent. We MUST NOT EVER use them again.

A fanatic is one who, upon losing sight of his goals, redoubles his efforts.
--George Santayana

LB

Xander

Do you really and honestly think the free world would tolerate the US using nuclear weapons openly in combat? Of ANY kind?!

The US has used nukes in combat before. What did the rest of the world do about it then?

Exactly, they bitched.

Never Squat With Yer Spurs On

Insanity at the helm?

Share this