Here's How The Deep State Is Trying To Lead Trump Into A Nuclear War

Tyler Durden's picture

Via Daniel Lang of,

Before Donald trump took office, he promised to rebuild the US military by diverting a lot more funding into the armed forces. And when he made that promise, he wasn’t just talking about our conventional forces. He also proposed expanding America’s nuclear capability; a position he recently reiterated in an interview with Reuters. He stated that “It would be wonderful, a dream would be that no country would have nukes, but if countries are going to have nukes, we’re going to be at the top of the pack.”

If Trump is really going to reinvigorate our nuclear program (a decision that many experts fear could spark another arms race), then he needs to be very careful about who he listens to. That’s because some of the high ranking officials in our government have some certifiably insane ideas on what a nuclear arsenal should look like. Recently a Pentagon panel known as The Defense Science Board, told the Trump administration that they need to remake our nuclear arsenal into a force that is capable of engaging in a “limited” nuclear war.

According to the report, “The Defense Science Board … urges the president to consider altering existing and planned U.S. armaments to achieve a greater number of lower-yield weapons that could provide a ‘tailored nuclear option for limited use.’”


The strategy behind limited nuclear use sounds deceptively simple. You need to escalate a conflict just enough to end it.


As the theory goes, using low-yield nuclear weapons against an adversary’s conventional forces will demonstrate that you mean serious business and might be crazy enough to launch an all out nuclear attack. This will cause the enemy to “blink” and ultimately back down, rather than risk global thermonuclear war or continue conventional hostilities.

There’s only one problem with the idea of engaging in a limited nuclear war. It simply can’t be done. Any limited nuclear war would eventually lead to a full scale nuclear war.

The lynchpin of a limited nuclear war is the tactical nuke. These are nuclear weapons that have a much smaller yield than a strategic nuke. Whereas a strategic nuke might have a yield of half a megaton or more, a tactical nuke is usually somewhere in the ballpark with the atomic weapons that we used on Japan, but usually smaller than that. They’re for use on the battlefield, possibly within close proximity to friendly forces. And there’s a reason why our government has been slowly phasing them out for decades. Just because they make a smaller crater, doesn’t mean they make a smaller impact.

When you use a tactical nuke, you’re still using a nuke. It doesn’t matter that it’s not large enough to destroy an entire city (though some of them can). By using them, you’re telling the enemy that you’re willing to use nukes. You’re saying that you’re willing to rain radioactive fallout on their territory. You’re willing to engage in total war.

The only appropriate response to that is escalation. The enemy has to show you that they can do the same thing. In war, both parties aren’t thinking “gee, how the heck do I get out of this?” They’re thinking, “how do I win” and “how do I get back at the other guy” and “how do I teach my enemy a lesson he won’t forget.” Limited nuclear war doctrine doesn’t burn the bridge between conventional war and full on nuclear holocaust. It builds that bridge.

This should be common sense. All you have to do is imagine what would happen if Russia dropped a relatively small, 10 kiloton nuke on an American military base in Europe. Would the US government respond with capitulation? Nobody in their right mind believes that.

And let’s pretend for a moment that a limited nuclear war is possible. What would that do? It would normalize nuclear warfare. It would make nukes a viable option in every single war. Every conflict would leave behind a trail of radioactive fallout and mass civilian casualties.

Hopefully brighter minds will prevail, because whoever is proposing this notion of limited nuclear conflict, needs to change out their dress uniform for a freaking straight jacket.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
LetThemEatRand's picture

It would be ironic if many of us who voted Trump to avoid the nuclear war we thought Hillary was going to start, voted for the guy who is actually going to start one.   Laugh's on us!


GUS100CORRINA's picture

It has been my observation that President TRUMP has not shown himself to be someone who would want to ever use the nuclear option. As the computer JOSHUA in the movie War Games once said: "There is no way to win. How about a friendly game of chess."

A lot more could be said, but I trust that the nuclear option is not part of GOD's short term plan for the planet.

jomama's picture

This stupid ass fairy tale bullshit is a big reason this country is so fucked.

Nemontel's picture

The main reason this country is truly fucked is the self-destructive egalitarianism pushed by leftoids.

07564111's picture

nope, you're fucked because people still fall for the red/blue left/right divisive BS. wake the fuck up moron, you're being conned again.

Anteater's picture

All that will be disrupted by Trump's $54 B National Security Police State. He even said it in plain English: "$54B for new public protection and national security". Everyone ran out to buy Boeing, Lockheed and Raytheon stock, but what Trump is talking about is Patriot Act II.


I told you all about this legislation two years ago. The Republicans wouldn't fund it until they controlled it:


DHS Director will have independent czar powers under the Cheney-Rumsfeld 'Survivability of Government' Deep State they began creating in 1990, after GHWBush, observing the collapse of the Soviet Union (that nobody at All-Powerful NSA or CIA foresaw), promised -30% Defense Cuts as our 'Cold War Dividend'. I'm sure you forgot that. Saddam didn't. Gaddafi didn't. Deep State re-branded their pogrom from 'Creeping Communism' to 'Islamic Jihad' in a zNY nanosecond.


Cheney and Rumsfeld invoked Deep State on 9/10, the day before the 'attacks' (sic). Cheney controlled the whole Big Show, while Jr was reading My Pet Goat in nursery school. Think about that stab in the back to the Bush's.

Can you even comprehend the level of evil of Luciferians? Can anyone comprehend that level of satanic evil, without becoming a raving lunatic? They took the USA down!!


Look where we are now, just 15+ years later:


DHS Director will have UNLIMITED FUNDING to condemn property or to lease property, NO BID, for any 'homeland security' purpose, and primarily the construction of FEMA camps and private SuperMax prisons in every state, also including hiring of mercenary contractors under DHS, and OUTSIDE OF DoJ criminal laws: special agents, special prosecutors, special judges and special prison guards, WITHOUT LIMIT.


You will be charged and convicted by the DHS tribunals with an appointed special defender, like military trials. Then you'll be Gitmo'd into a SuperMax, held without a lawyer, held without notice to your family. Abu Ghraib Rules. Or they'll just assassinate you at a traffic stop.

I posted this legislation line by line two years ago. So what has Trump announced: an expanded DHS, 10,000 new DHS agents, an expanded private prison program! And he's got a national private charter school putsch!


Americans are so docile, you could threaten them with a chollo cactus up the rectum, but they'd start barking at a passing Mexican or Muslim like pug-stupid guard dogs.


Where's this $54B National Police State money coming from, if Trump is planning even bigger tax cuts than Jr?

"Why, from your SS and MC withholding tax, Mr. Bond!"

They won't cut SS/MC benefits, they'll CUT DEPOSITS!!!!!


Again, Trump told you, all of you, in clear and plain English, but none are so blind, as those who will Nazi.

Sonny Brakes's picture

When you're right, you're right.

Trumpelstiltskin was probably the best choice for President, but it doesn't change the fact that we're all being matched into hell on Earth and there's nothing that can be done to change that. A true peace would cost everyone their life savings and everything they own and that's not on the table so instead, it'll be easier just to kill everyone. You can't sit back and think that somehow you'll be spared; there'll be few witnesses and no one alive left to care. We've all been such good sports for such a long time.


Malaka's picture

You are right about the fairy tales, but the Creator is real.

Why do you think they built all of the great churches directly on top of the ancient worship sites that just happen to be on ley lines?

Why do the elites dress up like druids?

This guy explores that important question.

I believe they stole the ancient secrets and twisted things for their own gain.

There is much truth in the Bible, but there is I suspect a bit of disinfo, omissions, and mistakes.

The council of Nicea were not God (s)

Funny thing, I always thought Malaka was a bad word in Greek, but it is not.

Both the Jews and Muslims use the same word.

There is power in words. Start chanting this one. Peace in many languages.

Tactical nukes have already been used I believe.

According to  Thylacine (I have read it more than once elsewhere)

Nukes have already been used in the Syrian theatre. They were dropped not far from downtown Damascus in, I think, May 2014, on a military barracks at Jamrayya. The citizens of Damascus were woken up and terrorised for at least 30 minutes by the nuclear fireball. The perp was, natch the Khazar Abomination, who made an incursion near the Golan and appear to have used long-range artillery to deliver the dirty nuke.

Pending more info (I will be watching VeteransToday’s Ian Greenhalgh and Jeff Smith for elaboration) the downside of nukes is residual radiation. At an isolated location a kiloton or two may not be a hazard, but then this objective of annihilating the murderers of the Russian pilots could probably have been achieved by MOABs. So, likely this is to send a message to the Atlanticist scum — ”We mean business, and are prepared to go all the way, Strangeloves”.

Allegedly the Russians did a bit of payback.

The death cult is just that.

They are in our midst, and threaten us all.

That is not a fairy tale.


Joyo Bliss's picture

Jesus ... what's with the superstition? How about being led by astrology, or patriotism or HRC or something/someone like that? Bleedin' nanny state mindset makes me wanna hurl.

jeff montanye's picture

yes, depending on god to save us seems a little prideful.  s/he/it hasn't saved many to my reckoning in recent history.  

better to take matters into our own hands to save ourselves.  remember how hollywood mocked trump for his stupidity and error and then demonstrated how smoothly flawless technique is actually performed.

humility is best.

the cia is out to destroy you mr. president.  do not take the bait.

they, the mossad, the mafia, big oil, his vice president, etc. destroyed jfk.  learn from history. 

NiggaPleeze's picture

Not only are parts of the neo-con Globalist Warmonger cabal urging for tactical nukes, they are also building huge underground shelters (hint: you're not invited) and building a "missile defense shield" around China and Russia.  The PNAC (neo-con) strategy is to WIN a nuclear war by using a surprise first-strike to take out the large majority of the "enemy's" nuclear triad and then use missile defense systems - both circled around the "enemy" to intercept missiles in the boost stage and at "home" to intercept missiles in the terminal stage - to take out any survivors.

This makes the tactical nuclear strategy even more dangerous because an opponent targeted by a limited tactical nuclear strike will be hesitant to respond "only" with tactical nukes given the likelihood of a full-scale strategic nuclear first-strike.  Hence the only rational response to a tactical nuclear strike is surrender or a strategic first nuclear strike.

But the neo-cons aren't worried.  See above about the nuclear bunkers (you're not invited).

On the other hand, the neo-cons have another use of tactical nuclear weapons:  a preemptive nuclear strike against non-nuclear states who refuse to bow down and join the march to a global government led by the neo-cons and their global oligarch masters.  Already in 2001 this became part of the US' official Nuclear Posture Review.

Flatchestynerdette's picture

I was just going to call it fake news since I haven't seen these guys on the WH daily events for a meeting


Caught_Fish's picture

When nukes are used, I fear the loosing side most.

What would the consequences of a nuke the size of a tsar bomb drilled down into a gas/oil field?

farmboy's picture

1 Sub from the Russians can blow up the complete east coast. Another sub the complete west coast. There will be no survivors.

The First strike concept is only viable in the mind of imbeciles.

McCain must have an IQ lower than an ape.

ne-tiger's picture

It's disrespect for ape, McCain has no IQ

HockeyFool's picture

Those subs only carry 16 missles. So 1 sub does not have enough firepower to result in "no survivors." So pick 16 cities on the west coast, blow them up. Everyone else is still alive. There would be many survivors. Too many people assume you cannot live through a nuclear war. That is just not true. It would not be easy and sure as hell would suck, but you can survive. There are a number of books on this subject if anyone cared enough to read them.

kommissar's picture

do you know what a "mirv" is?

SafelyGraze's picture

the reason to not to have a nucular war is, is that if you had one of them, then you wouldn't be survivaling of it unless you had a bunker inside a mountain or something like that.

plus food and sewerage hookups.

and whiskey.

and #pizza.

ben swann 

MontgomeryScott's picture


It's spelled like it's pronounced (correctly).



DAMN, GWB, you never WERE very good at pronunciation! Go to the BACK OF THE BUNKER, and write 'nuclear' on the blackboard 500 times!

GUS100CORRINA's picture

Since the topic is NUCLEAR war, lets talk about NUCLEAR war. 

One of my earlier job assignments under the REGAN military program of the 80's was SHIP CONTROL ENGINEER for TRIDENT NUCLEAR SUBMARINE PROGRAM.

Below is a list of BOATs with which I am very familiar. Each boat carries 24 missiles with 10 warheads per missile. Each boat carries 240 warheads per boat with 14 total boats in service. You do the math.

We better pray to GOD that a NUCLEAR exchange never gets started because it will be the end unless GOD intervenes to stop it.





Since the 1960s, strategic deterrence has been the SSBN's sole mission, providing the United States with its most survivable and enduring nuclear strike capability.


The Navy's ballistic missile submarines, often referred to as "boomers, " serve as an undetectable launch platform for intercontinental missiles. They are designed specifically for stealth and the precise delivery of nuclear warheads.

Each of the 14 Ohio-class SSBNs can carry up to 24 submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) with multiple, independently-targeted warheads. However, under the New Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty, each submarine will have four of its missile tubes permanently deactivated in the coming years. The SSBN's strategic weapon is the Trident II D5 missile, which provides increased range and accuracy over the now out-of-service Trident I C4 missile.

SSBNs are specifically designed for extended deterrent patrols. To decrease the amount of time required for replenishment and maintenance, Ohio-class submarines have three large-diameter logistics hatches that allow sailors to rapidly transfer supply pallets, equipment replacement modules and machinery components, thereby increasing their operational availability.

The Ohio-class design allows the submarines to operate for 15 or more years between major overhauls. On average, the submarines spend 77 days at sea followed by 35 days in-port for maintenance. Each SSBN has two crews, Blue and Gold, which alternate manning the submarines and taking them on patrol. This maximizes the SSBN's strategic availability, reduces the number of submarines required to meet strategic requirements, and allows for proper crew training, readiness, and morale.


General Characteristics


USS Henry M. Jackson (SSBN 730), Bangor, WA

USS Alabama (SSBN 731), Bangor, WA

USS Alaska (SSBN 732), Kings Bay, GA

USS Nevada (SSBN 733), Bangor, WA

USS Tennessee (SSBN 734), Kings Bay, GA

USS Pennsylvania (SSBN 735), Bangor, WA

USS West Virginia (SSBN 736), Kings Bay, Ga.

USS Kentucky (SSBN 737), Bangor, WA

USS Maryland (SSBN 738), Norfolk, Va.

USS Nebraska (SSBN 739), Bangor, WA

USS Rhode Island (SSBN 740), Kings Bay, GA

USS Maine (SSBN 741), Bangor, WA

USS Wyoming (SSBN 742), Kings Bay, GA

USS Louisiana (SSBN 743), Bangor, WA


Last Update: 12 January 2016

Anteater's picture

Lots of fresh, hot pizza, lol.

jomama's picture

Just ask yourself: "Could I really have been that fucking stupid"?

HowdyDoody's picture

A limited nuclear war. Take out New York, Washington DC, Langley, the NSA STASI base in Colorado, London, Tel Aviv. Job done.


You have been running around all day like a chicken with it's head cut off. Stop it. The strategy that had the goal of winning the election was successful. That strategy is still at work. Eyes on the prize. The BIG prize.

LetThemEatRand's picture

Okay, Mean Business, what's the big prize that justifies the ass fucking?

MontgomeryScott's picture

IF that cackling, cankerous, cantankerous cunt that you so love was to have been installed as commander, this discussion would not be taking place, as you and I and everyone else would have been creamated, and melted in to the creosote that you seem to crave.

LIFE, for a little longer, is not a bitter thing.

LetThemEatRand's picture

At what point can we concede that criticizing Trump for doing stupid shit does not mean we think Cankles would be preferable?  Is this argument really the only arrow in your quiver?  Trump is better than cankles, so I win.  

Giant Meteor's picture

Its a term I coined awhile back, its a reverse Obama,

Revered by the left, hated by the right, etc.etc visa versa etc. New Game!

Each "team" claims their guy has near God like qualities, plays three dimensional chess etc. Near as I can figure, its some form of collective electoral psychosis. Meanwhile as each member of each team gets classically bent over, the beatings continue, and some even persist in the delusion, despite said beatings and ass raping till the bitter end  ..

Could also call it a reverse Bush, Reverse Clinton (slick willy) but you get the idea, 

Such wonderful candidates, in the two party shuffle, makes it all possible.

But cheer up! It only gets worse from here ...

Fascinating ..


Clue: not $tate,pot,newks. It's taxes. Federal income taxes or lack thereof. 16thA.

Best of luck in Congress today Mr. President.

drop the needle!


Glad you asked! 

pot was already a waning issue, no discernable implications

nuuks compared to Secretary (Loser X2) Clinton> Don'tGeMeStarted

pussyz loose sleep over REX

ACA is the (albeit important) distraction, IRS is Root.


LetThemEatRand's picture

Responding to yourself has some implications.

. . . - - - . . .


Tyler's fault, and time is short...


posting comments on Zero Hedge threads about nuclear war doesn't have some implications RAND? umm err LMAO!

makes tax talk seem fun!


And KNoW:

his joke about AGW and fur coats. wait that was putin

EO on compensation for H&R Block employees is what?

slow response on Ambassador Churkin.


Make America mean business Again. End all federal income taxes and IRS. VPOTUS  is a TAX LAWYER, now your tax lawyer.

Best wishes!

JimmyRainbow's picture

putting mujo dollares in nukes seems a idiot way to make joe sixpack happy and big again

GreatUncle's picture

Or maybe whover you voted for = the globalists always intended one?

The Pentagon now the globalist war machine?

Troy Ounce's picture


Nuclear war is like cheating. You do it first and you will be condemned for eternity, whatever the circumstances, excuses and explanations.

Raffie's picture

The Russian Satan2 missile is a total face roll weapon.

A Dollar Short's picture

How does any country limit a nuclear war today when several countries have nuclear arsenals?


Giant Meteor's picture

Hmmm, I think you just agreed with the writers point. There is no putting the genie back in the bottle ..

Meh, a tactical nuke here, a tactical nuke there, before you know it, all out nuclear armageddon ..

Said it before, but bears repeating. The world and the fate of the world is in the hands of lunatics and madmen. I mean on the one hand its , idiocracy, the real, on the other hand ..

Well, there is no other hand ...

Bloody hell .. Reminds me of Slim Pickens, Dr. Strangelove,

Dr. Strangelove (8/8) Movie CLIP - Living Underground (1964) HD

A Dollar Short's picture

One thing I must add here - "IRAQ,  has weapons of MASS DESTRUCTION.."

Who said that???

LetThemEatRand's picture

Holy Shit!  Again?  We'll get to them after Syria and Iran, Colorado, Maine, Oregon, and so forth.

A Dollar Short's picture

Must not forget Washington State, California, Vermont and New York.

OverTheHedge's picture

Let's imagine, just for fun, that someone used a limited, battlefield nuke on the US. Say, a military target, out in the desert - air base or similar. Not a huge issue, other than a destroyed base. What would the US military response be, in a time of war? Just a little escalation? Tit for tat? Two slightly larger nukes in response?

Mad! You're all mad, I tell you!

Or, to quote Arther dent, "So this is it? We're all going to die?"