Preemptive Nuclear Strikes by USA - Now Only A Matter of Time

Pentagon has drafted important revisions to the The Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations.

The Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations describes the role of U.S. nuclear deterrence, force posturing and deployment considerations. In short the doctrine specifies definite rules for the use by the U.S. of nuclear weapons.

The newly revised doctrine provides more options and reasons for using nuclear devices as well as other weapons of mass destruction against nations and/or terrorist groups and furthermore, includes an option for preemptive use of nuclear weapons.

In other words, the revised doctrine includes the option for the United States to fire off the first nuclear missile - a preemptive strike, an idea that was initially announced by U.S. President George W. Bush in 2002. And that is merely the tip of the iceberg.

Along with the newly revised preemption clause, the doctrine also incorporates:

- a support for the utilization of nuclear weapons against all forms of weapons of mass destruction including chemical and biological;

- a support for deploying nuclear weapons against terrorists and terror factions;

- support for protection of nuclear forces over protecting people.

The revised doctrine contains over 20 additional pages devoted to various nuclear options including the use of nuclear devices in theatre operations or in an active combat zone. The new chapter devoted to theater nuclear operations was added as a direct result of the emergence of dangerous ‘rogue states’ and organized terrorist factions especially if those entities had been successful in obtaining weapons of mass destruction.

Critics of the revised doctrine warn that the added options for deployment of a nuclear device “threaten to make nuclear weapons just another tool in the toolbox”. The revised document also includes at least four scenarios where commanders in a combat theatre situation request Presidential approval for use of nuclear weapons first.

According to The Nuclear Information Project, “in nuclear preemption, the objective no longer is deterrence through threatened retaliation but battlefield destruction of targets with nuclear weapons first in anticipation that deterrence will fail.”

In other words the next Iraq like war is very likely to be fought with nuclear strike first, especially as they were alleged (falsely as we know now) of possessing WMDs.

The scariest part is that now all the government has to do is level baseless allegations against any nation of possessing WMD’s (in which they have demonstrated their excellent acumen) or supporting terrorists before it is destroyed or crippled with nuclear strikes. US forces are now authorized to use nuclear weapons with the same impunity as conventional weapons.

We all are deeply aware of the death and destruction that one small nuclear bomb can create, not only in the immediate aftermath of a strike but in the years and decades to come.
At a time when we would hope that world leaders would be doing their utmost to decrease the nuclear threat, the world’s most powerful nation is writing doctrines that will allow them to strike first - anywhere on this planet.

It is not hard to imagine how this new power could be leveraged by the government in negotiating with countries around the world.

For example now they are simply threatening sovereign nations (except few unfortunate ones like Iraq or Afganistan) which doesn’t bend to its will. In future it may be enhanced with threats of preemptive nuclear strikes and possibly even a demonstration of intention.

Would the self-appointed-leader-of-the-world-US-government misuse such power? You tell me.

Link: Halifax Live
Courtesy of Joel Bellenson.