Replies

Some comments on the article:

"...These and a host of other directives, including calls for developing bunker-busting mini-nukes and nuclear weapons that reduce collateral damage, are contained in a still-classified document called the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR)..."

"...Nevertheless, the Bush administration plan reverses an almost two-decade-long trend of relegating nuclear weapons to the category of weapons of last resort..."

"... It also redefines nuclear requirements in hurried post-Sept. 11 terms...."

The article also states, later on in the body, that...

"...Defense Department strategists promote tactical and so-called "adaptive" nuclear capabilities to deal with contingencies where large nuclear arsenals are not demanded..."

"...They seek a host of new weapons and support systems, including conventional military and cyber warfare capabilities integrated with nuclear warfare..."

"...The end product is a now-familiar post-Afghanistan model--with nuclear capability added. It combines precision weapons, long-range strikes, and special and covert operations..."

I don't see any problem here.

"...But the NPR's call for development of new nuclear weapons that reduce "collateral damage" myopically ignores the political, moral and military implications--short-term and long--of crossing the nuclear threshold..."

The so called "Nuclear Threshold" was breached when the Terrorists announced publicly that they would use ANY MEANS POSSIBLE to destroy the United States and its citizens.

"...The NPR says they "could be employed against targets able to withstand nonnuclear attack," or in retaliation for the use of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons, or "in the event of surprising military developments."..."

The article also states, later on in the body, that...

"...China, because of its nuclear forces and "developing strategic objectives," is listed as "a country that could be involved in an immediate or potential contingency." Specifically, the NPR lists a military confrontation over the status of Taiwan as one of the scenarios that could lead Washington to use nuclear weapons..."

Duh...!

"...The second important insight the NPR offers into Pentagon thinking about nuclear policy is the extent to which the Bush administration's strategic planners were shaken by last September's terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon...."

This is something that the MEDIA just can't understand no matter how hard they try...

"...Heretofore, nuclear strategy tended to exist as something apart from the ordinary challenges of foreign policy and military affairs...."

WRONG! What about M.A.D. ? Are you saying that it wasn't part of our foreign policy?

"...The terrorists who struck us on Sept. 11th were clearly not deterred by doing so from the massive U.S. nuclear arsenal," Rumsfeld told an audience at the National Defense University in late January..."

He was right.

"...Accordingly, the NPR calls for new emphasis on developing such things as nuclear bunker-busters and surgical "warheads that reduce collateral damage," as well as weapons that could be used against smaller, more circumscribed targets--"possible modifications to existing weapons to provide additional yield flexibility," in the jargon-rich language of the review..."

Sounds good to me. Wise and smart.

"...Officials did stress that, consistent with a Bush campaign pledge, the plan called for reducing the current 6,000 long-range nuclear weapons to one-third that number over the next decade..."

This makes sense.

"...Rumsfeld, who approved the review late last year, said the administration was seeking "a new approach to strategic deterrence," to include missile defenses and improvements in nonnuclear capabilities..."

"...It calls for "a new strike system" using four converted Trident submarines, an unmanned combat air vehicle and a new air-launched cruise missile as potential new weapons..."

The article also states, later on in the body, that...

"...Beyond new nuclear weapons, the review proposes establishing what it calls an "agent defeat" program, which defense officials say includes a "boutique" approach to finding new ways of destroying deadly chemical or biological warfare agents, as well as penetrating enemy facilities that are otherwise difficult to attack..."

This sounds very reasonable.

"...This includes, according to the document, "thermal, chemical or radiological neutralization of chemical/biological materials in production or storage facilities..."

The article also states, later on in the body, that...

"...the review calls for incorporation of "nuclear capability" into many of the conventional systems now under development..."

"...An extended-range conventional cruise missile in the works for the U.S. Air Force "would have to be modified to carry nuclear warheads if necessary."

Most Americans probably thought that it was already done this way since the 1960's.

"...the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter should be modified to carry nuclear weapons "at an affordable price..."

"...research to begin next month on fitting an existing nuclear warhead into a new 5,000-pound "earth penetrating" munition...."