This is the title of a news article in the August issue of American Conservative (purchase required) magazine. In the event of another 9/11-style terrorist attack on the U.S., vice president Dick Cheney’s office wants the Pentagon ready to nuke Iran.
The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing–that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack–but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections. — American Conservative, August 2005 via JustinLogan.com
Defense Tech analyzes the Pentagon’s nuclear war planning, commenting that “Only an organization would target 69 nuclear weapons on a single facility (later revealed to be the Sofrino missile defense radar) outside of Moscow in a strike designed to minimize ‘collateral damage’.”
That‘s one reason to be worried about efforts by the OVP to plan to strike Iran — not because there has been a policy decision to execute the plan (there has not), but because nuclear war planning continues to define the President’s options in ways that alienate him from the execution. — Defense Tech
Oh, the 69 nukes are to achieve a 94% probability of a kill on a hardened underground bunker. And STRATCOM doesn’t consider fires started by the nuclear blast in its collateral damage calculations.
World War III, here we come!
Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works license.
Video published by this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Sampling+ license.
Bad Behavior has blocked 3423 access attempts in the last 7 days.
Facebook
Digg
del.icio.us
reddit.com
Newsvine
Jul 26, 2005
Political Jackass » Bombs Away: Preparing to Nuke Iran
Brian Rose
Jul 26, 2005
The Iranian government can burn as far as I’m concerned (though a nuke may not be the best option).
Iran has hanged two gay teenagers.
Nonsense Nation
Jul 26, 2005
I guess that would put the pressure on Iran to see that a terrorist doesn’t get a weapon from the Iranian government.
What if thet get if from the Russian mob? Do we nuke Iran?
Jason
Jul 27, 2005
@Brian Rose:
While I agree that their decisions aren’t exactly the best, and yes, a nuke is not the best option, a blind bombing isn’t exactly “justice”.
One could almost liken US vs. Iran (with the ‘gay executions’ as a side detail) to Fundamental Christians/Mormons vs. Aethyists.
Should the Christians Bomb an Aethyist club (or maybe a scientologist church?) just because they have differing opinions.
Yes, my example is a little different, but I couldn’t come up with anything better
.
Bobby Strickland
Aug 03, 2005
I don’t know if its getting any publicity in the U.S. but I noticed that in the UK after the attacks they came up with a sticker that goes on the cell phone so that in the event of an emergency the police or paramedics will be able to know who to contact. Apparently they found that people are usually in shock after incidents like this and can’t give the emergency contact information needed. The sticker is called ICE in case of emergency. I thouth it was a good idea so i wanted to let the community know. http://www.icesticker.com/
Dec 30, 2005
Bush preparing to strike Iran? - Homeland Security or Homeland Stupidity