Clinton Had Plans to Nuke N. Korea in 1998

Recently declassified papers indicate that under "Scenario 5027" The US would drop 24 Nuclear bombs on North Korea if the communist nation launched a pre-emptive strike on South Korea. The papers have surfaced as the Korean Pennisula fears a tougher stance against North Korea from George W. Bush.

Another interesting item of note is that the US has Nuclear warheads in South Korea in 1998 even though the official answer has been all warheads were removed in 1991.

Seoul, South Korea, Nov. 7 (UPI) -- Newly declassified documents revealed the United States planned as recently as 1998 to drop nuclear bombs on North Korea if the country attacked South Korea.

As part of "scenario 5027," 24 F15-E bombers flew simulation missions at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base in North Carolina to drop mock nuclear bombs on a firing range between January and June 1998, the Korea Times reported Sunday.

The revelation followed claims by a South Korean lawmaker that the U.S. drew up plans to launch preemptive strikes on key targets in North Korea in 1994.

www.washtimes.com...

I hope this article will get people off the notion that not everything doomsdays scenario began while Bush was in office.

We have revolving plans to nuke every nation on Earth in response to any variety of scenarios. It's war gaming, and it's done by every nation on Earth. We have plans for the trajectory of launching a nuke at Luxembourgh of course.... Just because the contingency is planned for, doesn't make it something that is being actively pursued...

As for US nukes in SK, you have to keep in mind, you can have a sub off the coast, have no nukes IN SK, but still USE them to attack NK

"Greetings Professor Falken.....would you like to play a game?"

You guys ever play that boardgame Risk? It's alotta fun huh!

Especially when the stakes are risen and the fate of humanity is at the hands of Player 1 & 2.

Im surprised that they would risk the NK airspace with F-15E's Seems more like a job for the B-2 if you really want to get down to brass tacks

Originally posted by build319
I hope this article will get people off the notion that not everything doomsdays scenario began while Bush was in office.

He just happens to be the person in power, at times things have gone wrong.

[edit on 8-11-2004 by SpittinCobra]

It sounds more like a warning to NK more than anything. Everyone should know by now that we have plans to attack every country in the world. They are called contingency plans. It seems to me that this particular plan was leaked as a warning to North korea. I guess the talks are not going as well as hoped for. Also, if this plan were ever carried out, it would be don with Neuclear subs. The NAVY would be launching first strike on NK. That would be followed by airstrikes from the Air Force.

Cheers to Clinton's staff for this plan.

A responsibility of the government is to never be caught with its pants down when it comes to global conflicts isn't it? This wasn't intended as a plan that would happen on a specific date. It was a plan, a plan that would hopefully never ever happen, but a plan nonetheless.

Personally I find it reassuring (while I don't agree with nuking anyone) when the government runs through plans like this because I see it as an effort to be prepared for things to happen.

Bear in mind when criticizing this that no one nuked NK, it was a hypothetical situation.

Had more of this gone on perhaps clearer better plans might have been in place that could have helped us with 9/11 and its response and even a better organized Iraq. Planning and testing yourself against all possible events is responsible leadership. I'd rather a military that met challenges earlier in drills and plans than one that responds with "Holy Crap ummm"

We wouldn't need nukes for a first strike... Tomohawks from ships, F17s (and likely a few Raptors) would go in with the B2's and take out the air defenses, then they'd carpet bomb with B52s on military and industrial targets. F15s and other assorted aircraft would maintain air superiority while carrying out other sorties as well...

but as I mentioned, and another pointed out...

it was a hypothetical situation.

So do we have contingency plans to even attack countries like Canada?

And they would have contingency plans to attck the US?

According to this article the North Koreans would be able to win a nuclear exchange with the US...who knows but it would be a bad situation no matter what spin you put on it!

cfkap.com...

Originally posted by eh7879
According to this article the North Koreans would be able to win a nuclear exchange with the US...who knows but it would be a bad situation no matter what spin you put on it!

cfkap.com...

The notion of anyone "winning" a nuclear exchange with the US is absurd.

Anyway, that link is rife with errors. For instance, NK does not have the capacity to target "the whole Metropolitan USA with nuclear warheads." Nor will even a redoubled production effort result in "hundreds" of warheads in a mere four years. More like an additional seven or eight, at worst.

That page reads like North Korean propaganda.

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
So do we have contingency plans to even attack countries like Canada?

And they would have contingency plans to attck the US?

Yup, your greatest ally today could be your greatest enemy tomorrow. Say a coup replaced the government in Canada really quickly with a facist nazi like order that threated the USA, you wouldn't have much time to plan, so its all been pre planned now.

No doubt we(UK) also have plans to wipe France off the map, perhaps even plans to counterattack the USA if it nuked England(Our subs have orders locked away in a safe that are carried out if the UK is destoried)

I fully understand the reasoning behind these plans, they are there "just in case"