Stardate 20011011.1510 (On Screen): President Bush made a speech in which he said that we would fight with "every weapon". That seems to imply the possibility of using nukes and nerve gas. But the statement is ambiguous; taken in context it can be interpreted a different way.
In the missions ahead for the military, you will have everything you need -- every resource, every weapon, every means to assure full victory for the United States and the cause of freedom.
That sounds more like a statement that we're not going to let budget constraints keep us from fully supplying our troops with all the equipment they need in combat, which is a much different thing. I believe that this statement was not meant by Bush to imply that we were considering the use of nuclear weapons; I think it's being taken out of context by reporters.
Which is not to say that we are not considering the use of nuclear weapons. But it has to be understood that military planning is not the same as military intent. A great deal of planning goes into doomsday scenarios. Somewhere in the Pentagon, there are plans for how the US would invade Canada if that nation were to be taken over by forces inimical to the US. It won't happen, of course, but I have no doubt whatever that the plans exist, just in case. The reason is that planning is extremely time consuming; the result isn't five pages long and done in a week. (More like 5,000 pages, actually, taking six months or a year.) Most of the plans have to be made ahead of time so that they can be updated rapidly when needed. Equally, while a war is going on, there will be lots of lower level plans being made primarily so as to give options to the top commanders and the President; most of those plans also won't be used, but the main reason to do the planning is simply to work out feasibility and to estimate results, so that they can be evaluated for political and military effectiveness. I have no doubt whatever that there are planners in the Pentagon working out various ways in which nukes could be used in Afghanistan and elsewhere, so that if Bush asks "What would happen if we were to nuke Kandahar?" they'd be able to give him an answer. (discuss)
