Well nevermind all the Depleted Uranium used currently by the U.S. military. Now they're planning more preemption (a la Iraq)...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 53_pf.html
The Pentagon has drafted a revised doctrine for the use of nuclear weapons that envisions commanders requesting presidential approval to use them to preempt an attack by a nation or a terrorist group using weapons of mass destruction. The draft also includes the option of using nuclear arms to destroy known enemy stockpiles of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.
The document, written by the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs staff but not yet finally approved by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, would update rules and procedures governing use of nuclear weapons to reflect a preemption strategy first announced by the Bush White House in December 2002. The strategy was outlined in more detail at the time in classified national security directives.
At a White House briefing that year, a spokesman said the United States would "respond with overwhelming force" to the use of weapons of mass destruction against the United States, its forces or allies, and said "all options" would be available to the president.
The draft, dated March 15, would provide authoritative guidance for commanders to request presidential approval for using nuclear weapons, and represents the Pentagon's first attempt to revise procedures to reflect the Bush preemption doctrine. A previous version, completed in 1995 during the Clinton administration, contains no mention of using nuclear weapons preemptively or specifically against threats from weapons of mass destruction.
Titled "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations" and written under the direction of Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the draft document is unclassified and available on a Pentagon Web site. It is expected to be signed within a few weeks by Air Force Lt. Gen. Norton A. Schwartz, director of the Joint Staff, according to Navy Cmdr. Dawn Cutler, a public affairs officer in Myers's office. Meanwhile, the draft is going through final coordination with the military services, the combatant commanders, Pentagon legal authorities and Rumsfeld's office, Cutler said in a written statement.
A "summary of changes" included in the draft identifies differences from the 1995 doctrine, and says the new document "revises the discussion of nuclear weapons use across the range of military operations."
The first example for potential nuclear weapon use listed in the draft is against an enemy that is using "or intending to use WMD" against U.S. or allied, multinational military forces or civilian populations.
Another scenario for a possible nuclear preemptive strike is in case of an "imminent attack from adversary biological weapons that only effects from nuclear weapons can safely destroy."
click for full article.
Pentagon's new strategy calls for offensive use of nukes.
-
HM-PuFFNSTuFF
- Posts: 14376
- Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 8:00 am
Pentagon's new strategy calls for offensive use of nukes.
Last edited by HM-PuFFNSTuFF on Sun Sep 11, 2005 5:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Stanley: War? Who are we at war with?
Gabriel: Anyone who infringes on America's freedom. Terrorist states, Stanley. Someone must bring their war to them. They bomb a church, we bomb 10. They hijack a plane, we take out an airport. They execute American tourist, we tactically nuke an entire city. Our job is to make terrorism so horrific that is becomes unthinkable to attack Americans.
Gabriel: Anyone who infringes on America's freedom. Terrorist states, Stanley. Someone must bring their war to them. They bomb a church, we bomb 10. They hijack a plane, we take out an airport. They execute American tourist, we tactically nuke an entire city. Our job is to make terrorism so horrific that is becomes unthinkable to attack Americans.
Is that from the article, bit? That's just disgusting.
These assholes want to start the nuclear arms race all over again. Do they think the level of nuclear fear will be ratcheted up enough to save Bush's presidency? Or are they doing it for economic/financial reasons? Or are they really such complete nut-jobs that they think this is an appropriate and legitimate foreign policy?
More war-breeding horseshit from the chicken-hawks who finally got their say in government, thanks to GW Shrub.
These assholes want to start the nuclear arms race all over again. Do they think the level of nuclear fear will be ratcheted up enough to save Bush's presidency? Or are they doing it for economic/financial reasons? Or are they really such complete nut-jobs that they think this is an appropriate and legitimate foreign policy?
More war-breeding horseshit from the chicken-hawks who finally got their say in government, thanks to GW Shrub.
-
Guest
That's not a bad idea...bitWISE wrote:Stanley: War? Who are we at war with?
Gabriel: Anyone who infringes on America's freedom. Terrorist states, Stanley. Someone must bring their war to them. They bomb a church, we bomb 10. They hijack a plane, we take out an airport. They execute American tourist, we tactically nuke an entire city. Our job is to make terrorism so horrific that is becomes unthinkable to attack Americans.
.-
Guest
It's a pretty good policy when you think about it. If you know the terrorist is in some large city in the middle east but you can't find him, a nuke is a convenience way to terminate the threat with 100% success. There so many cities in the world anyway, it's not going to really affect America if one of them is deleted.
[size=85]yea i've too been kind of thinking about maybe a new sig but sort of haven't come to quite a decision yet[/size]
let's start with NooAwwlins. it's fucked up anywaymjrpes wrote:It's a pretty good policy when you think about it. If you know the terrorist is in some large city in the middle east but you can't find him, a nuke is a convenience way to terminate the threat with 100% success. There so many cities in the world anyway, it's not going to really affect America if one of them is deleted.
Americans are always the last to know what their government is doing.seremtan wrote:erm, i've known about this a couple of months or more now. why is it suddenly news to the washington post?
[img]http://www.subliminaldissonance.com/popehat.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.subliminaldissonance.com/images/smilies/nothing.jpg[/img]
-
Iccy (temp)
- Posts: 412
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 1:32 am
All i ask is that this mess holds out for another 50 years. Ill be like 80 then and blowing ourselves up will matter less to me 
" I thought i could handle the power, Ive alway been a kind and gentle person.
But once i was finaly able to split the atom
i built me some bombs and droped them on every mother fucker that got in my way."
But once i was finaly able to split the atom
i built me some bombs and droped them on every mother fucker that got in my way."