Subscriptions, Current Issue & Back Issues

Shop Website | Annual Subscriptions | Back Issues |

Tag: nuclear

More Evidence that Washington Is Criminally Insane

America’s Top Scientists Confirm: U.S. Goal Now Is to Conquer Russia

Eric Zuesse

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists published a study, on 1 March 2017, which opened:

The US nuclear forces modernization program has been portrayed to the public as an effort to ensure the reliability and safety of warheads in the US nuclear arsenal, rather than to enhance their military capabilities. In reality, however, that program has implemented revolutionary new technologies that will vastly increase the targeting capability of the US ballistic missile arsenal. This increase in capability is astonishing — boosting the overall killing power of existing US ballistic missile forces by a factor of roughly three — and it creates exactly what one would expect to see, if a nuclear-armed state were planning to have the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war by disarming enemies with a surprise first strike.

It continues:

Because the innovations in the super-fuze appear, to the non-technical eye, to be minor, policymakers outside of the US government (and probably inside the government as well) have completely missed its revolutionary impact on military capabilities and its important implications for global security.

This study was co-authored by America’s top three scientists specializing in analysis of weaponry and especially of the geostrategic balance between nations: Hans Kristensen, Matthew McKinzie, and Theodore Postol. Their report continues:

This vast increase in US nuclear targeting capability, which has largely been concealed from the general public, has serious implications for strategic stability and perceptions of US nuclear strategy and intentions.

Russian planners will almost surely see the advance in fuzing capability as empowering an increasingly feasible US preemptive nuclear strike capability — a capability that would require Russia to undertake countermeasures that would further increase the already dangerously high readiness of Russian nuclear forces. Tense nuclear postures based on worst-case planning assumptions already pose the possibility of a nuclear response to false warning of attack. The new kill capability created by super-fuzing increases the tension and the risk that US or Russian nuclear forces will be used in response to early warning of an attack — even when an attack has not occurred.

The authors explain why an accidental start of World War III or global annihilation would be likeiier from Russia than from the U.S.:

Russia does not have a functioning space-based infrared early warning system but relies primarily on ground-based early warning radars to detect a US missile attack. Since these radars cannot see over the horizon, Russia has less than half as much early-warning time as the United States. (The United States has about 30 minutes, Russia 15 minutes or less.)

In other words: whereas Trump would have about 30 minutes to determine whether Putin had launched a blitz-first-strike attack, Putin would have less than 15 minutes to determine whether Trump had — and if at the end of that period, on either side, there is no certainty that no blitz-first-strike attack had been launched by the other, then that person would be obligated to launch a blitz attack against the other, upon the assumption that not to do so would result not only in a toxic planet with nuclear winter and universal starvation, but also in a humiliating and scandalous absence of retaliation against that perpetrator, which would be a humiliation on top of an annihilation, and thus a sharing of blame along with the actual perpetrator, which sharing, for whatever term might remain during that passive party’s continued existence, would probably be an unbearable shame and result quickly in suicide, if that national leader’s own surviving countrymen don’t execute him before he kills himself.

Inevitably, the strictly personal morality and self-image of a nation’s leader in that type of situation are factors other than the very public global consequences that will determine the person’s decision; but, with only (at most) 15 minutes to decide on the Russian side, and 30 minutes to decide on the American side, there is an inestimably high chance now, that a nuclear war will terminate the lives of everyone who currently exists and who doesn’t soon die from the ordinary causes before then. Even the most dire projections of the dangers from global warming come nowhere close to matching that danger.

