It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Two More Wars that won't need Soldiers

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 09:13 AM
Furh86 brings up a point I never thought about.

Isreal attacks Iran; Iran can't attack Isreal directly due to US forces in Iraq, Turkey to the north and afganistan to the east.

It's actually pretty brilliant strategy.

If Iran attacks the US forces directly I can see the nuke option being played out.

Furh86 good research!

posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 09:14 AM
we got troops in South Korea and Japan doin nothing so dont expect that North Korea would invade South Korea again. this aint the 1950s. the U.S. military is ready for NK if it decides to be naughty.

posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 12:11 PM
As the US lowers the nuclear threshold, debate is stifled

The Pentagon has just removed from its website a document outlining a new doctrine for joint nuclear operations for the US chiefs of staff. For the first time it sets out specific guidance for US commanders reflecting the Bush administration's doctrine of pre-emptive strikes. It envisages the use of nuclear weapons to pre-empt a possible attack by a country, terrorist or criminal group with "weapons of mass destruction".

It states: "To maximise deterrence of WMD use, it is essential US forces prepare to use nuclear weapons effectively and that US forces are determined to employ nuclear weapons if necessary to prevent or retaliate against WMD use."
The proposed new doctrine significantly lowers the threshold for triggering the use of nuclear weapons, notably America's 480 tactical nuclear bombs in Europe, including the 110 at the US base at Lakenheath in East Anglia.

Tell me I'm not the only one that finds it IRONIC that we're threatening to use nuclear weapons to keep others from having nuclear weapons...

And why are they even bothering with another WMD story?!?! Yeah, riiight. WMDs... that's the ticket! They'll believe that again!

posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 01:46 PM
Oh dear... Looks like my previous post has been... er...


Sorry for jumping the gun Benevolent Heretic

Looks like you could be on to something after all.

I cant believe they would be so stupid as to even consider a first strike option...

Total idiots running the world. And now Britain has pointed the finger at Iran, for attacks on British solders, it could be the build up to all the excuses they need!!!

Very worrying indeed

posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 02:17 PM
If we didn't use nukes in Vietnam or Korea I doubt we would use them now, unless I see confirmation for this alleged doctrine its just some more fear mongering going on.

[edit on 5-10-2005 by WestPoint23]

posted on Dec, 30 2005 @ 05:54 AM

Originally posted by Humster

Thats 100% political suicide....

Not only on American soil, but also the world.

Imagine the outcome if Bush use nukes. The world will change forever.

I mean seriously, Bush ain't really that stupid not to know the outcome of using Nukes

Oh,yes ,he is....after 9/11 we all asked ourselves :Can the CIA be so stupid to create the attacks? It was a long plan which,unfortunately,only now ,in the 13 th hour,we've unfolded

Citizens ask Radio Erevan:
-What shall we do in the case of a nuclear war between the imperialists and USSR?
-Well,first of all,put a bed sheet onto your head
Then gather in columns and move orderly and quietly to the nearest graveyard
-Ok,I got it.But why quietly?
-So you'll not create panic

posted on Dec, 30 2005 @ 08:16 AM
I agree with my mate Jeremiah also I'm an Aussie too.
But you know Howard has an adgenda too He wants missiles offensive & defensive powered by an engine that will cut the round the world time to a mere few minutes. Remmember Australia has nukes we have them at North West Cape HMAS Harold E Holt. Engine is being developed at QUT.
Happy New Year

posted on Dec, 30 2005 @ 02:42 PM

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Mired in interminable conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush administration is moving toward initiating two more wars, one with Iran and one with North Korea. With no US troops available, the Bush administration is revamping US war doctrine to allow for "preventative nuclear attack." In short, the Bush administration is planning to make the US the first country in history to initiate war with nuclear weapons. The Pentagon document, "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations," calls for the use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear adversaries in order "to ensure success of US and multinational operations."

First of all what the heck is Second it's laughable to say there are no troops available, we are kind of stretched out but there are still some troops ready. Third we wouldn't invade Iran, just do air strikes against them. Fourth if we went to war with North Korea now most of the allied troops would be South Korean, so we wouldn't need to send over a lot of troops. We would pretty much handle the air and sea war. And handle it just fine at that.

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in