RE: Use of nuc. weapons in Iraq

["Strickert, Rick" <rstrickert@signaturescience.com>]

More on the discussion about the use of nuclear (as well as nukular) weapons:



>From a December 11, 2002, Statement by the President -

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/12/20021211-8.html



	"Today I have issued the National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction. The strategy establishes a comprehensive approach to counter the growing threat from weapons of mass destruction (WMD), including nuclear, radiological, biological, and chemical weapons... "



>From a December 11, 2002 Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer -

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/12/20021211-5.html#4



	Q Now, on the response question, some -- there was a headline in New York today that said, "Nuke 'em." There have been other reports that suggested the administration was somehow upping the ante here. Is that the case? 



	MR. FLEISCHER: No, I think it's a rather declarative statement of how seriously the United States would take it in the event that weapons of mass destruction were used. And it's a reiteration of a statement that has been made previously. But this time, it ties it all together to make clear that the United States will, indeed, respond. 



	Q Any departure at all from existing U.S. policy, going all the way back to the Gulf War, when we made similar statements, as far as I remember -- 



	MR. FLEISCHER: No, this policy is consistent with that previous policy. 



	Q But in an era of stateless terrorism, against who? 



	MR. FLEISCHER: Let me read from it. What is says, to be clear, is "The United States must be prepared to respond to the use of weapons of mass destruction against our citizens or military forces and those of our friends and allies. We will develop and maintain the capability to reduce to the extent possible the potentially horrific consequences of WMD attacks at home and abroad." 



	And the message, I think that people, whether they are states or whether they are terrorists or whether they are terrorists -- or states that are hosting terrorists, is that they should not engage in any such use because the United States will respond, as we deem appropriate. 



	Q With weapons of mass destruction? 



	MR. FLEISCHER: As is necessary and as is deemed appropriate. 



And from today's Washington Times (http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030131-27320419.htm)



	Bush approves nuclear response

	Nicholas Kralev

	THE WASHINGTON TIMES

	Published January 31, 2003



	     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.

	     A similar statement is included in the public version of the directive, which was released Dec. 11 as the National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction and closely parallels the classified document. However, instead of the phrase "including potentially nuclear weapons," the public text says, "including through resort to all of our options."...

	     



Rick Strickert

Austin, TX



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/