[bulldog905]

The use of nuclear weapons, barring a massive first-strike provocation

If ANYBODY, used ANY nuclear weapons on America, would that constitute your definition of massive?

I just want to be clear on that.

[George W. Bush]

If ANYBODY, used ANY nuclear weapons on America, would that constitute your definition of massive?

Actually, I've given that some thought previously. Anything nuclear on a scale like that of the WTC would justify at least some use of nukes, for instance in the terrorist camps and strongholds in Afghanistan. Any clear sign that Iraq helped would justify the use of nukes in Iraq. Same goes for Iran, Chechnya, etc.

In the event of a small nuclear strike or dirty bomb incident in America, President Bush should react as quickly as possible. This will prevent the world from speaking out against the use of nukes. We should react immediately and not wait if we use a nuke in reaction to a nuclear incident on American soil. There is a use-or-lose-it factor to public indignation that is a little reminiscent of Cold War nuclear strategies.

Strange how back then, this was all so theoretical to the general population and only the heartless SOBs who worked as nuclear strategists ever thought about this stuff. Now we all think about it.