“Confirmed by military documents as well as official statements, both the U.S. and Israel contemplate the use of nuclear weapons directed against Iran,” writes University of Ottawa Professor (Emeritus) Michel Chossudovsky, in a recently released book entitled “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”
The plans were formulated in 2004. The previous year, Congress gave the Pentagon the green light to use tactical nukes in conventional war theatres such as the Middle East and Central Asia, allocating $6 billion in 2004 alone to create this new generation of “defensive” weapons.
“In 2005, Vice President Dick Cheney ordered USSTRATCOM (Strategic Command) to draft a ‘contingency plan’ that included “a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons,” Chossudovsky writes. The plan went beyond even the Pentagon’s 2001 Nuclear Posture Review(NPR)’s “contingency plans” for an offensive “first strike use” of nuclear weapons against Russia and China as well as Iran and North Korea.
The 2005 plan identified more than 450 strategic targets in Iran, including numerous suspect nuclear-weapons-program development sites. The plan, incredibly, was rationalized on a second 9/11 type attack on the US that Cheney believed Iran would allegedly support!
“President Obama has largely endorsed the doctrine of pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons formulated by the previous administration,” Chossudovsky writes in his new book, “Towards a World War III Scenario” (Global Research). His Administration “has also intimated it will use nukes in the event of an Iran response to an Israeli attack on Iran.”
Chossudovsky points out, “The new nuclear doctrine turns concepts and realities upside down. It not only denies the devastating impacts of nuclear weapons, it states, in no uncertain terms, that nuclear weapons are ‘safe’ and their use in the battlefield will ensure ‘minimal collateral damage and reduce the probability of escalation.’ The issue of radioactive fallout is not even acknowledged with regard to tactical nuclear weapons, neither is the issue of ‘Nuclear Winter’.”
“What is unfolding [in relation to Iran] is the outright legitimization of war in the name of an illusive notion of global security. America’s mini-nukes, with an explosive capacity of up to six times a Hiroshima bomb, are upheld as a ‘humanitarian’ bomb, whereas Iran’s nonexistent nuclear weapons are branded as an indisputable threat to global security,” Chossudovsky writes.