You're like so duh. This is confirmation, corroboration? Rumsfeld naturally neither confirms nor denies what USG will opr will not do in the future but responds using standard operating procedure for a stupid question like that. 1) "Why, yes we have seriously considered tactical nuclear weapons" = worldwide political shitstorm. 2) "No we have ruled out tactical nuclear weapons" = tallybinladen relaxation pill. Big Smart Wired Writer of course jumps to the typically Wired Balanced Journalism conclusion that this perfectly reasonably evasiveness probably means the B61-11. Go back to preschool, or playing Nintendo or whatever you kids do. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,47319,00.html

From: cpaul <inc@fastmedia.net> To: cypherpunks@lne.com X-Orig-To: cypherpunks@EINSTEIN.ssz.com Subject: bush wheels out the nukes Begin forwarded message:

Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 12:33:22 +1000 Subject: B61-11

THE US 'ANNOUNCED' THEIR INTENTION TO USE B61-11 BUNKER BUSTERS ON LAST NIGHT'S NEWS BULLETINS (BUT SOMEHOW FORGOT TO REFER TO THE FACT THAT THEY ARE CLASSIFIED AS TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS)

2:00 a.m. Oct. 8, 2001 PDT Following the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was questioned on ABC television's This Week program about the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons in the expected conflicts to come.

In practiced Pentagonese, Rumsfeld deftly avoided answering the question of whether the use of tactical nuclear weapons could be ruled out.

Though large "theater" thermonuclear devices -- doomsday bombs -- don't fit the Bush administration's war on terrorism, smaller tactical nukes do not seem out of the question in the current mindset of the Defense Department.

The most likely candidate is a tactical micro-nuke called the B61-11, an earth-penetrating nuclear device known as the "bunker buster."

The B61-11 was designed to destroy underground military facilities such as command bunkers, ballistic missile silos and facilities for producing and storing weapons.