Talk:Defense Threat Reduction Agency

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Lack of History[edit]

This article has no history on either the Defense Nuclear Agency or the Defense Special Weapons Agency that preceded DTRA - in fact, it has zero pre-Cold War history - but pages for those agencies redirect back here. Either these agencies need separate pages, or the DTRA article must be greatly expanded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.229.244 (talk) 00:20, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

DTRA has published a rather large historical document on its website. On page 404 of the PDF begins an appendix with charters of its predecessor organizations. This is probably the most complete history you can find on any of those organizations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.163.114.163 (talk) 20:19, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Cleanup[edit]

I marked this page for cleanup because the article repeats itself over and over again. It looks like 5 people tried to write the article and just decided to include all 5 versions one after another. For starters, maybe the missions statement should only be quoted once?

Issues[edit]

DTRA was formed by combining some DoD agencies, including the Defense Special Weapons Agency. DSWA was a successor to the Defense Nuclear Agency. So, DNA did have a Cold War mission. DNA changed their name to DSWA, which was then assimilated into DTRA. Hope this helps - I'll change the page accordingly. - new user, 20 March 2006

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency came into being in 1998. This means that it did not have a mission during the Cold War. It was formed from previous agencies, some of which did have such missions. Its history should be expanded. I will be revising this article shortly to be consistent with the DTRA web page. Robert McClenon 16:52, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Good that we have someone with knowledge about this. Mine was simply stories ands tuff that I was told by other people. Best of luck with the expansion. -Husnock 20:50, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Unsourced material[edit]

I am archiving unsourced statements to this page. Robert McClenon 16:54, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Rumors also exist that the Defense Threat Reduction Agency maintains invasion plans for Canada and Mexico, should either of those countries destabilize into a government unfriendly or hostile to the United States.

It looks like it wasnt these guys, as you say, but I wonder who? There are actually such plans in existence, as the old War Plans Division of the War Department was in charge of invasion plans for everywhere from Canada, Mexico, and England. I wonder who inherited the job? -Husnock 20:50, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

It is my understanding that these plans exist. I have no idea who maintains them. I had not known until now that DTRA was one of various US agencies about whom there were conspiracy theories. (Conspiracies do exist, but most theories about them are nonsense. Some of them are true, but most are not.) Robert McClenon 02:08, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

The sole purpose of DTRA is to reduce the threat of the spread of WMD, but I can see how the vague concept of "Threat Reduction" could be tied into some nonsensical conspiracy theory. It's sort of like how "UFOlogists" latched onto the Foreign Technology Division of the USAF as being in contact with alleged aliens despite the fact that FTD's mission was interfacing with intercepted technologies from foreign countries like USSR, China, etc. Conspiracy theorists need to get a grip - the military is really not that creative, it is a blunt instrument designed for blunt purposes. Go fantasize about the CIA or the State Department if you're into conspiracy.
Here's the thing. EVERY country has invasion plans for their neighbors. It's sensible strategy, and you'd best believe that your neighbor has a plan for how to react when you lose control of it all to an intolerable cult or worse. If anyone in DoD has these plans, my money would be on the Office of Net Assessment. They have the crown of crowns for all DoD strategy and policy when it comes to the future. Even that could be wrong, though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.163.114.163 (talk) 19:31, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Introduction[edit]

I think that I accidentally snipped the opening paragraph when snipping the accuracy banner. Thank you for restoring it. Robert McClenon 00:13, 10 September 2005 (UTC)