The question, now, then, is: How did the world come to this extraordinarily ominous stage? The co-authors repeatedly refer to the secretiveness at the top of the American government as one essential source, such as “… which has largely been concealed from the general public …” and “… policymakers outside of the US government (and probably inside the government as well) have completely missed …,” and these passages refer to an ordinary phenomenon in conspiracies at the top of a large criminal operation such as corporate criminality, where only a very small circle of individuals, commonly a half-dozen or even less, are made aware of the operation’s chief strategic objective and of the main tactical means that are being put into place so as to execute the plan. In this particular instance, it wouldn’t include the head of every Cabinet department, nor anything nearly so broad as that; but, clearly, since the key decision, to implement the “super-fuze” on “all warheads deployed on US ballistic missile submarines” was made by Obama, he is the principal person reasonably to be blamed for this situation. However, Trump as the person who has inherited this situation from his predecessor has, as yet, given no indication at all of reversing and eliminating the now-operative top U.S. strategic objective of conquering Russia. The more time that passes without Trump’s announcing to the public that he has inherited this morally repulsive operation from his predecessor and is removing all of the super-fuses, the more that Trump himself is taking ownership of Obama’s plan. Typically in such a situation, the leader who has inherited such a plan will be assassinated if he gives any clear indication of an intention to reverse or cancel it (the key insiders are typically obsessive about ‘success’, especially at so late a stage in it); and, so, if Trump were to try to do that, he would almost certainly try to hide that fact until the inherited plan has already become effectively deactivated and no longer a threat.

The key turning-point that led up to the present crisis was the gradual and increasing acceptance, on the American side, of the concept of using nuclear weapons for conquest instead of only for deterrence — the prior system, for deterrence, having been called “MAD” for Mutually Assured Destruction, the idea that if the two nuclear superpowers were to go to war against each other, then the entire world would be destroyed so catastrophically as to make any idea of a ‘winner’ and a ‘loser’ in such a conflict a grotesque distortion of the reality: that reality being mutual annihilation and an unlivable planet. A landmark event in the process of reconceptualizing such a war as being ‘winnable’, was the publication in 2006 of two articles in the two most prestigious journals of international relations, Foreign Affairs and International Security, both formally introducing the concept of “Nuclear Primacy” or the (alleged) desirability for the U.S. to plan a nuclear conquest of Russia. Until those two articles (both of which were co-authored by the same two authors), any such idea was considered wacky, but since then it has instead been mainstream. As the final link above (the article that’s linked-to immediately before) explains, the source even prior to George W. Bush goes all the way back to 24 February 1990 when his father, then also the U.S. President, secretly initiated the operation ultimately to conquer Russia, and within that article are links to the ultimate source-documents about that origin of the path toward world-ending nuclear war; so, getting to the original causes of the steady progression after 24 February 1990 in the direction of a conquest of Russia by the U.S. (assisted by its allies) can now be addressed by historians, even though only now is it finally being revealed to the public as news, though 27 years after it had actually begun in a very fateful decision by George Herbert Walker Bush, which has already cost American taxpayers trillions of dollars for no good purpose and resulting perhaps in the ghastliest ultimate end.

This article is being submitted for publication to all news-media without charge, in the hope that the current U.S. President will comment publicly upon it, even if only to ridicule it so as to avoid being assassinated for referring to it at all. This is an extremely dangerous time in history, and Donald Trump is now on a very hot seat, which any intelligent and accurately informed person recognizes to be the case. If ever the world needed courageous great leadership, now is the time; because, without that, we might all soon be entering hell. To avoid it, starting now 27 years after the U.S. government initiated this path, would be enormously difficult, but not yet totally impossible. This is where we are at the present time; and, ever since the coup in Ukraine in 2014, the purchases of ‘nuclear-proof’ bunkers have been soaring as a result.

This extreme danger is the new global reality. If the elimination of the threat does not come from the U.S. White House, the culmination of the threat will — regardless of which side strikes first. The decision — either to invade Russia, or else to cancel and condemn America’s decade-plus preparation to do so — can be made only by the U.S. President. If he remains silent about the matter, then Putin can reasonably proceed on the assumption that he’ll have to be the one to strike first. He didn’t place himself in that position; the U.S. regime did. Let’s hope that the U.S. will stand down the threat, now.

Source: Paul Craig Roberts, Guest Contributions.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/05/03/evidence-washington-criminally-insane/

Government Documentation For Gotham Sheild Found: Simulated Nuclear-EMP Attack

Possibly related to the power outages in the US today? Exercise simulating nuke attack EMP burst, looks like this one is real:

NOTE: That while this is going on stateside, the CIA and FBI directors are holed up in Queenstwon NZ. Coincidence, you think?

