"Zweifel: Bush would use mini-nukes, prof warns"
" target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.madison.com...
"If you ask Professor John Swomley, he is.
Swomley, who teaches Christian ethics at the St. Paul School of Theology in Kansas City, has authored an indictment of the Bush administration's
foreign policy that includes actual plans to use nuclear bombs as pre-emptive weapons.
It is essential, he says in a magazine article, for Americans to understand that the administration has directed the military to prepare plans to use
nuclear weapons against at least seven countries - China, Russia, North Korea, Syria, Iran, Libya and Iraq.
Presumably, had Iraq had those so-called weapons of mass destruction and had used them when we invaded the country this spring, we were prepared to
drop a weapon of mass destruction of our own.
And Swomley warns that we shouldn't buy the argument that these nukes are small and won't be all that horrific.
"Nuclear weapons, even if they are smaller than those of Hiroshima or Nagasaki, will not only kill on impact, but raise immense radioactive dust,
with the terrible results of slow, agonizing death from radiation," he writes.
"Some people make the assumption that using smaller nuclear weapons will allow accurate precision bombing, such as was claimed for the bombing of
Iraq," he adds. "What was not reported by officials is that although the Iraq 'smart' bombs rarely missed a target by more than 13 feet, when a
bomb blew up it sent high-speed shrapnel flying as far as a mile, causing many civilian casualties. The additional power of a nuclear bomb, together
with its dispersal of radioactivity , is sure to produce infinitely more harm."
Nevertheless, the U.S. Senate has already approved Bush's request to lift a 10-year ban on research, development and production of nuclear weapons of
less than 5 kilotons.".......
Scary, very scary.
Is this a matter of "more Leftist propoganda?"
Is there a problem with this issue of "mini-nukes" or not?
Is there a problem with this at all or does it amount to more of: "We can do such things but you can not?"
Heres what a 1 kiloton bomb looks like:
"Nuke test Able_B, 1952, 1 kiloton"
I also found this....."Statement of Principles"
"June 3, 1997
American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also
resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in
the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential
agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests
in the new century.
We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War,
America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United
States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the
foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft,
and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term
commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present
threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.
We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and
future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United
States' global responsibilities."
There is a thread on "Mini-Nukes" by Advisor that, sadly, did not recieve the attention that it should have but am posting it here cause his source
was an excellent one.
Thoughts or comments to this? Yea or nay? Anything?
[Edited on 15-9-2003 by Seekerof]