You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
-Short Attention Span Theater-
In Stunning Strategy Reversal, Pentagon Will No Longer Rule Out Use Of Nuclear Weapons Against Non-Nuclear Threat
2022-10-31
Not rule out is not the same as determined to do.
[ZeroHedge] The Pentagon no longer rules out using nuclear weapons in retaliation to a non-nuclear strategic threat to the homeland, US forces abroad or allies.

Well, we're finally there: stocks are officially trading off nuclear war headlines.

Moments ago, as part of his closely-watched speech, Vladimir Putin appeared to talk down the likelihood of a nuclear attack in Ukraine:

*PUTIN: NO POLITICAL, MILITARY REASON IN NUKE STRIKE IN UKRAINE
Which, however, is more than can be said about the US.

As Bloomberg just reported, the Pentagon's new National Defense Strategy rejects limits on using nuclear weapons long championed by arms control advocates (and, in the not too distant past, by Joe Biden) citing burgeoning threats from Russia and China.

"By the 2030s the United States will, for the first time in its history face two major nuclear powers as strategic competitors and potential adversaries," the Defense Department said in the long-awaited document issued Thursday. In response, the US will "maintain a very high bar for nuclear employment" without ruling out using the weapons in retaliation to a non-nuclear strategic threat to the homeland, US forces abroad or allies.

In yet another stark reversal for the senile occupant of the White House basement, in his 2020 presidential campaign Biden had pledged to declare that the US nuclear arsenal should be used only to deter or retaliate against a nuclear attack, a position blessed by progressive Democrats and reviled by defense hawks. But, like with every other position held by the pathological liar who even trumps Trump in the untruth department, this one has just been reversed as well as "the threat environment has changed dramatically since then" and the Pentagon strategy was forged in cooperation with the flip-flopping White House.

In a stunning move that should - or rather "should" - spark outrage among the so-called progressives but will at best prompt some very sternly retracted letters, the nuclear report that’s part of the broader strategy said the Biden administration reviewed its nuclear policy and concluded that "No First Use" and "Sole Purpose" policies "would result in an unacceptable level of risk in light of the range of non-nuclear capabilities being developed and fielded by competitors that could inflict strategic-level damage" to the US and allies.

Putin: The only country in the world that has used nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state is the United States of America [FACT CHECK: TRUE]
Well, yes. But that’s because no one else developed them first. And it should be noted that despite plentiful provocation, the United States of America has used them on neither non-nuclear nor nuclear states since Imperial Japan surrendered.
The nuclear strategy document doesn’t spell out what non-nuclear threats could produce a US nuclear response, but current threats include hypersonic weapons possessed by Russia and China for which the US doesn’t yet have a proven defense.
Only a proven offense?
It does spell out, however, in the strongest terms, what would happen to another nuclear power, North Korea, if it launched a nuclear attack on the US, South Korea or Japan. That action "will result in the end of that regime," it says. US nuclear weapons continue to play a role in deterring North Korean attacks.

So, the brilliant neocon minds behind the report concluded, it is better to instill the fear of a disproportionate nuclear retaliation, thus making an outright nuclear attack far more likely (if the US will nuke you anyway, may as well go all out).
Or less likely, because the surety of punishment concentrates the mind wonderfully.
In the document, which was framed well before the invasion, the Pentagon says Russia continues to "brandish its nuclear weapons in support of its revisionist security policy" while its modern arsenal is expected to grow further. In other words, the Pentagon knew what Putin would do even before he did it and that defined the dramatic revision in US nuclear posture. Almost as if the Pentagon directed the entire sequence of events...
Uh huh. Right.

Posted by:Spike the Hairy6811

#14  “We had to nuke them to preserve LGBQTWERTY rights!"

Richard Moore, Head of Mi6, agrees with you.

UK MI6 Spy Chief Says War in Ukraine is About LGBT Rights

The head of MI6, who includes his preferred pronouns in his Twitter bio, faced backlash for suggesting that a large part of the war in Ukraine was about “LGBT+ rights.”

Yes, really.

Richard Moore (he/him), leader of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, made the comments in a Twitter thread.

“With the tragedy and destruction unfolding so distressingly in Ukraine, we should remember the values and hard won freedoms that distinguish us from Putin, none more than LGBT+ rights. So let’s resume our series of tweets to mark #LGBTHM2022,” he wrote

Posted by: Big Brother Is Sniffing You    2022-10-31 23:48  

#13  #11 Billy B., I hope you are right about sweeping the grifters out. I doubt the country would survive much more of this shite.
Posted by: JohnQC   2022-10-31 23:36  

#12  They are unlikely to nuke us deplorables though as we live in close proximity to the enlightened.
Posted by: ruprecht   2022-10-31 17:47  

#11  The Great Ukraine Grift comes to an end in eight days. Tick tock.

Behind enemy lines: Republicans pushing into deep blue districts in sign of red landslide
by Jack Birle
October 31, 2022

Posted by: Billy B    2022-10-31 17:39  

#10  Who are they trying to intimidate right now that doesn't have nukes but might cause a lot of trouble?

You, me, and the rest of the world’s Deplorables
Posted by: Billy B    2022-10-31 17:15  

#9  The military missed its recruitment goals by about 25%. Not getting the toxic males from flyover country who fight and win wars (sarc)?
Posted by: JohnQC   2022-10-31 17:09  

#8  I've been feeling insecure ever since Biden finagled his way into the Oval Office and this doesn't help. I guess peace through strength is off the table when you scare the best people away from the military.
Posted by: Abu Uluque   2022-10-31 12:24  

#7  Like the 1964? We were told not to vote for Goldwater because he was a warmonger and would start a nuclear war. We ended up with Lyndon Johnson as POTUS and the Viet Nam went on steroids.
Posted by: JohnQC   2022-10-31 11:28  

#6  Who are they trying to intimidate right now that doesn't have nukes but might cause a lot of trouble?
Posted by: ruprecht   2022-10-31 10:41  

#5  "We had to nuke them to preserve LGBQTWERTY rights!"

Well the Russians are pretty homophobic so it makes sense.
Posted by: DarthVader   2022-10-31 09:50  

#4  Spin it however you like, "no longer rule out" or "lowering the bar". Either way, discarding the no first use policy is big. Especially with the Brandon administration running the show. "We had to nuke them to preserve LGBQTWERTY rights!"
Posted by: SteveS   2022-10-31 09:22  

#3  I recall during the Reagan rebuild one of the senior Army general officers lecturing. His point was we were to build back as effectively as we could to buy the man as much time as we could before facing the decision to resort to using nuclear weapons in a confrontation. Now it appears they're sliding back.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2022-10-31 07:47  

#2  ...On the other hand, I think you can look at it this way: We're kinda-sorta-maybe lowering the bar for potential nuclear use, because the conventional forces might not be able to cut it any more.

Any similarities to the awful post-Vietnam years are, of course, entirely coincidental.

Mike
Posted by: MikeKozlowski   2022-10-31 06:58  

#1  In other words, the Pentagon knew what Putin would do even before he did it and that defined the dramatic revision in US nuclear posture

Well don't break yer arm pattin' yerself on the back, hoss.
Posted by: Dron66046   2022-10-31 05:33  

00:00