Declassified Nuclear Test Footage Now On YT

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/you-can-now-watch-dozens-of-declassified-nuclear-test-films-on-youtube/ar-BByeGML?li=BBqdg4K&ocid=SK2MDHP

Mushroom clouds were a common sight in the Nevada desert and the Pacific Proving Ground between 1945 and 1962.

The US used the regions to carry out more than 200 atmospheric nuclear tests, before above ground explosions were banned in 1963.

Now, a team of nuclear weapon physicists is seeking to preserve decomposing footage of those tests by embarking upon a major digitisation project.

The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLLN) uploaded the first 64 declassified videos to its YouTube channel this week.

Greg Spriggs, a weapon physicist at LLLN, told Gizmodo: “I think that if we capture the history of this and show what the force of these weapons are and how much devastation they can wreak, then maybe people will be reluctant to use them.”

In a YouTube video introducing the project, Spriggs said they’ve uncovered about 6,500 of the 10,000 films made during that era of history.

“By looking at these films, we found a lot of different pieces of information that had not been analysed back in the ‘50s, and we’re discovering new things about these detonations that have never been seen before,” he said.

Driving Towards Nuclear Disaster: North Korea

Hard to believe this little communist nation can generate so much fuss. More manufactured diversion? One minute it’s imminent financial collapse, the next it’s imminent nuclear Armageddon.

What next…?

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/world-leaders-condemn-north-korea-over-missile-launches/ar-AAnU70A?li=BBqdg4K&ocid=SK2MDHP

Image result for north korea nuclear war

 

A shocked international community has condemned North Korea after it launched four ballistic missiles on Monday morning, three of which fell into Japanese waters.

Calling on Pyongyang to “stop its provocative actions”, the British foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, said the launches were in violation of multiple UN security council resolutions and threatened international peace and security.

The Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe, said “strong protests” had been lodged with nuclear-armed North Korea, saying the scale of the attack represented a new development. “It is an extremely dangerous action,” he said.

South Korea’s acting president, Hwang Kyo-ahn, condemned the launches as a direct challenge to the international community and said Seoul would swiftly deploy a US anti-missile defence system despite angry objections from China.

Meanwhile, North Korea warned that military exercises by the US and South Korea were driving the region towards nuclear disaster.

In a letter to the UN security council on Monday, North Korea’s ambassador Ja Song Nam claimed the joint exercises that began on 1 March were “the most undisguised nuclear war manoeuvres”.

He said: “Consequently, the situation on the Korean peninsula is again inching to the brink of a nuclear war.”

North Korea’s four missiles flew about 620 miles, with three of them landing in waters that Japan claims as its exclusive economic zone. A fourth splashed down just outside the EEZ.

South Korea said it was too early to say what the relatively low altitude indicated about the types of missiles, but experts said the launch did not look like an inter-continental ballistic missile, but the launch of previously tested missile.

A Pentagon spokesman, Navy Captain Jeff Davis, confirmed the US had seen no ICBM launch attempt but otherwise gave no clear response to the missile launches.

He did suggest more missiles may have been fired, telling reporters: “There were four that landed. There may be a higher number of launches that we’re not commenting on. But four landed and splashed in the Sea of Japan.”

The EU foreign affairs chief, Federica Mogherini, said the launches showed “utter disregard” for several UN resolutions, while Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia was “seriously worried”. “These are the sort of actions that lead to a rise in tension in the region and of course in this situation, traditionally, Moscow calls for restraint from all sides,” Peskov said.

Speaking on behalf of the UK, Johnson said: “We urge North Korea to stop its provocative actions, which threaten international peace and security. North Korea should instead re-engage with the international community, and take credible, concrete steps to prioritise the wellbeing of its own people instead of the illegal pursuit of its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes.”

The French foreign office said: “We call on North Korea to immediately comply with its international obligations and to ensure the complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantlement of its nuclear and ballistic programmes.”

The test launches appeared to be a reaction to huge US-South Korean military drills last week which those countries consider routine but which are viewed as an invasion rehearsal by Kim Jong-un.

The US has about 28,500 troops and equipment stationed in South Korea, and plans to roll out the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (Thaad) anti-missile defence system by the end of the year.

Japan also plans to reinforce its ballistic missile defences and is considering buying either Thaad or building a ground-based version of the Aegis system that is currently deployed on ships in the Sea of Japan.

The launches also come as Kim’s regime faces international isolation over the killing of Kim Jong-nam, the leader’s half-brother, in Kuala Lumpur airport last month.

On Sunday Malaysia expelled the North Korean ambassador over the death, a move which prompted Pyongyang to announce a tit-for-tat expulsion of Malaysia’s ambassador to North Korea. State media said the Malaysian envoy would leave within 48 hours.

Has There Been A Nuclear Incident In The Arctic?

There have been rumblings regarding some sort of nuclear incident—or possibly incidents—in the Arctic over the last month. Multiple reports, some of them from official monitoring organizations, have reported iodine 131—a radioactive isotope often associated with nuclear fission—has been detected via air sampling stations throughout the region.

The first detection of the isotope came during the second week of January, via an air sampling station located in Svanhovd, on Norway’s border with Russia’s Kola Peninsula. Within days, air sampling stations as far south as Spain also detected the presence of small amounts of the isotope. The fact that iodine-131 has a half-life of just eight days would point to the release occurring just days earlier, and not being a remnant of a past nuclear event.

Because of the low levels of concentration, there is no health risk to the public or the environment, at least on a wide scale. By comparison, these recent measurements are roughly 1/1000th the size of what was detected during the Fukushima incident and 1/1,000,000th the concentration found in the nuclear tainted cloud that washed across Europe following the Chernobyl disaster.

Iodine 131 levels monitored across Europe last month (IRIN graphic):

After weeks without answers, the story seemed to pass as a peculiarity, not nearly an unprecedented one at that, until Friday when the US dispatched its WC-135 Constant Phoenix atmospheric testing aircraft to Europe without explanation. The highly unique aircraft are specifically designed to respond to nuclear incidents—especially those that include the detonation of nuclear warheads.

By sampling the air over wide areas and at altitude, the aircraft can provide critical data to better understand the “signature” of a radiation release. During nuclear tests, this can help scientists define what type of weapon was detonated, and, in conjunction with other data, how large the blast was. They can also be used to measure the effects and scale of other radiological events, like the meltdown of nuclear plants. For instance, the WC-135s went to work following the 2011 earthquake that resulted in the meltdown of Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant.

WC-135 taking off on a mission (USAF photo):

This leaves us with a number of unanswered questions. The first: What are WC-135s doing up there? Was this a good opportunity for a training sortie and to support scientific endeavors, or is it in response to a specific incident?

You can check twitter to see loads of people claiming this is proof that the Russians have restarted nuclear weapons testing at Novaya Zemlya near the Arctic. That assertion is problematic for a variety of reasons. The first is that we have no corresponding seismic data indicating a nuclear detonation from that region. Some have floated the possibility that a small tactical nuclear warhead may have been tested; once again, this still makes a big boom, and it is not clear if the levels of iodine-131 are indicative of such a test. Of course, politically speaking, restarting nuclear weapons testing would signal a massive shift in Moscow’s nuclear weapons policy.

There has been some talk about even the US restarting its nuclear testing under President Trump, but this is largely speculation mixed with hyperbole. Even though we have seen Russia is willing to migrate away from key weapons treaties in order to obtain niche strategic capabilities, violating the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty would signal a whole other level of aggression and defiance.

A more likely possibility is that some sort of limited nuclear material storage, research, or power generation incident has occurred. Russia uses nuclear propulsion for many of its active submarines as well as its Kirov class battlecruisers and its icebreakers. Russia also uses nuclear power in the arctic region for multiple applications. Not just that, but Russia’s northerly naval bases near the arctic are nuclear graveyards of the Cold War.

Hulls of decommissioned nuclear submarines sit idle still waiting to be denuclearized and disposed of. Many have said that over the decades following the end of the Cold War, these vessels are just an accident waiting to happen. Some of these vessels remain on the Kola Peninsula near Murmansk. One of Russia’s largest nuclear waste containment facilities, where the reactors of these decommissioned submarines are stored, is also located nearby at Saida Bay. Today, some 80 reactors and their shredded components are stored there in massive casks. Eventually the facility will accept 155 reactors.

