Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush approves nuclear response
Washington Times ^ | 1/31/03 | Nicholas Kralev

Posted on 01/30/2003 10:45:58 PM PST by kattracks

Edited on 07/12/2004 4:00:37 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

A classified document signed by President Bush specifically allows for the use of nuclear weapons in response to biological or chemical attacks, apparently changing a decades-old U.S. policy of deliberate ambiguity, it was learned by The Washington Times.

"The United States will continue to make clear that it reserves the right to respond with overwhelming force including potentially nuclear weapons to the use of [weapons of mass destruction] against the United States, our forces abroad, and friends and allies," the document, National Security Presidential Directive 17, set out on Sept. 14 last year.


(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bushdoctrineunfold
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last
To: ASA Vet
Ok, I give up, the North Korea reference is easy, but I can't think of a "P" nation which is a threat.

Uh, how about Pakistan?

41 posted on 01/31/2003 4:10:34 AM PST by Menkenspiel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Menkenspiel
Well that certainly was one of my "duh" moments.
I hate it when that happens.
42 posted on 01/31/2003 4:16:28 AM PST by ASA Vet ("Hardcore wackjob segment" of FR member.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
”Somethings need to be repeated!

The disclosure of the classified text follows newspaper reports that the planning for a war with Iraq focuses on using nuclear arms not only to defend U.S. forces but also to "pre-empt" deeply buried Iraqi facilities that could withstand conventional explosives. ”

No, This is already just repetition. The LA Times came out with this unsubstantiated fear mongering claim last week and now someone at the WT chose to reference it. It wasn’t worth repeating then or now. It’s like the preverbal lie that makes it half way around the world before the truth gets off the ground.

Preemptive use of nukes is too big a policy change to be undertaken like this. This story is either the LA Times playing games or the Pentagon doing the same with Saddam’s people.

43 posted on 01/31/2003 4:16:46 AM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Karl B
So you have a clear vision

I don't have visions at all. That was banned poster spiritoftruth.

44 posted on 01/31/2003 4:19:41 AM PST by ASA Vet ("Hardcore wackjob segment" of FR member.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
The classified document, a copy of which was shown to The Washington Times, is known better by its abbreviation NSPD 17, as well as Homeland Security Presidential Directive 4.

Well Dave, I believe NSPD 17 puts the N in the doctine quite sufficiently.

It's about time.

45 posted on 01/31/2003 4:42:18 AM PST by BOBTHENAILER (Vaporize Saddam's Smoking Gun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
I think this is referring to the small load bunker busting nukes were tested lately in Nevada.
46 posted on 01/31/2003 4:46:05 AM PST by ewing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Interesting the timing of this release.
Sadaam may need to reinforce his bunkers a bit.
47 posted on 01/31/2003 5:11:10 AM PST by Semper Paratus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
"I will defend the American people." -- George W. Bush

He isn't just whistling "Dixie."
48 posted on 01/31/2003 5:14:15 AM PST by Man of the Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lion's Cub
I suspect we would send some special ops or members of the resistance in to evacuate them before the weapons hit.

I would hope not,as this would not only be a sure death sentence for these troops,but a warning to the Iraquis that that site was going to be hit.

49 posted on 01/31/2003 5:20:00 AM PST by sneakypete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: sneakypete
bttt for later read.

Mornin' !

50 posted on 01/31/2003 5:22:19 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (9 out of 10 Republicans agree: Bush IS a Genius !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
I think you might want to consider whether not responding to a CBR attack with the best weapons in our arsenal is moral or not.

I have already considered,and agree that such a response would be appropiate.

Now ask yourself whether allowing American soldiers to die to maintain your image is moral.

Ask yourself if allowing them to die while fighting a war against the wrong enemy to protect your buddies in Saudi Arabia is the moral thing to do,or if dying to help with a reelection effort is the moral thing to do.

51 posted on 01/31/2003 5:24:10 AM PST by sneakypete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: sneakypete
We lose the moral high ground when we are the first ones to resort to using WMD...

We do not plan FIRST use, but use in response. Just not necessarily in kind; chem = bio = nuke.

52 posted on 01/31/2003 5:28:26 AM PST by JimRed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Depending on where the potential strike(s) occur,
would the residual radiation muck up the oil fields
for any significant amount of time?
53 posted on 01/31/2003 5:29:39 AM PST by Freebird Forever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack
Frankly, I'm proud and honored to have a President who is deliverately unambiguous.

Me too!


54 posted on 01/31/2003 5:34:27 AM PST by TankerKC (That handle left of the steering column? It's a "turn signal".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
I done told ya' and told ya'....we should have NO stated position on this issue. The world should always be left wondering - will she, or won't she?
55 posted on 01/31/2003 5:45:58 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
"I'm not going to put anything on the table or off the table," White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. said on NBC's "Meet the Press," adding that the United States will use "whatever means necessary" to protect its citizens and the world from a "holocaust."

Translation to Saddam: "Make My Day!"

Translation to All Other: "Yeah, we'll call your jihad and meet it with your trip to paradise."

56 posted on 01/31/2003 6:01:54 AM PST by Happy2BMe (It's All About You - It's All About Me - It's All About Being Free!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
This has always been US policy. If we need the nukes to protect Americans, we'll use them.
57 posted on 01/31/2003 6:05:34 AM PST by concerned about politics (Democrats are NOT deep thinkers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Susan Saranwrap and Barbra Stressedout must be outraged:~)
58 posted on 01/31/2003 6:07:58 AM PST by verity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Orion78
The White House has ordered the Pentagon to prepare plans for using nuclear weapons against at least seven countries and to build smaller nuclear bombs for certain battlefield situations, according to a published report today.

Tops on the nuclear hit list are China, Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria, according to a classified Pentagon report obtained by the Los Angeles Times.

"This is dynamite," Joseph Cirincione, a nuclear arms expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, told the newspaper. "I can imagine what these countries are going to be saying at the UN."

It sounds like this guy is saying "Oh goodie, goodie, goodie! Ben and Jerry's ice cream for everyone!. We've got Bush now. He he he." Stupid liberals. Every country prepares the same way during a war. Even their God Clinton did it.
They've also got theirs aimed at us just in case, too. Liberal idiots.
They should just stay out of politics and go back to their playpens.

59 posted on 01/31/2003 6:16:42 AM PST by concerned about politics (Democrats are NOT deep thinkers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: JimRed
We do not plan FIRST use, but use in response.

My post was in response to people wanting us to be the first to use WMD.

60 posted on 01/31/2003 6:18:49 AM PST by sneakypete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson