DETERRENCE MEANS NO ONE WILL ATTACK THE USA
USA PLEDGE TO USE WMD AGAINST A WMD ATTACK WILL DETER SUCH AN EVENT
David Gompert, Kenneth Watman, Dean Wilkening, RAND Corporation, 1995, U.S. Nuclear Declaratory Policy: The Question of Nuclear First Usehttp://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR596/mr596.html //VT2002acsln
Having committed itself not to keep biological and chemical weapons, the United States now finds nuclear and conventional retaliatory threats to be the only means available to deter WMD attacks. Sole reliance on U.S. conventional retaliatory threats to deter WMD attacks will not assure deterrence, especially against adversaries already facing or prepared to face conventional strikes. Consequently, it is prudent for the United States to reserve the right to use nuclear weapons in retaliation for any WMD attack as part of its declaratory policy, especially if the consequences of such attacks are severe (e.g., biological or chemical attacks against unprotected populations). Moreover, such a policy would remove some of the uncertainty regarding U.S. responses to biological and chemical attacks--an uncertainty that derives from current U.S. assurances that the United States will not use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states (even if they use biological or chemical weapons).
STRONG USA NUCLEAR FORCES DETER ANY NATION FROM STRIKING THE USA
Dr. William J. Perry, 1998, former US Secretary of Defense (1994-1997), Pulling Back from the Nuclear Brink "US Counterproliferation Efforts: Prevent, Deter, Defend" // JM
Taken together, these preventive measures have reduced the threat of proliferation. But the proliferation threat, like cancer, can sometimes elude preventive measures. So, we do need a second line of defense. And that second line of defense is deterrence.
Deterrence relies on having strong forces, both conventional and nuclear, and the demonstrated willpower to use them to protect our country, our forces, and our allies. Today, we have the strongest conventional military forces in the world. We know that, and the whole world knows that. We also continue to maintain a nuclear deterrent force. This nuclear deterrent force is considerably smaller than the one we had during the cold war, but make no mistake: it is still absolutely devastating in its destructive power. Anyone who considers using a weapon of mass destruction against the United States or its allies must first consider the consequences. We would not specify in advance what our response would be, but it would be overwhelming.
This deterrence capability should be enough to warn off any nation from using weapons of mass destruction. But the reality is that the simple threat of retaliation may not be enough to deter some rogue nations or to deter terrorists from using these weapons. Thus, we cannot always rely on deterrence, and that takes LIS to our third line of defense. We must be prepared to defend ourselves.
ANY NATION WHICH LAUNCHES A NUCLEAR WEAPON AT THE USA WILL BE OBLITERATED
JONATHAN F. REICHERT, Ph.D., is president of TeachSpin Inc., The Buffalo News
May 2, 1999, SECTION: VIEWPOINTS, Pg. 1H HEADLINE: STAR WARS REVISITED;
U.S. STILL PURSUING A TECHNOLOGICAL MIRACLE TO PROTECT IT FROM;
HARM.THERE'S JUST ONE PROBLEM -- IT WON'T WORK // lnu-acs
If Libya shot a nuclear weapon at a U.S. city, I think it is fair to say that retaliation would end the existence of Libya. They may be crazy, but they are not suicidal.