Draft U.S. Paper Allows Commanders To Seek Pre-emptive Nuclear Strikes(N.Korea/Iran)

Draft U.S. paper allows commanders to seek preemptive nuke strikes(N. Korea/Iran)
Kyodo News ^ | 05/01/05
Posted on 05/01/2005 12:22:02 PM PDT
Sunday May 1, 5:39 PM

Draft U.S. paper allows commanders to seek preemptive nuke strikes
(Kyodo) _ The U.S. military plans to allow regional combatant commanders to request the president for approval to carry out preemptive nuclear strikes against possible attacks on the United States or its allies with weapons of mass destruction, according to a draft new nuclear operations paper. The paper, drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the U.S. Armed Forces, also revealed that submarines which make port calls in Yokosuka, Sasebo and Okinawa in Japan are prepared for reloading nuclear warheads if necessary to deal with a crisis.

The March 15 draft paper, a copy of which was made available, is titled "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations" providing "guidelines for the joint employment of forces in nuclear operations...for the employment of U.S. nuclear forces, command and control relationships, and weapons effect considerations."

"There are numerous nonstate organizations (terrorist, criminal) and about 30 nations with WMD programs, including many regional states," the paper says in allowing combatant commanders in the Pacific and other theaters to maintain an option of preemptive strikes against "rogue" states and terrorists and "request presidential approval for use of nuclear weapons" under set conditions.

The paper identifies nuclear, biological and chemical weapons as requiring preemptive strikes to prevent their use.

But allowing preemptive nuclear strikes against possible biological and chemical attacks effectively contradicts a "negative security assurance" policy declared by the U.S. administration of President Bill Clinton 10 years ago on the occasion of an international conference to review the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Creating a treaty on negative security assurances to commit nuclear powers not to use nuclear weapons against countries without nuclear weapons remains one of the most contentious issues for the 35-year-old NPT regime.

A JCS official said the paper "is still a draft which has to be finalized," but indicated that it is aimed at guiding "cross-spectrum" combatant commanders how to jointly carry out operations based on the Nuclear Posture Review report adopted three years ago by the administration of President George W. Bush.

Citing North Korea, Iran and some other countries as threats, the report set out contingencies for which U.S. nuclear strikes must be prepared and called for developing earth-penetrating nuclear bombs to destroy hidden underground military facilities, including those for storing WMD and ballistic missiles.

"The nature (of the paper) is to explain not details but cross spectrum for how to conduct operations," the official said, noting that it "means for all services, Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine."

In 1991 after the end of the Cold War, the United States removed its ground-based nuclear weapons in Asia and Europe as well as strategic nuclear warheads on warships and submarines.

But the paper says the United States is prepared to revive those sea-based nuclear arms.

"Nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missiles, removed from ships and submarines under the 1991 Presidential Nuclear Initiative, are secured in central areas where they remain available, if necessary for a crisis," the paper says.

The paper also underlined that the United States retains a contingency scenario of limited nuclear wars in East Asia and the Middle East.

"Geographic combatant commanders may request presidential approval for use of nuclear weapons for a variety of conditions," the paper says.

The paper lists eight conditions such as "an adversary using or intending to use WMD against U.S. multinational or alliance forces or civilian populations" and "imminent attack from adversary biological weapons that only effects from nuclear weapons can safely destroy."

The conditions also include "attacks on adversary installations including WMD, deep, hardened bunkers containing chemical or biological weapons" and countering "potentially overwhelming adversary conventional forces."

Iam not sure how I feel on this issue. Yes Korea is a threat against the US. But I dont think launching a nuclear holocaust fuck bomb before they do is the right answer. People will die a agonzing death. War should be the last answer to anything that poses a threat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XTC

Iam not sure how I feel on this issue. Yes Korea is a threat against the US. But I dont think launching a nuclear holocaust fuck bomb before they do is the right answer. People will die a agonzing death. War should be the last answer to anything that poses a threat.

---

Howdy XTC,

I'm curious,do you think that western civilization,should take the first hit ? Do you think that Los Angeles,London,Tokyo or Tel-Aviv,should be nuked first-before we respond ? Why do you feel that we should allow our enemies to strike first..possibly killing over a million folks at once ? Do you think that Israel,should be forced to use every wmd in it's arsenal,to defend it's self ?

Have a good one...

No I dont. But there are better answers than just doing what they are doing. If the US Strikes first, then I am sure Korea or Iran with hit us with the second blow and vice a versa. Perhaps some kind of treaty, meeting, you get the picture. Talk it out before the world goes into some kinda of nuclear holocaust

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XTC

No I dont. But there are better answers than just doing what they are doing. If the US Strikes first, then I am sure Korea or Iran with hit us with the second blow and vice a versa. Perhaps some kind of treaty, meeting, you get the picture. Talk it out before the world goes into some kinda of nuclear holocaust

---

Howdy XTC,

Well I'm glad,that you ain't one of them civilians,who're willing to sacrifice millions of Free World citizens..just to be 'fair',to the enemies of Freedom. If we do it right the first time..there will be no 'second-blow'..the sad thing is,is that the citizens of N. Korea and Iran,want freedom..but it is they,who will suffer the most. Kim il Jong and the mullahs of Iran,are basically insane,yet sane enough to succeed in the near-term..if we stand-by and do nothing. Alot of folks,are hoping that Israel will take care of Iran..but that stills leaves NK..we need RNEP's,to destroy their wmd stockpiles and nuclear weapons factories. On the one hand,Iran wishes to destroy Israel and the US,on the other,NK wishes to destroy Japan and possibly England,and of course,South Korea.

Have a good one ....

Well the minute you decide to launch a nuke, nothing matters anymore. You can all start praying for the "god that's on your side". The retaliation will be, to back XTC, a fucking nuclear holocaust fuckfest and everyone gets a piece of the action. Every nation and terrorist organization with a grudge against USA will participate and soon there will be nothing left of this planet. Try self-defending yourself with inalienable right to carry handguns then or fleeing for you life with your 5-liter SUV, dipshit. But it doesn't matter, does it, since you're "going to a better world".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nuance

Well the minute you decide to launch a nuke, nothing matters anymore. You can all start praying for the "god that's on your side". The retaliation will be, to back XTC, a f*cking nuclear holocaust f*ckfest and everyone gets a piece of the action. Every nation and terrorist organization with a grudge against USA will participate and soon there will be nothing left of this planet. Try self-defending yourself with inalienable right to carry handguns then or fleeing for you life with your 5-liter SUV, dipsh*t. But it doesn't matter, does it, since you're "going to a better world".

---

Howdy nuance,

There's no reason for the russians or chinese to join in..not sure about France tho,I reckon that they will be pissed off,that we interfered with their lucrative contracts with NK and Iran..but they'll git over it..we weaned France and Russia, off the oil-for-food program kick-backs,and they seem to be just fine.

I reckon,that you'd rather be a NK slave-laborer or an infidel,payin the dhimini tax..than you would want to be free..I'd rather die fighting,as a free man..than as a coward.

Have a good one....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

Howdy nuance,

There's no reason for the russians or chinese to join in..not sure about France tho,I reckon that they will be pissed off,that we interfered with their lucrative contracts with NK and Iran..but they'll git over it..
Have a good one....

---

You miss the whole point of his post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torog

Howdy nuance,

There's no reason for the russians or chinese to join in..not sure about France tho,I reckon that they will be pissed off,that we interfered with their lucrative contracts with NK and Iran..but they'll git over it..we weaned France and Russia, off the oil-for-food program kick-backs,and they seem to be just fine.

I reckon,that you'd rather be a NK slave-laborer or an infidel,payin the dhimini tax..than you would want to be free..I'd rather die fighting,as a free man..than as a coward.

Have a good one....

---

1) Read
2) Comprehend

With strong emphasis on the second point. Sure, if someone's attacking, I'll defend myself and my country if needs be. But with a nuke? HAVE YOU COMPLETELY LOST YOUR FUCKING MIND? Over 100 000 civilians died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and that's just the ones that died in the blast and soon after. If the US marines are so fucking great as you keep suggesting, surely a ground attack dismantling the enemy's nuclear facilities would do the job if a peaceful solution cannot be reached. Nuclear weapons are the most horrid invention that man has made and above all, USA should stop their nuclear weapons programs here and now. If USA starts blasting around WMD's, how do they differ from the so called terrorists?

while i dont agree with a preemptive nuke strike,i will say that nuclear weapons today are much different today than 50 years ago.you dont have to level an entire city.you can tacticaly nuke part of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amsterdam

while i dont agree with a preemptive nuke strike,i will say that nuclear weapons today are much different today than 50 years ago.you dont have to level an entire city.you can tacticaly nuke part of it.

---

Yea but knowing USA, you'd drop 60 megatonnes to take out a bunker. Surely there are other weapons that are able to take out a part of a city without causing a fallout.

a neutron bomb,it only kills people and leaves the buildings intact.pretty cool stuff.

Yes, let's bomb the motherfuckers! I think they haven't suffered enough. I think the first step towrds freeing the North Koreans should be to kill half of them in a horrible death known as nuclear holocaust, then they will love America and happily help us get rid of Kim Jong Il. Then we'll open up a McDonald's in Pyongyang and everything will be in its right place.

America, Fuck Yeah!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by F L E S H

Yes, let's bomb the motherfuckers! I think they haven't suffered enough. I think the first step towrds freeing the North Koreans should be to kill half of them in a horrible death known as nuclear holocaust, then they will love America and happily help us get rid of Kim Jong Il. Then we'll open up a McDonald's in Pyongyang and everything will be in its right place.

America, Fuck Yeah!

---

north korea aint shit.there leaders are pee-ons and all they can do is shoot missles into the sea of japan,scary.let them starve themselves to death.

why even waste a bomb on them.

Yeah, but what's to stop them from smuggling a nuke in on a boat or plane and detonating it in San Francisco bay harbor? Sounds feasable to me. I think the idea of pre-emptive strikes is good against these tyrannical dictators and despots. Something needs to be done to keep the Kim-Jong-Ill's in check. If threats of nuclear bombs is all he understands, then so be it.

Bush = a tyrannical dictator. How about a pre-emptive nuke strike on Washington? No wait. He's a corporate puppet. There's a difference. Got to remember that one. :cool:

Seriously, i'm speechless.. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hydrizzle

Yeah, but what's to stop them from smuggling a nuke in on a boat or plane and detonating it in San Francisco bay harbor? Sounds feasable to me. I think the idea of pre-emptive strikes is good against these tyrannical dictators and despots. Something needs to be done to keep the Kim-Jong-Ill's in check. If threats of nuclear bombs is all he understands, then so be it.

---

i agree,but that guy is a pussy.no one gives ashit about him and thats why he is always trying to flex his small muscles. :(

A pussy with a nuke is quite dangerous. This pussy could be used by other powers to attack the US or Japan (China...).

Nuance, I would love to hear some FACTS on how bush is a "tyrannical dictator". Dictator=absolute power, which he doesnt have, because this is a democracy. If you want to know about tyrannical dictators, why don't you get your facts straight and read up about Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Saddam, Tojo, Hugo Chavez, etc, etc, etc...

All the Bush bashers really have no cognitive arguments against him... just vague comments about how he murders civilians and get money for himself, help the Saudis, blah blah blah Michael Moore said so blah blah blah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hydrizzle

A pussy with a nuke is quite dangerous. This pussy could be used by other powers to attack the US or Japan (China...).

Nuance, I would love to hear some FACTS on how bush is a "tyrannical dictator". Dictator=absolute power, which he doesnt have, because this is a democracy. If you want to know about tyrannical dictators, why don't you get your facts straight and read up about Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Saddam, Tojo, Hugo Chavez, etc, etc, etc...

All the Bush bashers really have no cognitive arguments against him... just vague comments about how he murders civilians and get money for himself, help the Saudis, blah blah blah Michael Moore said so blah blah blah.

---

you are my new hero!

be careful though,some people around here are RABID!

I HAVE GONE ROUND AND ROUND WITH THESE FOLKS

Yeah I'm just starting... my mission to make them understand the US isn't all that bad, and all the bad thing you hear about Bush are mostly vague "facts" pulled out of some coprorate news guy's ass. The REAL failings of Bush no one talks about. (can we say, he spends way too much money, and he is way to easy on illegal immigration?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hydrizzle

Yeah I'm just starting... my mission to make them understand the US isn't all that bad, and all the bad thing you hear about Bush are mostly vague "facts" pulled out of some coprorate news guy's ass. The REAL failings of Bush no one talks about. (can we say, he spends way too much money, and he is way to easy on illegal immigration?)

---

agreed!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hydrizzle

Yeah I'm just starting... my mission to make them understand the US isn't all that bad, and all the bad thing you hear about Bush are mostly vague "facts" pulled out of some coprorate news guy's ass. The REAL failings of Bush no one talks about. (can we say, he spends way too much money, and he is way to easy on illegal immigration?)

---

I'll give you coupld of facts:
He's a dumb fuck with a DUI record who could not run a business to save his fucking life, and is about as articulate as roadkill.

FACT mate.

But hey, thats democracy in action.
Also, dont forget (another fact for you, courtesy of MOD, Janes defense almanac, DOD reports last 2 decades and the iran/contra dossiers) that most off that killing Saddam did, most of them guns had a nice 'Made In USA' stamp right on them!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Funken Monken

I'll give you coupld of facts:
He's a dumb fuck with a DUI record who could not run a business to save his fucking life, and is about as articulate as roadkill.

FACT mate.

But hey, thats democracy in action.
Also, dont forget (another fact for you, courtesy of MOD, Janes defense almanac, DOD reports last 2 decades and the iran/contra dossiers) that most off that killing Saddam did, most of them guns had a nice 'Made In USA' stamp right on them!

---

so its the united states fault saddam hussein commited war crimes?now ive heard it all.

i have a gun that says glock on it but it wouldnt be their fault if i shot someone.

w talks like most people.i mess up when i speak everyday?

and he got a dui back in the days?big deal?

people relate to him.he comes across as a regular joe.

you do know w scored higher on his college entrance exams and officer training tests than john kerry.

Sorry dude, forgot you cannot detect the subtle nuances of irony in the English language.
Your government supplied the guns to Sadam.
Is that clear enough?
This is a published fact, and the sources are both reputable and neutral.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amsterdam

you do know w scored higher on his college entrance exams and officer training tests than john kerry.

---

With the funding behind his educaton. Id fucking hope so.

no i know,so what?

again,so we are responsible for the mass murder that regime commited because they had some american made weapons?i guess because everyone in the middle east carries an ak-47 russia is responsible for the crisis?ironic.

and the chinese too,all those chinese made RPG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amsterdam

no i know,so what?

again,so we are responsible for the mass murder that regime commited because they had some american made weapons?i guess because everyone in the middle east carries an ak-47 russia is responsible for the crisis?ironic.

---

Responding to the claim made by another poster.

I'm reading your response and that great phrase "he who is without sin...." keeps crossing my mind....

So what? SO DONT BE SO SURPRISED! You think they were dusting crops with them weapons? Regime needs hardware - 1st supplier, your Govt. OK it was a while back, but the fact remains. And OK so my jibe about 'stamp' clearly went over your head, I forgot...sorry, so I'll specify for you that there is a difference between 'supplying' and 'manufacturing'. I'm not saying your government manufactured them.

yep it was over my head.lol.its just that your accusation is sooooooo tired.its like reading the new york times.

so we supplied the weapons 25 years ago,our fault?france sold them anti tank missles a week before we went in,china sold them guns for the past 40 years as did russia.

so that means that because we supplied them with guns 25 years ago,we are responsibe for what they did with them.

that even sounds silly.

Funken, if you want to bring up what our countries did in the past to fuck up the world, the US has NOTHING on Britain. They fucked up so many damn countries with thier colonialism, it isn't even funny. Oh, and your incorrect about Iraq having US-made weapons; they have Russian and Chinese-made weapons. I don't see any M-4's, I see Kalishnakovs. I don't see American tanks or planes, I see Russian migs and PT-76's.... Maybe your thining of the Taliban, which we did supply, then they betrayed us.

BTW, Funken your "facts" about Bush being innarticualte and can't run a business, are actually opinions.
Just to define:

Fact: something that can be proven right or wrong with physical data.

Opinion: Something that CANNOT be proven right or wrong with physical data.

Of course an opinion can be proven...

The definition of an opinion is that it cannot be proven...

"Opinion:

a personal belief or judgment that is not founded on proof or certainty."

An opinion is a personal belief or judgement, like this definition says... It isn't based on fact or truth, but it can still be proven.. If I said "It is my opinion that there are at least three white people in America" you could go out and prove it.

Well, that's not an opinion, thats a fact! An opinion would be: the best ice cream is vanilla. A fact would be: vanilla ice cream is white

opinion: Rainy weather is bad.
fact: it's raining outside!

opinion: Pulp Fiction is the best movie
fact: Pulp Fiction was directed by Quentin Tarantino

see where i'm getting here?

Okay, yeah, I get it..

But Bush did fail at business... And he is damn sure inarticulate.. You only have to listen to him to see that. So saying that he is inarticulate and can't run a business would be a fact, not an opinion.

Sure, I agree. My opinion is the same as your. However, just because he is inarticulate and a bad businessman does not make him the devil.