December 9, 2022

In Stunning Strategy Reversal, Pentagon Will No Longer Rule Out Use Of Nuclear Weapons Against Non-Nuclear Threat

Well, we’ lso are finally there: stocks are officially trading off nuclear war headlines. Moments back, 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 […]#@@#@!!

Well, we’re finally there: stocks are officially trading off nuclear battle headlines.

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


Which, however , much more than can be said in regards to the US.

As  Bloomberg just documented , the Pentagon’s brand new National Defense Strategy  rejects limits on making use of nuclear weapons long championed by arms control advocates  (and, in the not really too distant past, by Joe Bide) citing burgeoning threats from Russia and China.

“ By the 2030s the United States will, the first time in its history face two major nuclear powers since strategic competitors and possible adversaries, ”   the Defense Department stated in the long-awaited document released Thursday. In response, the US may “ maintain a very high bar for nuclear employment”   without judgment out using the weapons within retaliation to a non-nuclear strategic threat to the homeland, US forces abroad or allies.

Within 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 collection 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 simply by the  pathological liar   who even trumps Trump in the untruth department, this one has just already been reversed as well as “ the threat environment has changed dramatically since then” and the Pentagon strategy  was solid in cooperation with the flip-flopping White House.

In a stunning move that should – or instead “ should” – ignite outrage among the so-called progressives but will at best quick some very sternly retracted characters, the nuclear report that may be 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 undesirable level of risk in light from the range of non-nuclear capabilities getting developed and fielded by competitors that could inflict strategic-level damage” to the US and allies.


The particular nuclear strategy document isn’t going to spell out what non-nuclear risks could produce a US nuclear response,   yet current threats include hypersonic weapons possessed by The ussr and China for which the united states doesn’t yet have a established defense.

It does spell out, however , in the strongest terms,   what would happen to another nuclear power, North Korea, if it launched a nuclear assault on the US, South Korea or Japan. That actions “ will result in the end of the regime, ” it states. US nuclear weapons carry on and play a role in deterring Northern Korean attacks.

So , the outstanding neocon minds behind the particular report concluded, it is better in order to instill the fear of a disproportionate nuclear retaliation, thus producing an outright nuclear attack far more likely  (if the US will nuke you anyway, may as well go all out).

In the document, which was framed  some time before the invasion,   the Pentagon says Russia continues to “ brandish its nuclear weapons supporting its revisionist security policy” while its modern strategy is expected to grow further. In other words, the Pentagon understood what Putin would do even before he did it and that defined the dramatic modification in US nuclear position. Almost as if the Pentagon directed the entire sequence of events…

In the mean time,   China remains the US’s “ the majority of consequential strategic competitor just for coming decades, ”   Defense Secretary  Lloyd Austin  said in a notice presenting the new defense technique. He cited China’s “ increasingly coercive actions to reshape the Indo-Pacific area and the international system to suit its authoritarian preferences, ” even as it rapidly modernizes and expands its army.   China desires to have at least 1, 500 deliverable nuclear warheads by the end of the decade,   the nuclear strategy document says, saying it could use them for “ coercive purposes, including military provocations towards US allies and companions in the region. ”

The nuclear technique affirmed modernization programs including the ongoing replacement of the aging ALL OF US air-sea-land nuclear triad. One of them are the Navy’s Columbia-class nuclear ICBM submarine, the ground-based Minuteman III ICBM alternative, the new air-launched Long-Range Battle Weapon and F-35 jet fighter jets for Europe transporting nuclear weapons.

The review confirmed previous reports that the Pentagon will retire the B83-1 gravity bomb and cancel the Sea-Launched Cruise Missile program. But the review endorses a controversial Trump-era naval weapon, the low-yield W76-2 submarine-launched nuclear warhead, which is described as providing “ an important means to deter limited nuclear use. ”

The broader strategy record also offered gently worded criticism of major US weapons programs, which often runs years behind plans and billions of dollars over preliminary budgets.

“ Our current system is too slow and too centered on acquiring systems not designed to address the most critical challenges we now face, ”   the Pentagon said. It called for more “ open systems that can rapidly incorporate cutting-edge technology” whilst reducing problems of “ obsolescence” and high costs.

The Pentagon strategy documents were sent to Congress in classified type in March so they were considered during congressional approval of the fiscal 2023 protection budget.

2. * *

So how to trade all of this? Well, the initial instinct now that nuclear war headlines are now being lobbed around is that it might be time to sell… but because Art Cashin so  insightfully put it some time ago , “ By no means bet on the end of the planet, because it only happens once. ”

Now thanks to the Biden administrative, that “ once inside a lifetime” event is that a lot closer to taking place.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *