You can find a copy of the draft paper at 
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/policy/dod/jp3_12fc2.pdf.  I have 
only just started reading it, but it already looks like most of the other 
DoD policy papers I have read - a lot of fluff, but not much substance.  The 
DoD is always putting out things like this, asking (and answering) the 
question, "What if..."

It is scary that the US has to make plans for the potential use of its 
nuclear arsenal, and I eagerly look forward to the day when the last nuclear 
weapons is disabled or destroyed, but not making these plans is like keeping 
a shotgun in your home for protection and not keeping any shells because you 
are afraid what will happen if it goes off.

BTW, do you notice that when the DoD refers to its enemies' nuclear, 
chemical or biological arsenal, it uses the term "Weapons of Mass 
Destruction," but when it refers to its own, these are "Deterrents against 
WMD" or just "nuclear weapons".  I think they are trying to downplay the 
fact that the US has enough nuclear weapons to massively destroy the entire 
earth.  Perhaps we should coin a term for this - Weapons of Gargantuan 
Destruction (WGD) or maybe Gigantic Wicked Bombs (GWB - oh wait, those 
initials are already taken).  I like Weapons of Planetary Destruction 
(WPD) - it has a nice, though eerie ring to it...

Enjoy the time you have left...

Earl Kinsley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are 
free."
 -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
----------------------------------
Check out my latest blogs at http://KinsleyForPrez08.blogspot.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Keith Addison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <biofuel@sustainablelists.org>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 5:49 PM
Subject: [Biofuel] Draft US Defense Paper Outlines Preventive Nuclear 
Strikes


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0911-02.htm

Published on Sunday, September 11, 2005 by Agence France Presse

Draft US Defense Paper Outlines Preventive Nuclear Strikes

A new draft US defense paper calls for preventive nuclear strikes
against state and non-state adversaries in order to deter them from
using weapons of mass destruction and urges US troops to "prepare to
use nuclear weapons effectively."

Archive picture of a US nuclear bomb exploding over Nagasaki, Japan,
on August 9, 1945. A new draft US defense paper calls for preventive
nuclear strikes against state and non-state adversaries in order to
deter them from using weapons of mass destruction and urges US troops
to 'prepare to use nuclear weapons effectively.' (AFP/File)

The document, titled "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations" and
dated March 15, was put together by the Pentagon's Joint Staff in at
attempt to adapt current procedures to the fast-changing world after
the September 11, 2001, attacks, said a defense official.

But the official, who spoke to AFP late Saturday on condition of
anonymity, said it has not yet been signed by Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld and thus has not been made official policy.

"It's in the process of being considered," the official said.

A copy of the draft obtained by AFP urges US theater force commanders
operating around the world to prepare specific plans for using
nuclear weapons in their regions -- and outlines scenarios, under
which it would be justified to seek presidential approval for a
nuclear strike.

They include an adversary using or planning to use weapons of mass
destruction against US or allied forces as well as civilian
populations.

Preventive nuclear strikes could also be employed to destroy a
biological weapons arsenal belonging to an enemy, if there is no
possibility to take it out with conventional weapons and it is
determined the enemy is poised for a biological attack, according to
the draft.

They could also be seen as justified to destroy deep, hardened
bunkers containing enemy chemical or biological weapons or the
command and control infrastructure required to execute a chemical,
biological or nuclear attack.

However, a number of scenarios allow nuclear strikes without enemy
weapons of mass destruction in the equation.

They could be used, for instance, to counter potentially overwhelming
conventional adversaries, to secure a rapid end of a war on US terms,
or simply "to ensure success of US and multinational operations," the
document indicates.

In the context of the US-led "war on terror", the draft explicitly
warns that any attempt by a hostile power to hand over weapons of
mass destruction to militant groups to enable them to strike a
devastating blow against the United States will likely trigger a US
nuclear response against the culprit.

Regional US commanders may request presidential approval to go
nuclear "to respond to adversary-supplied WMD use by surrogates
against US and multinational forces or civilian populations," the
draft says.

The doctrine also gives the Pentagon the green light to deploy
nuclear weapons to parts of the world where their future use is
considered the most likely and urges troops to constantly train for
nuclear warfare.

"To maximize deterrence of WMD use, it is essential US forces prepare
to use nuclear weapons effectively and that US forces are determined
to employ nuclear weapons if necessary to prevent or retaliate
against WMD use," the document states.

The doctrine surfaced after the US Congress moved over the past
several months to revive a controversial weapons research program
aimed at enabling the US military to conduct precision nuclear
strikes against hardened underground facilities.

In separate measures, both the Senate and the House of
Representatives approved four million dollars for fiscal 2006 to
study the feasibility of the so-called Robust Nuclear Earth
Penetrator, also known as the "bunker-buster" bomb, a program that
was interrupted last year under intense international and domestic
criticism.

Moreover, under the 2002 Moscow Treaty, the United States will be
able to retain up to 2,200 operationally deployed strategic nuclear
warheads all the way through 2012.

The doctrine reminds that while first use of nuclear weapons may draw
condemnation, "no customary or conventional international law
prohibits nations from employing nuclear weapons in armed conflict."

© Copyright 2005 AFP


_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 
messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/



_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Reply via email to