**US MAY USE TATICAL NUKES IN IRAQ**

LA Times and Times of India ^ | January 25, 2003 | William Arkin

[ewing]

The United States is quietly preparing for the use of tatical nuclear weapons in a war against Iraq and military planners have been actively studying lists of potential targets, the media reported Saturday.

The preparations include possible use of so called 'bunker buster' nuclear weapons against deeply buried military targets the Los Angeles Times reported on Saturday morning quoting William M. Arkin.

Defence officials have been focusing their plans on the use of tatical nuclear arms in retaliation for a strike by the Iraqis with chemical or biological weapons, or to preempt one, the daily said.

US Administration officials believe that in some circumstances, using nuclear arms may be the only way to destory deeply buried targets that may contain unconventional weapons, the report said.

Some officials have argued that the blast and radiation of effect of such strikes would be limited.

[cake_crumb]

Cool. Nowhere to run; no hole deep enough to hide in.

[pickemuphere]

Close, but no cigar,

Thank you, Freepers!

[Scott from the Left Coast]

Using Nukes on our enemies would give us all here a great sense of satisfaction...but let's face it, it simply is not going to happen, ever. The media is stupid enough to put a story like this out there for titilation but we should be smarter here.

The U.S. is never going to engage in first use of nuclear weapons. They will only be used in the case that we are first attacked with the same.

The nation that uses nukes in a first strike will be the world's pariah. And any U.S. President that orders it will be politically dead...if not impeached.

[ffusco]

liberate not destroy.

[ffusco]

liberate not destroy.

[Grampa Dave]

Psy Ops courtesy of the liars of the LA Slimes!

They ran this same story before we started the war that we would lose in Afganistan.

The good thing is the terror that this will cause to those still loyal to Uncle Soddomite in Iraq. When they get their run to the border and surrender passes dropped next week, they will be more inclined to drop weapons and run for the border.

[Poohbah]

It's my understanding that "bunker busters" are not nuclear weapons.

The B61 Mod 11 is a nuclear bomb intended to penetrate a significant distance into the ground before detonation.

[Poohbah]

Sure, that wouldn’t pull the plug on anti- terrorism cooperation we're getting from Europe, Russia, Asia, Africa, South America and the Antarctic.

What, the penguins are tracking al-Qaeda operatives for us?

[Almondjoy]

Except that's a totally ridciulous precendent and would result in world isolation.. unless you want any country with nukes to free to nuke countries that don't have them at will. You would basically start WWIII.

[beckett]

Psy ops..exactly...just like the Pentagon's release of information recently confirming that we have thousands more cruise missles than ever before and can fly 2400 sorties a day from our carriers, as opposed to 400 a day in the Gulf War.

[ApesForEvolution]

Whatever it takes...

[elfman2]

”What, the penguins are tracking al-Qaeda operatives for us?”

Just a little something extra for ya…

[navychicknik]

Do you think that the civilians in Iraq love us?? well they don't and who cares if we kill a few well that is my opinion seeming how i am currently in the active forces!

[elfman2]

”Nuke them too if they want act up.”

They would “act up”, and too many of them are able and probably willing to lob them back.

[Howlin]

This report is bogus. You don't win wars with nukes.

[navychicknik]

I agree with you totally !! (currently overseas on the USS TRUMAN CVN75)

[Poohbah]

You don't win wars with nukes.

"Take off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."

[Orion78]

Russia May Expand Nuclear Doctrine (4/28/00)
Report: Military Plans Nuke Hits on 7 Countries (3/9/02)

[muslims=borg]

Its time to put fear into these dirtbags.

[putupon]

You would basically start WWIII.

and finish it in about 3 hours.