Posted on 03/09/2002 1:07:48 AM PST by kattracks
The White House has ordered the Pentagon to prepare plans for using nuclear weapons against at least seven countries and to build smaller nuclear bombs for certain battlefield situations, according to a published report today.
Tops on the nuclear hit list are China, Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria, according to a classified Pentagon report obtained by the Los Angeles Times.
"This is dynamite," Joseph Cirincione, a nuclear arms expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, told the newspaper. "I can imagine what these countries are going to be saying at the UN."
The Times said the secret report, given to Congress on Jan. 8, says the nuclear weapons could be used against targets able to withstand nuclear attack; in retaliation for attack with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, or "in the event of surprising military developments."
The report says the Pentagon should be prepared to use nuclear weapons in an Arab-Israeli conflict, in a war between China and Taiwan or in an attack by North Korea on the south, and possibly in an attack by Iraq on Israel or another neighbor.
The call for a limited-range arsenal was seen as an important deterrent against enemies who doubt the U.S. would use larger weapons in certain situations because of the widespread death and destruction they would cause.
The U.S. has long had a detailed plan for nuclear attack on Russia, but the new Nuclear Posture Review apparently marks the first time an official list of potential targets has been compiled.
The report acknowledges Russia is no longer officially an "enemy," but cites concern about the huge Russian arsenal of about 6,000 deployed warheads and some 10,000 smaller "theater" weapons, The Times said.
Pentagon spokesman Richard McGraw declined comment because, he said, the report is classified.
Nuclear analysts predicted to the newspaper that the report would draw strong reaction, but some insisted the Pentagon must be ready — especially after Sept. 11 — for all contingencies.
One nuclear expert, John Isaacs, president of the Council for a Livable World, said, "This is very, very dangerous talk.... Dr. Strangelove is clearly still alive in the Pentagon."
U.S. policy generally has been to consider the use of nuclear weapons against nonnuclear states only if they are allied with nuclear powers.
We know our conspicuous enemies sneak up and play dirty. Now they can sweat for their trouble.
I completely agree with you. They ( the RATS ) have tried everything they can to hurt W over the last year and a half and have failed. America can see these people for what they are, Liberals are anti military, anti middle class, and anti America. They want only to promote their socialist agenda and destroy this great land. They don't care that Americas safety hangs in the balance, because they don't love this country. Yes Alan, I said it, and I mean it!!
I know, I know. I began my argument from the POV that someone thought this was purposely leaked and was good strategy.
We did not threaten them, we prepared a defense plan.
I have no problem with a defense plan or contingency plan. I see no reason to name names and now that this has been released...I think I've put forth that argument five or six times already.
Yes, they [Libya} have, but they have also constructed hardened underground sites that a nuke might be needed to penetrate. Do you trust Kadafi(sp?)?
Might be needed, whatever. Cynic that I am, I trust very few people who hold power. However, Kaddafi has *seemed* sincere lately, why punish a "good deed"?
So? What are they going to do? Attack? If they do, they would have anyway.
I don't know how you can say this is necessarily so.
Whoever leaked it should be tried and hung in public for TREASON.
LOL!!! You don't honestly think anyone will be held accountable for this do you????
Assumimg that war against other nations is an honest perspective, nothing. But we don't see this, in America. We see a continuing and expanding war that is now global.
I am confident that you are of the finest with family background and education. We have a problem in America. Our government no longer protects us. We have a government today that protects *BIG_BUSINESS*; this should have never happened as it violates the underscore of our Constitution.
It has gone on for years, too. Over 100 years since the Spanish-American War in 1898 which turned it all to the crap that we see, today.
We are a "sinking-ship" today. The world is about to consume us because we, in America, have no manners.
...and I hesitate to post which ones came to mind :^)
Lets see...
Marin, Palm Beach, Westchester?
We'll try to stay serene and calm,
when Alabama gets the bomb.
And until the US replenishes its depleted inventory of cruise missiles (factory in California is supposedly producing enough for a late Spring assault on Iraq according to Michael Reagan on his radio program), the US has few long range cruise missile "arrows" with which to afflict Iraq. But will enough cruise missiles be produced soon enough for prolonged military actions and/or self defense against other necessary targets in addition to Iraq? And will these cruise missiles have tactical nukes available (like once was the case) to be put on them if need be?
When HW Bush announced in a speech to the nation on September 27, 1991 that he was unilaterally disarming the US of its tactical nukes, he also had our neutron bomb components destroyed at a time when others allege Bush gave the neutron bomb to China (Sam Cohen father of neutron bomb).
Tactical nukes ordered dismantled by Bush included nukes for cruise missiles and artillery shells. In this speech HW Bush declared his actions were part of his "New Age" vision-his exact words (not sure if they refer to the New Age Religion).
I have a copy of HWBush's speech and the list of US nukes he had destroyed- I requested it and it came to me directly from the White House. THe speech has been reposted on FR late last year several times.
I look at it as just keeping him on his toes and reminding him that Pres. Bush is in the Reagan mold, not clntoon.
So? What are they going to do? Attack? If they do, they would have anyway.
I don't know how you can say this is necessarily so.
Not necessarily, but I would think high probability.
LOL!!! You don't honestly think anyone will be held accountable for this do you????
Cynicism? Let's not get into a pissing contest, we will have to get out the waders and trout season has not even opened yet!;-) Accountability? Hey I can dream, can't I?
P.S.-
I'm listening to Batchelor and Alexander on WABC 770 AM (they stream) and their first guest was Frank Gaffney from the Center For Security Policy who said the leak sounded like it came from a guy named Bill Larkin. I did not catch who he was (unlike that running joke around here I really was in the shower), but I'm going to try to find out who he is. Gaffney said he was a well known leaker from the past in these kind of matters.
4 chariots, (horsemen?)
Two mountains (bronze = man made)
Joshua crowned, Kohen Gadol (Yeshua)
Note: VAV Number 6
Compare, Parsha: PEKUDEI EXODUS 38:21-40:38
OK, so why hasn't Congress declared war?
Cynical? Moi??? Naaaaah.
Accountability? Hey I can dream, can't I?
Well, I'm dreaming too but the elite don't get held accountable for much, if anything these days.
...but we gotta cut some slack for Westchester.......There's a well known FReeper who lives in Westchester.
And congresspersons shouldn't be leaking classified information. They should be arrested and/or impeached. Publishing such a story causes difficulty in diplomatic relations, and the LA Times knows that. They didn't care, because their boy lost in 2000 and they want Bush's presidency fraught with as much peril as possible. They (both Congress's Left-wing and their willing accomplice, LA Times) apparently don't care how many soldiers die, how many missions fail, and how many enemies they might create... as long as their anti-Bush agenda is promoted. When one acts in such a way to help American troops become endangered, that's sedition and treason.
Do you have no problem, however, with the summary way in which the administration is deporting itself?
How is a report that is asking the Pentagon to prepare for the worst-case scenario a bad thing? I'd be willing to bet that every administration has published similar reports since JFK. (Ever seen the movie "Wargames" with a teen-age Matthew Broderick? Such preparation is not a new idea.)
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.