Sunday, September 11, 2005

It might be crazy enough to work

Just read an interesting article on the Fox News website. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,169052,00.html

It's titled: Pentagon Considers Nuclear Deterrent for Terrorists

Here are some phrases from the article that caused me to pause a moment after reading them.

- A Pentagon planning document being updated to reflect the doctrine of pre-emption declared by President Bush in 2002 envisions the use of nuclear weapons to deter terrorists from using weapons of mass destruction against the United States or its allies.

- in a changing environment "terrorists or regional states armed with WMD will likely test U.S. security commitments to its allies and friends."

- the U.S. needs a range of capabilities to assure friend and foe alike of its resolve

- "U.S. forces must pose a credible deterrent to potential adversaries who have access to modern military technology, including WMD and the means to deliver them."

- In such cases, deterrence, even based on the threat of massive destruction, may fail and the United States must be prepared to use nuclear weapons if necessary."

- U.S. policy has always been purposely vague with regard to when the United States would use nuclear weapons and that it has never vowed not to be the first to use them in a conflict.

Anyone else find those excerpts interesting? I'm still deciding what to even think about all this. Is this the right road to be heading down? A big part of me says, YES. Nuke em' and be done with it. But, another part of me thinks of the old saying, " you reap what you sow. " If we were to start using nukes, what Pandora's box are we opening? On the other hand, I think of when we had Bin Laden cornered for a bit in Tora Bora. Anyway, they are pretty sure he was there, and barely slipped through our fingers, leaving his followers behind to fight us to the death. Imagine if we'd just nuked the mountain side. Hmmmm. It sure is tempting isn't it?

I think a bit more on it, and you know what? I'm for it. I am for taking a hard stance against these villians. They don't think like you and me. They only understand violence, and slaughter. We are eventually going to have to start playing hard ball with them if we expect any peace. They have families and loved ones too. Maybe they'd be less willing to conduct the work of death if they knew our retaliation would not only consume their lives, but the lives of their families as well. I'd love to see the look on Bin Laden's face if a week after 9/11 we had started nuking the whole Mid-East. One terrorist sponsoring state after another. And the look on Kim Jong's face would be pretty priceless too.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

This is also such an interesting debate...to Nuke or Not! As a student of history, I realize that the tactics of the Atomic Bombs launched on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, were successful in minimizing the possible, overall loss of life if that decision had not been made. But as an emotionally charged Mother who constantly thinks of the innocent children in harms way...I may not be able to push the button!