List of reasons to use nuclear weapons

[Jara sang]

http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/zFacts_2005_03_15_Joint_Nuclear_Operations.pdf

The list of reasons field commanders can ask for permission to use nuclear weapons. Of the 8 possible reasons, only one is for retaliation. (From page III.2 (PDF p.47) of Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations) Only two of the eight (a) and (b) are mentioned in the Washington Post article.

Geographic combatant commanders may request Presidential approval for use of nuclear weapons for a variety of conditions. Examples include:

(a) An adversary using or intending to use WMD against US, multinational, or alliance forces or civilian populations.

(b) Imminent attack from adversary biological weapons that only effects from nuclear weapons can safely destroy.

(c) Attacks on adversary installations including WMD, deep, hardened bunkers containing chemical or biological weapons or the C2 infrastructure required for the adversary to execute a WMD attack against the United States or its friends and allies.

(d) To counter potentially overwhelming adversary conventional forces, includingmobile and area targets (troop concentration).

(e) For rapid and favorable war termination on US terms.

(f) To ensure success of US and multinational operations.

(g) To demonstrate US intent and capability to use nuclear weapons to deteradversary use of WMD.

(h) To respond to adversary-supplied WMD use by surrogates against US and multinational forces or civilian populations.

from cryptome.org

[Katherine Brengle]

1. 1) To kill people. (That's all. n/t)

[G_j]

2. translation: whenever we want n/t

[Faygo Kid]

3. What?? When was this written? If this was written under Bush, God help us.

I was going to make a joke about nuking a Paris Hilton TV appearance, or the Detroit Lions, but I fear you are serious here. I am so grateful to be in my mid-50s, and whatever happens, at least I had a hell of a lot of good times. And people to admire and emulate.

[Rick Myers]

4. E and F pretty much say it all!

Just do it!

[Katherine Brengle]

5. BushCo: "Death and destruction are the only answers." n/t

[Avalux]

6. Scary. Very Scary.

(f) is so broad, it can be interpreted to mean just about anything. How can these men actually believe using nukes will not lead to horrible, horrible consequences for this entire planet and EVERYONE on it????

[jpak]

7. Condition C will be ChimpCo's justification to nuke suspected

I-ranian WMD bunkers.

[Whoa_Nelly]

8. Want to learn the real reasons to use nukes? Most compelling documentary

EVERYONE should watch the video "Arsenal of Hypocrisy" to fully understand the bigger picture of the grand plan. This is a documentary, NOT a conspiracy video.

Arsenal of Hypocrisy:
The Space Program and the Military Industrial Complex
http://www.arsenalofhypocrisy.com/index.asp

I watched this the other night on Free Speech TV (FSTV). http://www.freespeech.org/fscm2/genx.php?name=home

It is the most compelling and telling documentary I have ever watched.

It's about thw why's and how's of unraveling our constitution, allowing people to die, creating wars, using pre-emptive strikes...all for the larger plan for controlof gold nad oil, for wealth and greed.


What the BushCo administration and PNAC thugs are doing is of huge design, it boggles the mind. Watching this video really puts it all in perspective..and it's scarier than hell, and made me mad as hell as it was explained.

Arsenal of Hypocrisy can also be requested as a library item through Project Peacemakers at: http://tinyurl.com/9b7o4

Are you outraged about the current state of affairs within our government? Are you wondering why there is so much meddling by this administration and what appears to be ugly and/or weird mistakes in foreign policy and military actions?

Please take the time somehow to watch this documentary.

It will make sense.

Our nation, our world is headed for greater disaster than ever known in its entire unrecorded and recorded history.

[TankLV]

9. God help us all.

First, I can see NO condition where it is appropriate.

Second, I could NEVER approve of a REPUKE saying THEY had "evidence" - they've ONLY LIED 100% of the time in PREVIOUS claims.

If a Democrat came to me and asked for approval, I would be more apt to believe them, but I still would not approve.

Haven't we learned anything AT ALL from history?!

No wonder the repukes constantly attack education and education funding.

[LynnTheDem]

10. What a difference one word makes...

(a) An adversary using or intending to use WMD against Iran, multinational, or alliance forces or civilian populations.

(b) Imminent attack from adversary biological weapons that only effects from nuclear weapons can safely destroy.

(c) Attacks on adversary installations including WMD, deep, hardened bunkers containing chemical or biological weapons or the C2 infrastructure required for the adversary to execute a WMD attack against Iran or its friends and allies.

(d) To counter potentially overwhelming adversary conventional forces, includingmobile and area targets (troop concentration).

(e) For rapid and favorable war termination on Iran's terms.

(f) To ensure success of Iran and multinational operations.

(g) To demonstrate Iran intent and capability to use nuclear weapons to deteradversary use of WMD.

(h) To respond to adversary-supplied WMD use by surrogates against Iran and multinational forces or civilian populations.

[Jara sang]

11. Kick!

For democracy!:kick: