Sunday, September 11, 2005

PENTAGON WANTS TO NUKE 'TERRORISTS'

f
Would you trust this man with preemptive nuclear strikes?

By Elaine Meinel Supkis

It never ends, the thoughtless stupidity of people. The Pentagon posted at their website information about changing the rules for using nukes. They want to "pre-emptively strike" countries "harboring" terrorists---which can be any place, you know, including south Florida, right? And not wait for the President to order this but do it themselves via the new command structure. We are in the NORAD sector, ourselves. NORAD has been the butt of cartoons here on the blog and the incompetent military/industrial paper pushers running that joint did what I expected during the loss of a major port city: they screwed around and did everything ass-backwards.

Now we aren't going to punish the general running NORAD nor anyone in the upper ranks. He will slither under the radar like terrorist do and stay in position of power one of which is the supervision of a vast array of nuclear bombs that are set on a hair trigger and can go flying in an eyeblink. The controls over him are very tenuous indeed and growing thinner each year as the do nothings in DC give up more and more guidance over the Doomsday machine we built in America over the last 50 years.

From Yahoo:
The "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations," which was last updated 10 years ago, makes clear that "the decision to employ nuclear weapons at any level requires explicit orders from the president."

But it says that in a changing environment "terrorists or regional states armed with WMD will likely test U.S. security commitments to its allies and friends."

"In response, the U.S. needs a range of capabilities to assure friend and foe alike of its resolve," says the 69-page document dated March 15.
This is Pentagon talk for attacking potential opponents in surprize attacks using nukes to kill everyone. Great. The WMD classification is childish as well as insane. The Pentagon won't tell us exactly what these things are which is why they and Bush still pretend our illegal invasion into Iraq was allowed by the UN to search for WMD that we all know never existed.

A spitball is a WMD if the Pentagon wants it to be one!
Its existence was initially reported by The Washington Post in Sunday editions, which said the document was posted on a Pentagon Internet site and pointed out to it by a consultant for the Natural Resorces Defense Council.

The file was not available at that site Saturday evening, but a copy was available at http://www.globalsecurity.org.

"A broader array of capability is needed to dissuade states from undertaking ... courses of action that would threaten U.S. and allied security," the draft says. "U.S. forces must pose a credible deterrent to potential adversaries who have access to modern military technology, including WMD and the means to deliver them."

It says "deterrence of potential adversary WMD use requires the potential adversary leadership to believe the United States has both the ability and will to pre-empt or retaliate promptly with responses that are credible and effective."
Oh yeah. The Europeans just are itching for us to show "resolve" by launching nukes BEFORE a terrorist attack (sic). This is so illegal the UN should immediately demand all American nuclear facilities should be investigated and shut down. Having our inept Pentagon run by a Neroian President threatening the earth with nuclear war if there is any hint of possible "terrorists" in their countries is ridiculous and the entire point of the UN is to stop exactly this.

It wasn't just the disgust with WWII's aggressive fascist states, it was real fear over the possibility of nuclear war killing all humans. Once the Pentagon launches nukes against, say, Iran---nukes could fly all over the place, out of control. We already know from the White House tapes that the lunatics running the Pentagon tried desperately to get Kennedy to nuke China over Tibet. The minor clashes at the Nepal/Tibet border between India and China was seen as a time to nuke Beijing.
"However, the continuing proliferation of WMD along with the means to deliver them increases the probability that someday a state/nonstate actor nation/terrorist may, through miscaluation or by deliberate choice, use those weapons. In such cases, deterrence, even based on the threat of massive destruction, may fail and the United States must be prepared to use nuclear weapons if necessary."

It notes that U.S. policy has always been purposely vague with regard to when the United States would use nuclear weapons and that it has never vowed not to be the first to use them in a conflict.

One scenario for a possible nuclear pre-emptive strike in the draft would be in the case of an "imminent attack from adversary biological weapons that only effects from nuclear weapons can safely destroy."
What sort of "biological weapon" requires nukes to stop? And how will they stop them? We all know that information about biological weapons labs in Iraq were all fake. Can we trust the conspiritors who worked in the Pentagon and conspired with Bush to lie about this at the UN to be reasonable and fair in the future?

Hahaha. Armaggeddon, baby!

&spades From Global Security:
Afghan officials say the country's defense minister has escaped a bungled assassination attempt. The incident happened Saturday when gunmen fired on the car he had already left. The attack comes a week before Afghanistan's landmark parliamentary elections.

Officials say Defense Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak drove to the airport in Kabul Saturday, and left the capital by helicopter. Gunmen then attacked his convoy as it left the airport.

Defense Ministry spokesman General Mohammed Zahir Azimi says that four assailants in military uniforms opened fire on the vehicles, hitting the defense minister's car, but causing no casualties.

General Azimi says the four men have been arrested in what he described as a bungled assassination attempt.
In the Chinese news are pictures of the helicopter crashing and everyone running, too. Chaos in Afghanistan. Didn't we invade there to take down bin Laden? And build a nation? Like in Iraq, the news is our troops attacking yet another town, another city, suppressing the populace, the rage rising ever higher. Triumph! We always "win" when we apply great force.

So while New Orleans was being destroyed with nearly no help to save us coming from our military, the very same week, we had our forces in another country, trying to gain controls of meaningless towns. The Pentagon is part of the Defense Department. I recall, defending America was supposed to be the number one activity.

Obviously, it isn't.

To return to homepage click here
|

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home