Pre-emptive Nuclear Strike Key Nato Option

[darkbeaver]

Pre-emptive nuclear strike a key option, Nato told

By Ian Traynor

Global Research, January 28, 2008
The Guardian - 2008-01-22

The west must be ready to resort to a pre-emptive nuclear attack to try to halt the "imminent" spread of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, according to a radical manifesto for a new Nato by five of the west's most senior military officers and strategists. Calling for root-and-branch reform of Nato and a new pact drawing the US, Nato and the European Union together in a "grand strategy" to tackle the challenges of an increasingly brutal world, the former armed forces chiefs from the US, Britain, Germany, France and the Netherlands insist that a "first strike" nuclear option remains an "indispensable instrument" since there is "simply no realistic prospect of a nuclear-free world".
The manifesto has been written following discussions with active commanders and policymakers, many of whom are unable or unwilling to publicly air their views. It has been presented to the Pentagon in Washington and to Nato's secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, over the past 10 days. The proposals are likely to be discussed at a Nato summit in Bucharest in April. "The risk of further [nuclear] proliferation is imminent and, with it, the danger that nuclear war fighting, albeit limited in scope, might become possible," the authors argued in the 150-page blueprint for urgent reform of western military strategy and structures. "The first use of nuclear weapons must remain in the quiver of escalation as the ultimate instrument to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction."
The authors - General John Shalikashvili, the former chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff and Nato's ex-supreme commander in Europe, Gene

 

[EastSideScotian]

whats new about that...they have nukes.....of course its an option...I dont agree with it....but yeah...they dont just have them for show...unfortuneatly....

 

[Avro]

Yeah....so what?

 

[Praxius]

It's an option... a very dumb one, but an option none the less I suppose.

If they decide to use this "Option" then yeah, not all that good for the Canadian Forces over there... let alone any forces over there.

Actually, it's not really an option at all, considdering the possible obvious consiquences that could come from using nuclear weapons.

You step up the game, you step up the deaths, it's still the same war, only then it'd just be even worse.

Launch Nuke in the Afghanistan/Pakistan area.... Pakistan launches their nukes, and the then party begins.

Enjoy.

 

[#juan]

There are a lot of nuclear bombs out there. Most are held by the Americans and the Russians. If a nuclear war is started, my guess would be that one of the smaller nuclear powers that starts it. Pakistan has people worried as well because of the political unrest in that country and the possibility that one of the agressive(read crazy)factions got hold of a few bombs is one of the nightmares we worry about.

http://tinyurl.com/2rkexc

 

[Toro]

Of course NATO is never going to renounce first-strike capabilities. Why would we? It is not in our interests to do so.

 

[darkbeaver]

Kosovo secession linked to NATO expansion

By Heather Cottin

Global Research, February 3, 2008
Workers World - 2008-01-30

The U.S. calls it “Operation Status.” The United Nations calls it “The Ahtisaari Plan.” It is the U.S./NATO “independence” project for Kosovo, which has been a province of Serbia since the 14th century. With NATO’s 17,000 troops backing it, Kosovo’s government is set to secede on Feb. 6, declaring itself a separate country.
Kosovo’s president is Hashim Thaci, who was the leader of the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army (UCK for its Albanian initials), which U.S. diplomat Robert Gelbard called “terrorist” in 1998, just before the U.S. started funding the UCK to use it against Yugoslavia. Thaci, whose UCK code name was “Snake,” and his UCK cronies are well funded by drug running and the European sex trade.
In a series of wars and coercive diplomacy in the 1990s, the U.S. government and the European NATO powers backed the secession of four republics of Yugoslavia, a sovereign socialist state. It took another 78 days of NATO bombing in 1999, aggression that President Bill Clinton described as “humanitarian,” and a coup financed by the National Endowment for Democracy and other imperialist agencies in 2000, to install a pro-western regime in Serbia that was open to Western intervention and privatization.
State resources were privatized. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was almost totally dismantled politically and economically.
But the U.S. then moved to break up the rest of Yugoslavia. Through lies and raw military power, the U.S. supported a pro-imperialist group of gangsters—the UCK—in the war against Yugoslavia, and this gang then took over Kosovo.

 

[darkbeaver]

The Criminalization of the State: "Independent Kosovo", a Territory under US-NATO Military Rule

By Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, February 4, 2008

While the European Union and the US, have acknowledged that they would be "opposed" to a " unilateral" declaration of independence of Kosovo, the secession of Kosovo from Serbia is already de facto. It is part of a US-NATO military agenda. It is the culmination of the 1999 NATO led invasion. It responds to US-NATO strategic objectives.
Moreover, the "compromise" Ahtisaari Proposal under the helm of the former Finnish Prime Minister to establish a "multi-ethnic" Kosovar State has little to do with "national sovereignty" or "independence". It is a copy and paste replicate of the structures imposed on Bosnia-Herzegovina under the 1995 Dayton agreements. It essentially sustains the authority of the military occupation. Under proposed blueprint, all the major decisions pertaining to public spending, social programs, monetary and trading arrangements would remain in the hands of the NATO-UN occupation administration.
The re-election of a "pro-Western" president Boris Tadic in the Serbian elections is likely to "legitimize" Kosovo's de facto secession. Boris Tadic's Democratic Party takes its orders from Washington. In 2000, it actively participated in the ousting of Slobodan Milosevic from the Serbian presidency. Moreover, Boris Tadic as Serbian president, is also the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. He is unlikely to act without consulting Washington and Brussels in the event of a unilateral declaration of independence.
Since the 1999 NATO invasion, Kosovo has become a territory under foreign military rule. Kosovo remains under UN administration, In practice, however, it is under NATO military jurisdiction. Secession from Serbia would reinforce the control of the NATO-UN occupation authority.

 

[darkbeaver]

Read this or George W. Bush Will Be President the Rest of Your Life

The Anti-Empire Report
by William Blum / February 4th, 2008
NATO is a treaty on wheels — It can be rolled in any direction to suit Washington’s current policy
Have you by chance noticed that NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, has become virtually a country? With more international rights and military power than almost any other country in the world? Yes, the same NATO that we were told was created in 1949 to defend against a Soviet attack in Western Europe, and thus should have gone out of existence in 1991 when the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact expired and explicitly invited NATO to do the same. Other reasons have been suggested for NATO’s creation: to help suppress the left in Italy and France if either country’s Communist Party came to power through an election, and/or to advance American hegemony by preventing the major European nations from pursuing independent foreign policies. This latter notion has been around a long time. In 2004, the US ambassador to NATO, Nicholas Burns, stated: “Europeans need to resist creating a united Europe in competition or as a counterweight to the United States.”1
The alliance has been kept amongst the living to serve as a very useful handmaiden ofhttp://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/...sh-will-be-president-the-rest-of-your-life-2/

 

[Scott Free]

NATO is probably reacting to Russia's recent statement that it can use its missiles for a preemptive strike.

 

[Lester]

I beleive that europe will withdraw from NATO at somepoint-what do they need them for? they have already implented the EDA (European defence agency)They have their own nukes, battle groups, navy, airforce- The USA is not the biggest kid on the block anymore they need to be realistic about the up and comers China's no slouch when it comes to the military wasn't it a silkworm missle that melted the sheffeild during the falklands episode.

 

[darkbeaver]

NATO is probably reacting to Russia's recent statement that it can use its missiles for a preemptive strike.

Nato drives the process of conflict Scott, it's an arm of imperialism, has been since day one. The mandate is the same just the venue has changed to reflect the areas of western capitalisms involvement. Russia is only just emerging from the IMF/WTO free market economic rapeing of the ninetys which was very destructive to the Russians, that period of hardships actually reduced the life expectancy of Russians by more than ten years. It killed so many that today they have a disappearing population, it's a big problem. The preemptive strike was first adopted publicly by the USA.

 

[darkbeaver]

I beleive that europe will withdraw from NATO at somepoint-what do they need them for? they have already implented the EDA (European defence agency)They have their own nukes, battle groups, navy, airforce- The USA is not the biggest kid on the block anymore they need to be realistic about the up and comers China's no slouch when it comes to the military wasn't it a silkworm missle that melted the sheffeild during the falklands episode.

French exocet I think.

 

[Lester]

you are right, kept thinking silkworms for some reason.

 

[darkbeaver]

you are right, kept thinking silkworms for some reason.

Have you seen the stats yet on the new Russian missle delivered to Iran called the Sunburn, I was looking at it the other night but I forgot where and I didn't save the page. Apparently it's very dangerous to anything it's pointed at.

 

[Scott Free]

Nato drives the process of conflict Scott, it's an arm of imperialism, has been since day one. The mandate is the same just the venue has changed to reflect the areas of western capitalisms involvement. Russia is only just emerging from the IMF/WTO free market economic rapeing of the ninetys which was very destructive to the Russians, that period of hardships actually reduced the life expectancy of Russians by more than ten years. It killed so many that today they have a disappearing population, it's a big problem. The preemptive strike was first adopted publicly by the USA.

Sure.

 

[darkbeaver]

Sure.

Power rules Scott. And that is for sure. The combined military power of NATO is the defacto power on the planet. That power has fueled western influance and wealth since the close of WWII. If you want to believe that's not the case, help yourself. Any military adventure in the next couple of months will be in maintenance of that power which will include the complete conquest of the middle east to secure the oil of both the middle east and the Caspian sea. U.S. dollar hegemony floats on oil. No oil no dollar hegemony no lavish lifestyle of infinite choice, no growth and developement no western civilization as we know it. Even now it's wealth long ago peaked in the late seventys, everything since then has been on credit and in a downward spiral. The oil is vital for two reasons, first it fuels the western worlds economys subsidized by the indiginous owners of the oil, second it cannot be allowed to flow eastward to China in volumn that would threaten the western economys by fueling Asian domestic consumption of consumer goods and raising the New Chinese Empire, that would be an unacceptable shift of power to the western civilization.

 

[Lester]

time

Have you seen the stats yet on the new Russian missle delivered to Iran called the Sunburn, I was looking at it the other night but I forgot where and I didn't save the page. Apparently it's very dangerous to anything it's pointed at.

wow- thirty seconds from horizon to impact while doing corkscrews and serpentine maneuvers- not much time to do anything meaningful this Iran war is going to be a little different than Iraq not dealing with rusty T-34's here are they

 

[Scott Free]

Power rules Scott. And that is for sure. The combined military power of NATO is the defacto power on the planet. That power has fueled western influance and wealth since the close of WWII. If you want to believe that's not the case, help yourself. Any military adventure in the next couple of months will be in maintenance of that power which will include the complete conquest of the middle east to secure the oil of both the middle east and the Caspian sea. U.S. dollar hegemony floats on oil. No oil no dollar hegemony no lavish lifestyle of infinite choice, no growth and developement no western civilization as we know it. Even now it's wealth long ago peaked in the late seventys, everything since then has been on credit and in a downward spiral. The oil is vital for two reasons, first it fuels the western worlds economys subsidized by the indiginous owners of the oil, second it cannot be allowed to flow eastward to China in volumn that would threaten the western economys by fueling Asian domestic consumption of consumer goods and raising the New Chinese Empire, that would be an unacceptable shift of power to the western civilization.

I meant sure, as in, I agreed with you.