Photo via Sovfoto/UIG via Getty Images:

The Arctic is also dotted with other Cold War relics that relied on nuclear power to function, these include Russia’s nuclear lighthouses and outposts. And this is just what you can see, below the surface, hulks of sunken nuclear vessels and other waste still pose a major threat to the environment. It is not really a question of if they will do harm, but when.

During the Cold War, Russia dumped all types of nuclear waste in the Kara Sea, including an estimated 17,000 containers and 19 vessels full of radioactive waste. The USSR also pitched 14 nuclear reactors, some with spent fuel rods, into the same body of water and other forms of lower-level nuclear waste was just poured directly into the sea. The Russian submarine K-27, which was scuttled in the Kola Sea, is said to be literally a ticking time bomb. That is just that one area, and other areas in the region, such as the Barents Sea (K-159) and Norwegian Sea (K-278), also have abandoned nuclear submarines and who knows what else lining the sea floor. Even the US left its own portion of nuclear waste in the northern latitudes, such as the once secret reactor at Camp Century, in Greenland, although this is minuscule compared to what the Soviets left behind.

A graphic showing the known nuclear waste and wreckage sites near northern Europe and the Arctic (Bellona.org graphic):

On top of all the Russian nuclear material that is actually rotting in arctic, there are also nuclear power, ship maintenance, and research stations that also dot Russia’s northern reaches.

With all this in mind, if there was a peculiar release of iodine-131 into the atmosphere, it is much more likely to have come from the nuclear wasteland that the Soviet Union created, or from operational reactors in the region, and not from some sort of clandestine atomic testing. That doesn’t mean it is impossible, just highly unlikely. There is even a possibility that it didn’t come from Russia at all, and was leaked by a reactor in Europe or elsewhere. Still, with the Arctic likely becoming a key battleground of the future—a reality that has been spurred by Russian military expansion into the region—and considering Moscow’s great change in geopolitical tone and military stance over the last few years, suspicions surrounding Russia’s true intentions in the region are at an all-time high.

Now we’ll have to wait and see if the Pentagon releases more information on the movements and findings of its WC-135, and if there is yet another new spike in radiation coming from the region. If anything else, this mystery should serve of a stark reminder—and a warning—of what mankind has left behind near the arctic, and how perilous a threat it still poses nearly three decades after the Cold War officially ended.

Contact the author: Tyler@thedrive.com

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7758/has-there-been-a-nuclear-incident-in-the-arctic

 

Top Secret US Nuclear “City Under The Ice” Revealed

A top-secret cold war US military project and the toxic waste it conceals, which had been thought buried forever beneath the Greenland ice cap, are likely to be uncovered by rising temperatures within decades, scientists have warned

Nuclear waste tank

Camp Century was excavated by the US army engineering corps in 1959 around 200km (124 miles) inland from the coast of Greenland, which was then part of Denmark.

Powered, remarkably, by the world’s first mobile nuclear generator and known as “the city under the ice”, the camp’s three-kilometre network of tunnels, eight metres beneath the ice, housed laboratories, a shop, hospital, cinema, chapel and accommodation for up to 200 soldiers.

Officially its personnel were stationed there to test Arctic construction methods and carry out research. Scientists based at the camp did, indeed, drill the first ice core samples ever used to study climate, Colgan said, obtaining data still cited today.

But in reality, the camp served as cover for something altogether different: a project so immense and so secret, that not even the Danish government was informed of its existence.

“They thought it would never be exposed,” said William Colgan, a climate and glacier scientist from the Lassonde school of engineering at Toronto’s York University, the lead author of the study. “Back then, in the 60s, the term global warming had not even been coined. But the climate is changing, and the question now is whether what’s down there is going to stay down there.”

The study suggests it isn’t.

Project Iceworm, presented to the US chiefs of staff in 1960, aimed to use Camp Century’s frozen tunnels to test the feasibility of a huge launch site under the ice, close enough to fire nuclear missiles directly at the Soviet Union.

At the height of the cold war, as the US and the USSR were engaged in a terrifying standoff over Soviet missile deployment in Cuba, the US army was considering the construction of a vast subterranean extension of Camp Century.

