Posted on 11/02/2001 1:46:24 PM PST by Tunehead54
November 2, 2001
The nuclear option
Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told The London Telegraph last week that Britain and the United States should expect a large-scale chemical and biological weapons assault on civilian targets by Osama bin Laden's terrorist group. The objective, said Wolfowitz, is to cause tens of thousands of casualties.
If such a forecast is based on sound intelligence, President Bush should consider emulating his predecessor, Harry Truman, and employ the use of at least tactical nuclear weapons against the Taliban should it be concluded that such a weapon might produce better results than the current bombing campaign. If this is war, why pull any punches?
There are similarities between Japan in 1945 - the first and only time any nation has employed nuclear weapons in warfare - and Afghanistan now. Then, Japanese troops frequently hid in caves and pillboxes and fought with a religious fervor inspired by their Emperor in whom they vested divine power. Now, the Taliban use caves as protective cover and are inspired by religious zeal.
Gen. George C. Marshall recounted Japanese resistance and the willingness of Japanese soldiers to fight to the death during World War II. "We had one hundred thousand people killed in Tokyo in one night of bombs, and it had seemingly no effect whatsoever," Marshall is quoted in "Truman," David McCullough's 1992 biography of the president. "It destroyed the Japanese cities, yes, but their morale was affected, so far as we could tell, not at all. So it seemed quite necessary, if we could, to shock them into action...We had to end the war; we had to save American lives."
That was Truman's main concern - saving American lives. As recounted in McCullough's book, the president took no delight in wiping out entire cities and thousands of civilians, but Japan, like the Taliban today, had started the war and would not give up. The Japanese, like the Taliban, promised more American dead, and Truman's first obligation, like that of President Bush, was to protect America and Americans. "It occurred to me," McCullough quotes Truman, "that a quarter of a million of the flower of our young manhood were worth a couple of Japanese cities, and I still think they were and are."
"Remember Pearl Harbor" served as a rallying cry for a previous generation that taught warmongers the consequences of attacking the United States. "Remember the World Trade Center and the Pentagon" should serve as a contemporary rallying cry. The Taliban fight with the weapons of terror, determined to kill every man, woman and child they can. The United States should spare no effort in wiping out the Taliban and all terrorists who would follow in their sandal-steps. If there is collateral civilian damage, that's war.
America's willingness to use nuclear weapons during World War II preserved the peace and struck fear into the hearts of our adversaries. It's time for another demonstration of our resolve. Perhaps nothing short of nuclear weapons will deter for another generation the enemies of freedom. Like the fanatical Japanese of Truman's day, the fanatical Taliban will not be dissuaded from murdering as many Americans as they can. This is not a time for diplomatic or political niceties. It is a time to wipe them out before they wipe any more of us out.
Harry Truman was not afraid to use the power he had to save America and the lives of its citizens. As David McCullough writes, "Japan had some 2.5 million regular troops on the home islands, but every male between the ages of 15 and 60; every female from 17 to 45, was being conscripted and armed with everything from ancient brass cannon to bamboo spears, taught to strap explosives to their bodies and throw themselves at advancing tanks."
That's the kind of fanaticism the United States faces in Afghanistan and in countries like Iraq. If we show them that our sword is bigger than theirs and, more importantly, that we will not shrink from using it to defend our people and our values, the likelihood we will have to do so again in the near future will be diminished.
There is a psychological and political downside to deploying even tactical nuclear weapons. But there's a bigger downside should Wolfowitz's forecast come true. Americans and Britons who would die in such a terrorist attack - and their loved ones - deserve to know that their countries are doing all they can to defend them.
What does it take to justify their use?
9/11. No more was needed.
Interesting question for sure. I think the attacks on WTC and the Pentagon, were WMD. I question whether we will ever do what is right, and use them, even if we suffer a chemical attack that kills many, many thousands. We can only hope, but I will believe it when I see it.
They know that tommorrow or the next day we can use even bigger weapons than today and the suspense must be very exciting for them.
I suspect that soon we will hear their leaders are dead and we will be able to dirrect our attention else where.
I am sure Sadamm is curious if the USA"s new sense of purpose will motivate us to utilize a nuke on him. I hope he thinks about it each night.
Since they've never been used since 1945 I can understand our reluctance to employ the nuclear option but I think we need to put the world on notice that we are not a target - our enemies are the target and we can deliver!
Good question! We send millions to nations that spit in our face. Maybe we ought to try a different tactic. I like President Bush's approach. "You're either with us - or you're with the terrorists."
Like Cal notes - we used nukes to save American lives ... sounds like that applies here as well.
The full declaration of War was what it took to unite the American People in WWII. The stygma of WWIII is un-avoidable, it is a historic Prophetical fact that we are living in the Biblical Last Days. Only a Ostrich with his head burried in the sand refuses to deal with the obvious fact of where we are.
Fanaticism has to be met with fanaticism. Ultimate Power ends the argument. It only hurts when you lose over and over,eventually the message comes clear to your mind! This is not worth all the pain.
Iwo Jima, Tarawa, Okinawa showed the resolve we face with the Taliban today. At some point we will need to find the courage to end this War like we ended WWII. I say drop leaflets declaring our intentions and give them a short fuse to surrender or just bend over and Kiss it good-bye! After forty years or so we can come back with the bulldozers and reclaim the land for a gravel pit!
I am sure Sadamm is curious if the USA"s new sense of purpose will motivate us to utilize a nuke on him. I hope he thinks about it each night.
Me too! Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Lebanon ...so many targets, so little time! Oops! Did I mention Saudi Arabia? Or are they "with" us now? I forget.
I wonder what even the threat to use them would do?
Hey nimc! Jeez ... Get off the fence - none of this wishy-washy stuff. Tell us how you feel!
Frankly, can I call you Frank? You may be right - there's all this crap about Islam being a peaceful religion - as long as you're muslim or supposedly "people of the book" - course I think Osama tossed that part - and too bad about those 2 billion+ Buddhists?
Maybe we need to change the 'ol "Can't we just get along?" - to "We're going to get along - or else!".
Nits breed lice anyway. Let's be done with them.
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.