 |
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999 time: 05:24
|
|
Just saw it on Fox. I wasn't a news report but a discussion among 3 military types and a commentator about the 3rd inf deployment. One of the army guys was sure, the other 2 dubious.
If true, a division commander could use nukes on his own authority...
Can this be true?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999 time: 05:24
|
|
Col David Hackworth made the statement but the pentagon has now said it's not true.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999 time: 05:24
|
|
maybe that's what they want you to believe...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999 time: 05:24
|
|
5 stars is the top, but presidential authority is, I believe, usually required to nuke someone. I may be wrong.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002 time: 21:24
|
|
when will privates be able to authorize nuclear weapons. i want to see a "starship troopers" like use of tactical nukes.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999 time: 05:24
|
|
That's true Timexwatch, you're right. However it still wasn't at 2 star level, I think it took the highest level for first use. The theory being that the Russians would break through conventionally and NATO would use nukes to stop them. What alot of folks didn't know is that the US had given the Germans tactical nukes to increase the threat to the Sovs. NATO wasn't sure that the US would nuke Russias, and thereby bring about a full on nuclear war (goodbye US) to save Germany. Then again, I'm not sure the Germans would do it...the whole strategy was flawed, but it worked I guess.
But what am I saying, you know all this I'm sure...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jack_www
|
|
I believe that the President would have to authorize use of nukes, then the commanders can use them as they see fit. Well if Iraq has a nuke somewhere in hiding and does use it on US army that will be invading they will most surelly get nuked.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zkribbler
|
 |
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Feb 1999 time: 21:24
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Lancer
What alot of folks didn't know is that the US had given the Germans tactical nukes to increase the threat to the Sovs. |
Did we actually go through with that?? I remember a lot of talk about a Multi-Lateral Force (MLF) but as I recall, the Brits nixed the idea. Tom Lehrer even wrote a song about it...some of which I can vaguely recall:
We have the force, peace to determine,
And one of the fingers on the button will be German.
Why shouldn't they have nuclear warheads?
Britain says no, but they all are soreheads.
I say a bygone, should be a bygone.
Let's make peace the way we did in Stanleyville and Saigon.
Once the Germans were warlike and mean,
But now is now, and that was then,
We taught them a lesson in 1918,
And they've hardly bothered us since then.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sikander
|
 |
Boulder, Colorado, United Snakes of America
Jan 2000 time: 22:24
|
|
Any use of nuclear weapons has to be cleared by the "National Command Authority", which IIRC is the President ("Lil' Georgie" Bush), the Vice President ("Shlong" Cheney) and the Secretary of Defense ("Rummy" Rumsfeld). There are (and especially were during the Cold War) of course standing contingency orders, but I don't see any reason whatsoever for them to have relaxed their standards at all from Cold War era standards, and in fact think that there are many fewer weapons and conditions where they might be deployed without NCA approval.
Lancer,
These days most U.S. Divisions are commanded by Brigadier (ie one star) Generals, while Brigades are usualy commanded by Colonels. Don't ask me why. Also, I strongly suspect your story about the Americans giving the Germans tactical nukes was misinterpreted. The tactical nukes were put into place in Germany etc. in order to show (as you said) our determination to go all out defending Germany if necessary. The rationale was that we would not allow the enemy to simply overrun our weapons, and would fire them in a use or lose situation.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999 time: 05:24
|
|
axi, no you may not ask a question. 
Jack, Col Hackworth said the low level release order was to immediatly counter any use of biological weapons. If a cloud of nasty stuff comes over a hill a nuke would go back over , within minutes, the other way kind of thing. In some ways it makes sense. If you are an Iraqi bio weapons unit commander, would you release your nasty stuff knowing a nuke would be on you in a very short while? Low level nuke release is a deterent that could save American/coalition lives. If the general in charge of the US division you just hit has to go up the chain to the president to get nuke release authority, then you have all day and part of the next to get away and sure, you launch your nasty.
Zkribbler, to the best of my knowledge they did go through with it. I believe they were US assets put under NATO control, or something like that, so we could get em back. In theory. Don't know if we have them back yet though, and the Germans know the French have nukes and are generally out of their minds...besides, remember Alsase/Loraine! Und Feurer, don't verget der Russians, erm I meant ahh, chancellor...
How do you spell feurer?
alva, if you're not an Iraqi I agree completely with your assessment.
Sikander, yeah I guess this Col Hakworth fellow was wrong about the 2 star bit. However he did mention one division that was commanded by a 2 star, don't recall what he said exactly.
Joseph, thasverintaresting. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24. Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|