Secret Plan Outlines the Unthinkable

Los Angeles Times ^ | 03/10/2002 | William M. Arkin

[Pokey78]

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration, in a secret policy review completed early this year, has ordered the Pentagon to draft contingency plans for the use of nuclear weapons against at least seven countries, naming not only Russia and the "axis of evil"--Iraq, Iran, and North Korea--but also China, Libya and Syria.

[Ciexyz]

I'm trusting the President's judgment in this matter. I'm confident that Mr. Bush will do whatever is necessary to protect this country.

[Paul Atreides]

I'm just disappointed that Berkeley isn't on the list.

[elwoodp]

As they used to say in WWII, "If you got 'em, smoke 'em."

[harpo11]

I do not understand how a "secret report" "classified Pentagon report" provided to Congress on January 8, can be obtained by the Los Angeles Times defense analyst and Times contributor William Arkin.

Who gave it to him and what did the giver hope to obtain or achieve in divulging top secret/classified information to the press concerning America's National Security?

[TomGuy]

Let's see...
the secret bunker and shadow government reports...fizzled
the quelching of information about some mad nuke bomber loose in NYC...fizzled
now, the secret nuclear plans.....

Like the shadow government, the government has had nuclear plans and revisions as events warrant since the 1940's.

These "secrets" revealed by the media for dazzle are getting old. Come to think of it, these "secrets" are old--most going back decades. When did all the real journalists retire? Where are the Jack Andersons? Instead of trying to set policy and manipulate the populace, the media/journalists need to stick with the business of real news and investigative reporting.

[Dutch Boy]

This seems more like a way of putting countries on notice. Nothing wakes you up more than to be on a nuke target list. Not sure if this ultimately is a good or a bad think but I am reassured that at least someone it planning for our safety and protection.

[dts32041]

If they did not have contigency plans, they would be derelict in their duty.

Knowing, the pentagon, there are plans in ther on how to take out canada, britian, france and germany.

There are people paid to think out these scenarios and responses.

[Jonathon Spectre]

I laugh every time I see this sort of crap. These limp-wristed pinko libs just mess their panties every time they find out the US has nukes not just to waste huge amounts of money and "deter" people, but to actually USE if the need arises. Someone needs to sit these hysterical women down and explain to them:

A nuke is not "magic". Use of a nuke won't "destroy the world". It is nothing but a great big bomb with some nasty side effects. Of course, this explanation wouldn't matter, because it is measured and reasonable, and what they really want is shrieking and horrified hand-wringing.

California should be targeted, too.

[Mr.Clark]

How this is a surprise? I bet the Pentagon has all kinds of contigency plans, probably a few alien invasion ones hanging around.

[harpo11]

I agree with you Dutch Boy, thank you for your thoughts.

[Paraclete]

According to Condi Rice this morning on MTP, the report was "selectively leaked." I take that to mean that this is information the administration wanted revealed. It is valuable as a deterrent -- letting these countries know they're in the sights -- so they better watch their step.

[Lockbox]

Hijacking airlines and flying into buildings to kill thousands – Unthinkable?

Strapping a bomb to your body and walking into a shopping mall to detonate and killing tens of civilians - Unthinkable?

Using Chemical weapons not only on your enemy, but your own people - Unthinkable?

Making Americans watch Alex Baldwin movies - Unthinkable?

or are these ‘of an unspecified nature’.

"In truth, what has evolved since last year's terror attacks is an integrated, significantly expanded planning doctrine for nuclear wars."

Time for the Libs to wake up to reality. Hollywood's punshiment would be to take the offender off the 'A' list, that would be Unthinkable to the Libs !!!!

[Bobalu]

Maybe it will be better if we link to the LaLa Times 'print versions' of it's 'News' stories...not so many ads :-)

[ridensm]

The Lala Times uses its typical leftist ideologue to communicate this.

HERE is an article from AP about the same thing.

It does seem to me that all too many people are ready and willing to use nukes in this "war on terrorism". Not just this approach by the government, I'm hearing it from people all over. They also seem to find amusing the thought of obliterating the haystack in order to eliminate the needle.

I had concerns over this vague, no exit plan, potentially endless war when it was first announced. IMO, effectively combating terrorism belongs in the black ops and spy areas rather than the light of day. Get Osamas skull, put it on a pike and then parade it around for all to see. Infiltrate, collect information, and act accordingly.

I've read the thread and I'm sure the pentagon has always had several contingency plans, including those using nukes, for most conflicts and problems we've faced over the years. I'm thinking about why this one has become public and the fact that Russia and China are named along with the terrorist states and the possible implications this becoming public may have.

clinton isn't the only one capable of floating trial balloons. I think republicans are just as focussed as the democrats on shaping public opinion and increasing their governmental powers and those who refuse to recognize this and analyze information in that context are simply burrying their heads in the sand. Do not take this as an attack on Bush, I admire what he has done and support him. But our founders warned us about the nature of government and all too many people have forgotten.

[Exnihilo]

I think that's "Smoke 'em if you got 'em"

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

I do not understand how a "secret report" "classified Pentagon report" provided to Congress on January 8, can be obtained by the Los Angeles Times defense analyst and Times contributor William Arkin.

Transcript of Pentagon Office of Strategic Disinformation Meeting, 5 January 2002

SECDEF(Rummy): Okay, now, we need to instill in these bastards a credible fear that we’ll nuke there asses if they try anything stupid. Whether or not we’ll actually do it is another thing, we want to fear that we would. How we gonna get the message to them?

CJCOS(Myers): Could we have the Swiss Ambassador hand them a note?

RUMMY: Naw, they’ll see that as a bluff, they won’t think we’re serious.

COL. Anderson: What if we plant a story on the Drudge Report?

ALL: Studied silence.

ANDY: OK, something else.

RUMMY: What if we told congress, and their staff under pains and penalty of espionage law, that we were drawing up plans for attacks on certain countries. Might as well publish it in the legal notice section of the Washington Post.

MEYERS: They’d know about it in hours.

ANDY: Our media would believe it, but would they?

MEYERS: Could they afford not to?

……

[finnman69]

Why is this a secret? Is it any surprise that nuclear 'weqapons' are actually weapons desiegned to be used? Hopefully this will scare the crap out of the nations on the 'leaked' list.

[elephantlips]

This article and others like it are bound to stir controversy over the next few weeks. Whether our government "allowed" this information out is a question. If they didn't and it was found out unfortunately, gives us insight into the policy of whether we allow the media to cover the on-going war which has, in itself, been a hotbed of controversy. I firmly believe that the media cannot be trusted. How many of the networks refused to be identified with the USA during the coverage of 9-11? "We must remain above it all for the sake of neutrality." Such a pompous and ignorant statement that is.