Author Topic: New Joint Publication 3-72 Nuclear Operations  (Read 674 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 202,880
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,399
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
New Joint Publication 3-72 Nuclear Operations
« on: June 19, 2019, 15:56:17 »
Quote
Nuclear weapons: experts alarmed by new Pentagon 'war-fighting' doctrine

US joint chiefs of staff posted then removed paper that suggests nuclear weapons could ‘create conditions for decisive results’


Julian Borger in Washington Wed 19 Jun 2019 19.21 BST

The Pentagon believes using nuclear weapons could “create conditions for decisive results and the restoration of strategic stability”, according to a new nuclear doctrine adopted by the US joint chiefs of staff last week.

The document, entitled Nuclear Operations, was published on 11 June, and was the first such doctrine paper for 14 years. Arms control experts say it marks a shift in US military thinking towards the idea of fighting and winning a nuclear war – which they believe is a highly dangerous mindset.

...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/19/nuclear-weapons-pentagon-us-military-doctrine

https://fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp3_72.pdf

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 214,315
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,149
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: New Joint Publication 3-72 Nuclear Operations
« Reply #1 on: June 19, 2019, 16:05:38 »
So the effective date on the current pub has changed...

I’d be surprised if there wasn’t (still) a joint publication detailing the doctrine around employment of nuclear weapons.

I’d say the following quote from the first article is either naive, or fails to consider that it’s release and recall was actually quite deliberate.

Quote
Bell, now senior policy director at the Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, added: “Posting a document about nuclear operations and then promptly deleting it shows a lack of messaging discipline and a lack of strategy.

...or does it show both discipline and strategy...and of course a willingness to hesitate less about messaging to the Bear and the Dragon, that America takes its defense seriously?

Regards
G2G
« Last Edit: June 19, 2019, 16:09:44 by Good2Golf »

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 233,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,722
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: New Joint Publication 3-72 Nuclear Operations
« Reply #2 on: June 19, 2019, 16:07:41 »
Anyone read “The Doomsday Machine” by Daniel Ellsburg? I just recently finished it- one of the scariest things I’ve ever read, from someone very ‘in the know’ about the history of nuclear weapons and strategic policy.

https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B074HZMN71/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 214,315
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,149
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: New Joint Publication 3-72 Nuclear Operations
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2019, 16:10:38 »
Anyone read “The Doomsday Machine” by Daniel Ellsburg? I just recently finished it- one of the scariest things I’ve ever read, from someone very ‘in the know’ about the history of nuclear weapons and strategic policy.

https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B074HZMN71/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

A good read, for certain.

Truthfully, I’m more worried about bio-warfare... :nod:

Online Old Sweat

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 219,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,851
Re: New Joint Publication 3-72 Nuclear Operations
« Reply #4 on: June 23, 2019, 13:53:49 »
I've read it, as well. Am I glad we got out of the sixties, because the planning for a nuclear exchange was suicidal, at best. As a retired Cold Warrior, my only military qualification that I am glad I didn't have to use is Nuclear Target Analyst.

As for this doctrine, I can see why, even if it scares me more than a little. But, until we can get everybody, and I mean everybody, to scrap nukes and there is an effective enforcement mechanism, the ogre ain't going to go away.