Does it have any merit or is it bullshit?
The ominous new document - since deleted - is called 'Nuclear Operations' and suggests military
chiefs could once again use the weapons of mass destruction to "restore strategic stability."
Arms control experts say the doctrine marks a dangerous shift towards the idea of actually fighting
and winning a full-scale nuclear conflict.
“Using nuclear weapons could create conditions for decisive results and the restoration of strategic
stability,” the joint chiefs’ document states.
“Specifically, the use of a nuclear weapon will fundamentally change the scope of a battle and create
conditions that affect how commanders will prevail in conflict.”
The US is the only country to have used the weapons in combat, with the bombings of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki in World War II.
The controversial paper comes after the Trump administration withdrew from two nuclear agreements -
a 2015 deal with Iran and the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty with Russia.
What say you?
The ominous new document - since deleted - is called 'Nuclear Operations' and suggests military
chiefs could once again use the weapons of mass destruction to "restore strategic stability."
Arms control experts say the doctrine marks a dangerous shift towards the idea of actually fighting
and winning a full-scale nuclear conflict.
“Using nuclear weapons could create conditions for decisive results and the restoration of strategic
stability,” the joint chiefs’ document states.
“Specifically, the use of a nuclear weapon will fundamentally change the scope of a battle and create
conditions that affect how commanders will prevail in conflict.”
The US is the only country to have used the weapons in combat, with the bombings of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki in World War II.
The controversial paper comes after the Trump administration withdrew from two nuclear agreements -
a 2015 deal with Iran and the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty with Russia.
What say you?