It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Introduction
During a speech to a Heritage Foundation conference in May 2004, National Nuclear Security Administration Director Ambassador Linton F. Brooks assured the audience: “I’ve never met anyone in the Administration who would even consider nuclear preemption in connection with countering rogue state WMD threats.”
1
His assurance must have excluded the White House, STRATCOM, the Air Force, and the Navy, for during the past decade they have been busy planning for precisely such a scenario. One year after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, the Bush administration published the National Security Strategy of the United States of America. Building on the events of 9/11 – and a decade of gradual expansion of nuclear doctrine focused on Russian and China to one aimed increasingly at regional aggressors armed with weapons of mass destruction – the new strategy wove together terrorism and weapons of mass destruction proliferation in a plan for a more offensive U.S. military posture.
Three and a half years later, the military product of that strategy is operational: Global Strike. The operational embodiment of the Global Strike mission is Contingency Plan (CONPLAN)
8022, a new strike plan developed by STRATCOM in coordination with the Air Force and Navy to provide a prompt global strike options to the President with nuclear, conventional, space, and information warfare capabilities. It is important to understand that the Global Strike mission and CONPLAN 8022 are different than previous missions and plans both in their intent and capabilities. Although promoted as a way of increasing the President’s options for deterring lesser adversaries, Global Strike is first and foremost offensive and preemptive in nature and deeply rooted in the expectation that deterrence will fail sooner or later. Rather than waiting for the mushroom cloud to appear, a phrase used several times by the Bush administration, the Global Strike mission is focused on
defeating the threat before it is unleashed. In its most extreme sense, Global Strike seeks to create near-invulnerability for the United States by forcing utter vulnerability upon any potential adversary. As a result, Global Strike is principally about warfighting rather than deterrence.
It goes into details of how the USA is planning to have a series of Nuclear attack drills around the world to prepare for a nuclear war
Originally posted by Patronas
It goes into details of how the USA is planning to have a series of Nuclear attack drills around the world to prepare for a nuclear war
Nucliar attack drills....hmmm...
So...
A terrorist exercise in witch they try to bomb the WTC from the parking garage, oeps it was real.
A terrorist exercise in witch they thought of some planes hitting key positions in the USA..oeps...was real...
An terrorist exercise in witch some terrorists bomb the undergroudn of london...OEPS WAS REAL.
Then Fox news and bush and some other people say there will probably be another terrorist attack in the USA, this time MAYBE of nucliar proportions..
And now they are having nucliar drills how bout that.
my advise: RUN LIKE HELL, GET *SNIP*OUT OF AMERIKA, GO SOMEWHERE WHERE IT IS STILL PEACEFULL, or at least what looks like peace
I don't think I want to panick like you want me to. Just another date to not worry about.
\
Originally posted by Melbourne_Militia
This is a document published by the Federation of American Scientists,[...] that will give the USA full global nuclear attack capability (I sorta thought they already had that).
Let us not forget about the NUCLAR bomb drill in haiwiia.
"Simulated nuclear explosion planned"
www.honoluluadvertiser.com.../20060711/NEWS08/607110337/1001/NEWS
"State simulates terror attack"
starbulletin.com...
[edit on 8/9/2006 by mrmonsoon]
[edit on 8/9/2006 by mrmonsoon]