| |
 |
Monday, May 2, 2005 |
The White House Correspondents' Association Dinner this year was particularly interesting with Laura Bush's witty debunking of George. Of course, no mention was made of the carnage in Iraq, but still Laura took the mickey out of Dubya.
Here is the video (the important part starts at 1:14:50) and the transcript.
9:39:07 PM 
|
|
ICH: "The U.S. military plans to allow regional combatant commanders to request the president for approval to carry out preemptive nuclear strikes against possible attacks on the United States or its allies with weapons of mass destruction, according to a draft new nuclear operations paper."
"The US defense strategy aims to achieve four key goals that guide the development of US forces capabilities, their development and use: assuring allies and friends of the US steadfastness of purpose and its capability to fulfill its security
commitment; dissuading adversaries from undertaking programs or operations that could threaten US interests or those of our allies and friends; deterring aggression and coercion by deploying forward the capacity to swiftly defeat attacks and imposing severe penalties for aggression on an adversary's military capability and supporting infrastructure; and, decisively defeating an adversary if deterrence fails."
Forget about the 'security commitment' which only boils down to worldwide insecurity and forget about the 'friends; the US has no friends. The fact is that this is not about safeguarding the borders of the US, it is all about promoting the interests of the US, that means the interests of the US corporations worldwide. They are willing to protect these interests with pre-emptive nuclear strikes. In the fascist minds of the present US military the reasons for attacking will not be difficult to find. Just remember how they started the Iraq war. With 'penalties against supporting infrastructure' they mean destroying power lines, electricity, water supplies, hospitals, etc.; which is a war crime (that was done in former Yugoslavia).
"Geographic combatant commanders may request Presidential approval for use of nuclear weapons for a variety of conditions. Examples include:
(a) An adversary using or intending to use WMD against US, multinational, or alliance forces or civilian populations.
(b) Imminent attack from adversary biological weapons that only effects from nuclear weapons can safely destroy.
(c) Attacks on adversary installations including WMD, deep, hardened bunkers containing chemical or biological weapons or the C2 infrastructure required for the adversary to execute a WMD attack against the United States or its friends and allies.
(d) To counter potentially overwhelming adversary conventional forces, including mobile and area targets (troop concentration).
(e) For rapid and favorable war termination on US terms.
(f) To ensure success of US and multinational operations.
(g) To demonstrate US intent and capability to use nuclear weapons to deter adversary use of WMD.
(h) To respond to adversary-supplied WMD use by surrogates against US and multinational forces or civilian populations."
1:10:06 PM
|
|
Will Britain vote and make a difference? If not, it will show democracy no longer works properly. Governing by lies and violence will reduce the democratic system to nothing more than totalitarianism with a gilt edge (the word 'guilt' is more appropriate).
Times: "A secret document from the heart of government reveals today that Tony Blair privately committed Britain to war with Iraq and then set out to lure Saddam Hussein into providing the legal justification."
12:27:00 PM
|
|
© Copyright 2005 Hetty Litjens.
|
|
|
|
|
