Skip to comments.
Documents: U.S. had plan to nuke N. Korea
United Press International/Washington Times ^
| November 8, 2004
| United Press Internatioanal
Posted on 11/08/2004 7:40:00 AM PST by WmShirerAdmirer
Seoul, South Korea, Nov. 7 (UPI) -- Newly declassified documents revealed the United States planned as recently as 1998 to drop nuclear bombs on North Korea if the country attacked South Korea.
As part of "scenario 5027," 24 F15-E bombers flew simulation missions at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base in North Carolina to drop mock nuclear bombs on a firing range between January and June 1998, the Korea Times reported Sunday.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: clinton; northkorea; nuclearbombs; nuke
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
I consider this nuke idea pretty drastic measures. What was Clinton and his peace niks-appeasement-bomb WMD factories at night (when no one is in the building) buddies in the State Department thinking?
To: WmShirerAdmirer
This, if true, is probably more along the lines of leaked information to give the N.K. a thought along the lines of, "if clinton was going to 15 nuke armed planes in NK, what the heck will GW do?"
2
posted on
11/08/2004 7:42:35 AM PST
by
ruiner
To: WmShirerAdmirer
There are nuke plans for every enemy...and 10 other conventional warfare plans to cover any possible scenario. What did people think, we had nukes and they sit in a warehouse somewhere? That we don;t pay our military officers to plan and prepare?
3
posted on
11/08/2004 7:42:40 AM PST
by
Bob J
(Rightalk.com...coming soon!)
To: WmShirerAdmirer
Newly declassified documents revealed the United States planned as recently as 1998 to drop nuclear bombs on North Korea if the country attacked South Korea. I don't think "planned" is quite the same thing as "had plans."
4
posted on
11/08/2004 7:42:58 AM PST
by
sionnsar
(NYT/Cbs: "It's fake but true!" | Iran Azadi | Traditional Anglicans: trad-anglican.faithweb.com)
To: WmShirerAdmirer
Why F15s???
Why not cruise missiles? Don't tell me! The
Klin-toons were afraid of COLLATERAL damage??!
MV
5
posted on
11/08/2004 7:43:25 AM PST
by
madvlad
((Born in the south, raised around the globe and STILL republican))
To: WmShirerAdmirer
To: WmShirerAdmirer
The plan was in existence for the entire 1990s, and probably the 1980s.
When they say as recently as 1998, they mean that Clinton somehow scrapped it back then... probably.
7
posted on
11/08/2004 7:45:01 AM PST
by
coconutt2000
(NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
To: WmShirerAdmirer
I really don't know why the press gets all worked up in a tizzy over this. The USA also has plans to attack Canada, Switzerland, Russian, Vatican City, and Great Britain if need be...we have a whole section of our government that does nothing but sketch out ideas and scenarios that could conceivably happen. They look for worst-case positions and try to develop a plan *if* military action is needed.
I would be more worried if the Washington Times came out with a story that we DID NOT have a plan to fight against North Korea. Just my humble opinion.
To: coconutt2000
Who can say that we don't have an even more, ahem, explosive plan now?
To: WmShirerAdmirer
Why is this news? The Commies have 15,000 artiliery guns trained on Seoul alone, the only way to stop an invasion may be a nuke.
To: ruiner
My, my. We certainly aren't wasting any time taking care of business around the globe. I'm betting documents from "1998" aren't declassified very often. Especially ones detailing warplans for one of our biggest problem countries. I smell disinformation, and I smell strategery.
11
posted on
11/08/2004 7:46:35 AM PST
by
johnb838
(We had to beat the left in this country before we could take on the terrorists. Now let's roll.)
To: WmShirerAdmirer
Seriously, though.. Clinton BETTER have made plans to nuke NK. To me, they're the most dangerous power on Earth today. Poor folks, terrible markets, communism and NUKES.
The neo-cons know how to plan (hooray!) and I hope they are including NK as a central part of their course. There's more to the world than the middle east!
12
posted on
11/08/2004 7:47:37 AM PST
by
SBOinTX
To: WmShirerAdmirer
13
posted on
11/08/2004 7:49:21 AM PST
by
Red Badger
(Give someone enough EU-ROPE and they will hang themselves......out of pure frustration......)
To: WmShirerAdmirer
If we didn't have "plans" for evey single contingency imaginable I'd be upset.
14
posted on
11/08/2004 7:50:25 AM PST
by
1Old Pro
To: WmShirerAdmirer
I'm pretty sure this option has been in the plan for a very long time. The same can be said during the NATO vs.Warsaw pact days. Specifically in OPLAN 4102, it called for nuclear strike option if the need called for it using tactical nuclear weapons.
To: WmShirerAdmirer
We have a plan for each country to nuke....doesnt mean its serious or is ever a "real" option. Plans are just that.
16
posted on
11/08/2004 7:51:57 AM PST
by
smith288
(I have posted over 10,000 times. The more I post, the more intelligent you become!)
To: WmShirerAdmirer
I would hope that we, as a country, as a nation, have a plan to nuke any and all of our declared enemies.
It's only prudent planning.
17
posted on
11/08/2004 7:53:20 AM PST
by
ChadGore
(59,459,765 Bush fans can't be wrong.)
To: 1Old Pro
Re:
If we didn't have "plans" for evey single contingency imaginable I'd be upset. Bingo !
18
posted on
11/08/2004 7:54:03 AM PST
by
ChadGore
(59,459,765 Bush fans can't be wrong.)
To: Constantine XIII
Probably because nuking is pretty much the most explosive card in our deck. We used to keep nuclear subs with nukes off of the N. Korea coast. Every time the N. Koreans massed on the border, the subs would surface and make themselves obvious... Essentially waving at the N. Koreans saying.. "Hey, how much for that parking lot you call a country?"
19
posted on
11/08/2004 7:54:46 AM PST
by
coconutt2000
(NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
To: coconutt2000
The plan was in existence for the entire 1990s, and probably the 1980s And probably the 1970s and 1960s.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson