[quote] But where do you get the idea the hawks in the US want to use nukes?<hr></blockquote>
well, i get the idea from public statements made by administration officials and from published reports on new administration policy initiatives. perhaps they just want people to think they are capable of it.
[quote] U.S. Works Up Plan for Using Nuclear Arms
Military: Administration, in a secret report, calls for a strategy against
at least seven nations: China, Russia, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya and
Syria.
By PAUL RICHTER
Times Staff Writer
March 9 2002
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration has directed the military to prepare
contingency plans to use nuclear weapons against at least seven countries
and to build smaller nuclear weapons for use in certain battlefield
situations, according to a classified Pentagon report obtained by the Los
Angeles Times.
The secret report, which was provided to Congress on Jan. 8, says the
Pentagon needs to be prepared to use nuclear weapons against China, Russia,
Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria. It says the weapons could be used
in three types of situations: against targets able to withstand nonnuclear
attack; in retaliation for attack with nuclear, biological or chemical
weapons; or "in the event of surprising military developments." <hr></blockquote>
[quote]"You have two countries, North Korea and Iraq, one with nuclear weapons and one without, one that is contained and one that is not. Yet you invade the one that has no nuclear weapons and is already contained, and you do a deal and send aid to the other." <hr></blockquote>
As for the hawks and nukes, eugene, the push for new nukes is very, very high-profile.
So being prepared to use them means wanting to use them, bluesigns.
Name me a president since WWII that hasn't had plans and preparations drawn up in regards to nukes.
-
You know what the sad thing is, Il might be right on track if this is all about getting aid. We all know the international community doesn't really care a whole lot about starving nations, maybe the only way to get help is extortion.
The international community might not care but there is no point in the international community trying to do anything about the food problem so long as North Korea continues to funnel all the food to their army while the general population suffers from malnutrition and to a lesser extent starvation. Nevertheless we announced in the last week or so that we are or will be resuming our food shipments to North Korea again.
So being prepared to use them means wanting to use them, bluesigns.
<hr></blockquote>
The pressure to use them and develop new ones has been discussed just about everywhere. Do a search in lexis-nexis as well as at fas.org and globalsecurity.org
and, yes, there is a ton of highly vocal pressure to use them. There have even been enough front-page stories to give birth to the buzzword 'tactical nukes.'
North Korea and Iraq. One's "Checkpoint Charlie" is another ones "No-Fly Zone". We've been having a stand off with North Korea for almost 50 years. Iraq is a mosquito compared to North Korea.
I feel now that we have to go into Iraq and boot Saddam's ass out. Because it's inevitable. But I'm afraid as to how we will be viewed...or judged by those uncooperative allies. But North Korea is a whole other nuclear bag.
Powell went to China I guess to give them a "briefing" on our next plans...
I like how you "turned his frown upside down". Otherwise he had no chance of membership....
Really though, he almost has that late-80's "Bobby Brown Wave" look to him, doesn't he? Might've fit right in with Bel Biv Devoe, given the proper attire and chains. Or maybe the next "House Party" movie?
Anyone else get the feeling that N. Korea and Iraq are working together on this? Kind of like Saddam says, "Hey NK cause some trouble for the US and take the heat off of us."
At the very least it is a test bed searching for a precedence. The test being, how far can you push the UN and world community before you get shutdown? Is there a "limit" or can you basically do whatever you want ultimately w/o repercussions? How long of a grace period can you expect to orchestrate a final "dirty deed" while the UN is fuddling through "paperwork and redtape" to come up with a course of action?
If it turns out that you can do whatever you please, ultimately, then that could possibly open up a series of new rogue nation activity in the years to come. These could be dark times for humanity coming up, whether or not "pre-emptive" wars are averted for the sake of short-term peace. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Well, the UN just seem to be a bunch of chicken-sh*ts where all this is concerned. They keep bluffing, but they're not very good at it:
"Saddam, you'd better disarm or we're..."
"You're gonna what?"
"...or we're, um....going to...tighten down inspections, yeah. Take that."
"Ooooh, I'm shaking in my little space boots!" <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
"Saddam, why aren't you cooperating?"
"'Cause you're all a bunch of pansies that won't back up what you say with any real action." <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />
Comments
Guess North Korea's economy is getting so bad that they need to stir up some trouble to get some much needed aid.
well, i get the idea from public statements made by administration officials and from published reports on new administration policy initiatives. perhaps they just want people to think they are capable of it.
[quote] U.S. Works Up Plan for Using Nuclear Arms
Military: Administration, in a secret report, calls for a strategy against
at least seven nations: China, Russia, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya and
Syria.
By PAUL RICHTER
Times Staff Writer
March 9 2002
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration has directed the military to prepare
contingency plans to use nuclear weapons against at least seven countries
and to build smaller nuclear weapons for use in certain battlefield
situations, according to a classified Pentagon report obtained by the Los
Angeles Times.
The secret report, which was provided to Congress on Jan. 8, says the
Pentagon needs to be prepared to use nuclear weapons against China, Russia,
Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria. It says the weapons could be used
in three types of situations: against targets able to withstand nonnuclear
attack; in retaliation for attack with nuclear, biological or chemical
weapons; or "in the event of surprising military developments." <hr></blockquote>
An interesting observation from Andrew Kennedy, head of Asia programmes at the Royal United Services Institute in London, as cited in <a href="http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030223-dprk01.htm"; target="_blank">this article:</a>
[quote]"You have two countries, North Korea and Iraq, one with nuclear weapons and one without, one that is contained and one that is not. Yet you invade the one that has no nuclear weapons and is already contained, and you do a deal and send aid to the other." <hr></blockquote>
As for the hawks and nukes, eugene, the push for new nukes is very, very high-profile.
Name me a president since WWII that hasn't had plans and preparations drawn up in regards to nukes.
-
You know what the sad thing is, Il might be right on track if this is all about getting aid. We all know the international community doesn't really care a whole lot about starving nations, maybe the only way to get help is extortion.
Pretty sad if true, even if only partly true.
So being prepared to use them means wanting to use them, bluesigns.
<hr></blockquote>
The pressure to use them and develop new ones has been discussed just about everywhere. Do a search in lexis-nexis as well as at fas.org and globalsecurity.org
and, yes, there is a ton of highly vocal pressure to use them. There have even been enough front-page stories to give birth to the buzzword 'tactical nukes.'
[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: giant ]</p>
<a href="http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/top11/kim_jong_bush.htm"; target="_blank">Top 11 Signs you might be GeorgeWBush or Kim Jong Il</a>
sample excerpt
11. You were a drunken party-boy who now finds himself the leader of a nuclear power.
10. You are often confused with your father because you share two-thirds of his name.
9. You threaten war to get oil.
hmmm... scary but true
<strong>
hmmm... scary but true</strong><hr></blockquote>
What scares me is that poeple think it's true.
I feel now that we have to go into Iraq and boot Saddam's ass out. Because it's inevitable. But I'm afraid as to how we will be viewed...or judged by those uncooperative allies. But North Korea is a whole other nuclear bag.
Powell went to China I guess to give them a "briefing" on our next plans...
"Wha's up, beotch?! Come on baby, you wanna take this outside? I got nukes I can fire all over your ass."
But they're waiting for US to make the first move.
That oughta lighten the tone a bit.
Really though, he almost has that late-80's "Bobby Brown Wave" look to him, doesn't he? Might've fit right in with Bel Biv Devoe, given the proper attire and chains. Or maybe the next "House Party" movie?
House Party VII - JUNG BE ILin?
[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>
If they were I'm sure the US would know about it.
If it turns out that you can do whatever you please, ultimately, then that could possibly open up a series of new rogue nation activity in the years to come. These could be dark times for humanity coming up, whether or not "pre-emptive" wars are averted for the sake of short-term peace. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: Randycat99 ]</p>
"Saddam, you'd better disarm or we're..."
"You're gonna what?"
"...or we're, um....going to...tighten down inspections, yeah. Take that."
"Ooooh, I'm shaking in my little space boots!" <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
"Saddam, why aren't you cooperating?"
"'Cause you're all a bunch of pansies that won't back up what you say with any real action." <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />
"Oh yes we will! Don't push us!"
"Riiiiiight." <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
"That's it! More inspections!"
North Korea is getting even EDGIER in their threats.
This is starting to bother me...big time.
<strong>::UPDATE::
North Korea is getting even EDGIER in their threats.
This is starting to bother me...big time.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Links?