Around 4,000km system of icy underground tunnels and chambers extending over an area around three times the size of Denmark were to have housed 600 ballistic missiles, in clusters 6km apart, trained on Moscow and its satellites.

Eventually the engineers realised Iceworm would not work: the constantly moving ice was too unstable an environment and would have deformed – perhaps even collapsed – the tunnels.

From 1964 Camp Century was used only intermittently, and three years later it was abandoned altogether, the departing soldiers taking with them the reaction chamber of the nuclear generator.

But they left the rest of the camp’s infrastructure – and its biological, chemical and radioactive waste – where it was, on the assumption it would be “preserved for eternity” by the perpetually accumulating snow and ice.

Thus far their assumption has proven correct: up to 12 metres deep at the time it was abandoned, the ice covering Camp Century has since thickened to around 35 metres and will continue to deepen for a while yet.

But climate change looks certain to reverse that process, Colgan and his six-strong team, from Canadian, US and European universities, said in their report, published last month in Geophysical Research Letters.

Greenland’s temperatures broke new records this spring and summer, hitting 24C (75F) in the capital, Nuuk, in June – a figure that shocked meteorologists so much they had to re-check their measurements.

Between 2003 and 2010 the ice that covers much of the island melted twice as fast as during the whole of the 20th century. This year it began melting a month earlier than usual.

The researchers studied US army documents and drawings to work out how deep the camp and its waste – estimated to include 200,000 litres of diesel fuel, similar quantities of waste water, and unknown amounts of radioactive coolant and toxic organic pollutants such as PCBs – were buried.

Then they ran regional and global climate change simulations to work out how much longer they will stay there. Based on the “business as usual” climate change scenario, Colgan said, snowfall will continue to be greater than ice melt for a few more decades. “But after that, melt will be greater than snow. Every year, another layer of ice will be removed. Our estimate is that by 2090, the exposure will be irreversible. It could happen sooner if the magnitude of climate change accelerates.”

Once that starts to happen, the question of who is responsible for the clear-up – already the subject of discussion – will become more pressing, the report said, presenting “an entirely new form of political dispute resulting from climate change”.

With no established agreement on the question, the report says the “multinational, multi-generational” problem posed by Camp Century and its waste could become a source of tension between the US, Greenland and Denmark.

Although Denmark allowed the US to build Camp Century and other bases on Greenland in a 1951 agreement, it is not clear how much it was told about the work being done there, or the waste left behind. Complicating matters further, Greenland became largely self-governing in 1979.

Vittus Qujaukitsoq, Greenland’s foreign minister, said he was “concerned” about the camp’s future and is determined to establish responsibility, while his Danish counterpart, Kristian Jensen, has said the issue was being examined “in close contact with Greenland”.

The Pentagon has said it “acknowledges the reality of climate change and the risk it poses” for Greenland, adding that the US government has pledged to “work with the Danish government and the Greenland authorities to settle questions of mutual security”.

Source: MSN News.

Site Icon -SmallI’m sure you’ve noticed the emphasis on Global Warming in this item, something the most of you will be sceptical about I’m sure. What’s the agenda here?

Don’t forget to share your opinion with us.

Are Ya Feelin’ Lucky?

 

Iran has no weapons-grade uranium, Congress told

https://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0310/breaking60.htm

Irishtimes.com

Iran lacks weapons-grade highly enriched uranium and has not yet made a decision on whether to produce any, US intelligence officials told Congress today.

Director of national intelligence Dennis Blair and Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Michael Maples also said recent Iranian missile tests were not directly related to its nuclear activities. They said the two programs were believed to be on separate development tracks.

Mr Blair had been asked to clarify recent conflicting statements from defense officials on Iran’s nuclear program.

“We assess now that Iran does not have any highly enriched uranium,” Blair said. “We assess that Iran has not yet made that decision,” to convert the low-enriched uranium it is making to the weapons-grade material.

Maples said Iran’s launch in February of the Safir Space Launch Vehicle “shows progress” in technologies used to make intercontinental ballistic missiles.

But Mr Blair said the nuclear and missile programs are “separate decisions,” and both officials said they believed Iran had not yet made a decision on whether to proceed with its nuclear program.

Reuters


%d bloggers like this: