George Bush is one signature away from having preemtive nuclear strike powers



  1. http://www.10tv.com/Global/story.asp?S=3833744



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_strike
    •  
  2. 39 Comments

  3. by   Spidey's mom
    "A Pentagon planning document spells out America's willingness to use nuclear weapons in a preemptive strike if terrorists threaten the U-S or its allies with weapons of mass destruction."

    It seems only prudent to me to look at this since the terrorists have upped the ante.

    steph
  4. by   VeryPlainJane
    Like the time Iraq threatened us with WMD?



    Quote from stevielynn
    "A Pentagon planning document spells out America's willingness to use nuclear weapons in a preemptive strike if terrorists threaten the U-S or its allies with weapons of mass destruction."

    It seems only prudent to me to look at this since the terrorists have upped the ante.

    steph
  5. by   Spidey's mom
    Quote from VeryPlainJane
    Like the time Iraq threatened us with WMD?
    Exactly! :-)

    steph
  6. by   Roy Fokker
    Ladies and Gentlemen,

    Even the SOVIETS donot have "one man launch" capability.

    The Pentagon won't stand for it.

    And even if it did, the guys manning the silos in Dakota or the subdrivers won't just fall for the drop of the hat.

    For all the posturing and arm-twisting and rhetoric that "think-tanks", political "analysts" and ofcourse politicians do - any sane member of the military knows that the use of nuclear weapons (even the so called "tactical" ones. How the hell does anyone differentiate between tactical and strategic nuclear use anyways?) makes for ghastly possibilities.

    Truman didn't decide just willy nilly to drop "fat boy" and "little man" ya know.

    And I'd like someone to explain to me why a nuclear "first use" policy makes sense.

    For example, assume "XYZ Iraqi terrorist organisation" bombs us with a nuke - who do WE drop the nuke on in retaliation? Or how/where do we drop on as a "strategic first strike" ?

    First lets decide these questions before we get carried away and fall over each other.
  7. by   VeryPlainJane
    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of illicit weapons at the time of the U.S. invasion in March 2003 and had not begun any program to produce them, a CIA report concludes.

    http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...aq.wmd.report/

    The hunt for biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in Iraq has come to an end nearly two years after President Bush ordered U.S. troops to disarm Saddam Hussein. The top CIA weapons hunter is home, and analysts are back at Langley.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Jan11.html

    Many said they had been openly sceptical about the presence of WMD in Iraq for years. There was a systematic failure, they believe, in the way intelligence was interpreted. This was because they were under pressure to provide the government with what it wanted, namely that Iraq possessed WMD and that it posed a clear and present danger.

    http://www.sundayherald.com/39487

    U.S. public perceptions about former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein's alleged ties to al-Qaeda and stocks of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) continues to lag far behind the testimony of experts, boosting chances that President George W Bush will be re-elected, according to a survey and analysis released Thursday.

    http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0422-09.htm

    No sign of Iraq's WMD

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3081006.stm

    New questions about U.S. intelligence regarding Iraq's weapons of mass terror

    http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar...09/9intell.htm

    The Senate Intelligence Committee has issued a scathing report of the CIA's pre-war assessments of Iraq's WMD. According to the committee, claims made by the CIA that Saddam Hussein possessed chemical and biological weapons and was working to acquire nuclear weapons were either wrong or based on false or misleading analysis. Sen. Jay Rockefeller said, "We in Congress would not have authorized that war ... with 75 votes, if we knew what we know now." Rockefeller blames the CIA's "bad information" for the decision to go to war in Iraq. But that's only part of the picture, and not the most important part.

    http://www.cato.org/dailys/07-13-04-2.html


    PRINT THIS ARTICLE
    EMAIL THIS ARTICLE
    WRITE TO THE EDITORS
    TAKE ACTION NOW
    SUBSCRIBE TO THE NATION

    Read David Corn's "Where's the Outrage?" for more on the WMD scandal.

    With each passing day, the questions surrounding Iraq's missing weapons of mass destruction take on added urgency. Where are the massive stockpiles of VX, mustard, and other nerve agents that we were told Iraq was hoarding? Where are the thousands of liters of botulinim toxin? Wasn't it the looming threat to America posed by these weapons that propelled the United States into war with Iraq? Isn't this the reason American military personnel were called upon to risk their lives in combat?

    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20030623/byrd

    'US knew Iraq was WMD free'

    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...DF602720CB.htm

    "See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." George W Bush, 5/24/05
  8. by   VeryPlainJane
  9. by   ZASHAGALKA
    Well it's about time.

    Of course, it'll have to be repealed before the next Democrat takes office ...

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
  10. by   fab4fan
    Sickening.
  11. by   Jessy_RN
    Just the thoughts scare me to death :stone
  12. by   URO-RN
    I do hope that we don't go down that road again. The history channel had a docu on the effects of the nuke in HIroshima and it's heartbreaking.
  13. by   fab4fan
    And after we bomb the Iraqis, the Afghanis, then who? I'm sure there are some who would advocate the French, but really, where does it stop? Every time there is a perceived threat, should nuclear weapons be considered as a means to "neutralize" the threat?

    Humanity is sorely lacking these days.
  14. by   VeryPlainJane
    God Save Us From Ourselves

close