Nuke release authority at 2 star level for Iraq?

Lancer · December 31, 2002, 14:12

Just saw it on Fox. I wasn't a news report but a discussion among 3 military types and a commentator about the 3rd inf deployment. One of the army guys was sure, the other 2 dubious.

If true, a division commander could use nukes on his own authority...

Can this be true?

Lancer · December 31, 2002, 14:22

Col David Hackworth made the statement but the pentagon has now said it's not true.

Saint Marcus · December 31, 2002, 14:31

Quote:

but the pentagon has now said it's not true.

so that means it is true

Inverse Icarus · December 31, 2002, 14:35

how many stars are there? and is 1 the "most nuke-worthy" ?

Lancer · December 31, 2002, 14:35

maybe that's what they want you to believe...

Lancer · December 31, 2002, 14:37

5 stars is the top, but presidential authority is, I believe, usually required to nuke someone. I may be wrong.

Lawrence of Arabia · December 31, 2002, 15:07

I read Col David Hackworth's book. I liked it. He is the most decorated soldier in the history of the army (he has something like 110 medals)

MRT144 · December 31, 2002, 15:19

when will privates be able to authorize nuclear weapons. i want to see a "starship troopers" like use of tactical nukes.

Timexwatch · December 31, 2002, 15:47

Lancer, et al.,

Weren't commanders authorized to use tacnukes in Europe to peel back the Russians during the Cold War if they were about to break through areas like the Fulda Gap? I remember reading somewhere that there was a more liberal policy with tacnukes in the event WWIII broke out...

Lancer · December 31, 2002, 21:23

That's true Timexwatch, you're right. However it still wasn't at 2 star level, I think it took the highest level for first use. The theory being that the Russians would break through conventionally and NATO would use nukes to stop them. What alot of folks didn't know is that the US had given the Germans tactical nukes to increase the threat to the Sovs. NATO wasn't sure that the US would nuke Russias, and thereby bring about a full on nuclear war (goodbye US) to save Germany. Then again, I'm not sure the Germans would do it...the whole strategy was flawed, but it worked I guess.

But what am I saying, you know all this I'm sure...

Tuberski · December 31, 2002, 21:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Lancer
5 stars is the top, but presidential authority is, I believe, usually required to nuke someone. I may be wrong.

Five is RARELY given.

ACK!

axi · December 31, 2002, 21:51

Yikes!!!

May I ask a question? Do US nukes have "please recycle after use" written somewhere on their delivery system? Since it's so easy to drop a nuke, then some arrangement has to be made to recycle the cans....

Jack_www · December 31, 2002, 21:52

I believe that the President would have to authorize use of nukes, then the commanders can use them as they see fit. Well if Iraq has a nuke somewhere in hiding and does use it on US army that will be invading they will most surelly get nuked.

Zkribbler · December 31, 2002, 22:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Lancer
What alot of folks didn't know is that the US had given the Germans tactical nukes to increase the threat to the Sovs.

Did we actually go through with that?? I remember a lot of talk about a Multi-Lateral Force (MLF) but as I recall, the Brits nixed the idea. Tom Lehrer even wrote a song about it...some of which I can vaguely recall:

We have the force, peace to determine,
And one of the fingers on the button will be German.

Why shouldn't they have nuclear warheads?
Britain says no, but they all are soreheads.
I say a bygone, should be a bygone.
Let's make peace the way we did in Stanleyville and Saigon.

Once the Germans were warlike and mean,
But now is now, and that was then,
We taught them a lesson in 1918,
And they've hardly bothered us since then.

alva · December 31, 2002, 23:49

Having grown up during the cold war (being scared sh*tless every time a plane flew over), I simply refuse to even get bothered by this.

Sikander · January 1, 2003, 02:38

Any use of nuclear weapons has to be cleared by the "National Command Authority", which IIRC is the President ("Lil' Georgie" Bush), the Vice President ("Shlong" Cheney) and the Secretary of Defense ("Rummy" Rumsfeld). There are (and especially were during the Cold War) of course standing contingency orders, but I don't see any reason whatsoever for them to have relaxed their standards at all from Cold War era standards, and in fact think that there are many fewer weapons and conditions where they might be deployed without NCA approval.

Lancer,

These days most U.S. Divisions are commanded by Brigadier (ie one star) Generals, while Brigades are usualy commanded by Colonels. Don't ask me why. Also, I strongly suspect your story about the Americans giving the Germans tactical nukes was misinterpreted. The tactical nukes were put into place in Germany etc. in order to show (as you said) our determination to go all out defending Germany if necessary. The rationale was that we would not allow the enemy to simply overrun our weapons, and would fire them in a use or lose situation.

Joseph · January 1, 2003, 02:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Sikander
Any use of nuclear weapons has to be cleared by the "National Command Authority", which IIRC is the President ("Lil' Georgie" Bush), the Vice President ("Shlong" Cheney) and the Secretary of Defense ("Rummy" Rumsfeld). There are (and especially were during the Cold War) of course standing contingency orders, but I don't see any reason whatsoever for them to have relaxed their standards at all from Cold War era standards, and in fact think that there are many fewer weapons and conditions where they might be deployed without NCA approval.

I have heard that Submarine can no longer launch without the release code to.

Lancer · January 1, 2003, 10:18

axi, no you may not ask a question.

Jack, Col Hackworth said the low level release order was to immediatly counter any use of biological weapons. If a cloud of nasty stuff comes over a hill a nuke would go back over , within minutes, the other way kind of thing. In some ways it makes sense. If you are an Iraqi bio weapons unit commander, would you release your nasty stuff knowing a nuke would be on you in a very short while? Low level nuke release is a deterent that could save American/coalition lives. If the general in charge of the US division you just hit has to go up the chain to the president to get nuke release authority, then you have all day and part of the next to get away and sure, you launch your nasty.

Zkribbler, to the best of my knowledge they did go through with it. I believe they were US assets put under NATO control, or something like that, so we could get em back. In theory. Don't know if we have them back yet though, and the Germans know the French have nukes and are generally out of their minds...besides, remember Alsase/Loraine!

Und Feurer, don't verget der Russians, erm I meant ahh, chancellor...

How do you spell feurer?

alva, if you're not an Iraqi I agree completely with your assessment.

Sikander, yeah I guess this Col Hakworth fellow was wrong about the 2 star bit. However he did mention one division that was commanded by a 2 star, don't recall what he said exactly.

Joseph, thasverintaresting.