Printable View
All I can say is that given all this information... I lack ANY confidence this country will be here after the first Russian nukes fall next year.
We not only won't retaliate, we can't.
We not only won't build new bombs, we can't or won't.
This is sad. This is dangerous. And this is Obama's fault.
Seek and Destroy
Chicago Tonight | November 6, 2014 10:30 am
Tweet?
Eric Schlosser joins us to discuss his nonfiction book, Command and Control: Nuclear Weapons, the Damascus Accident and the Illusion of Safety. Schlosser is in town for the Chicago Humanities Festival and will be at UIC Forum on Saturday, Nov. 8.
Read an excerpt from the book.
Not Good
http://chicagotonight.wttw.com/sites...ol%20cover.jpg
On September 18, 1980, at about six thirty in the evening, Senior Airman David F. Powell and Airman Jeffrey L. Plumb walked into the silo at Launch Complex 374-7, a few miles north of Damascus, Arkansas. They were planning to do a routine maintenance procedure on a Titan II missile. They’d spent countless hours underground at complexes like this one. But no matter how many times they entered the silo, the Titan II always looked impressive. It was the largest intercontinental ballistic missile ever built by the United States: 10 feet in diameter and 103 feet tall, roughly the height of a nine-story building. It had an aluminum skin with a matte finish and U.S. AIR FORCE painted in big letters down the side. The nose cone on top of the Titan II was deep black, and inside it sat a W-53 thermonuclear warhead, the most powerful weapon ever carried by an American missile. The warhead had a yield of 9 megatons—about three times the explosive force of all the bombs dropped during the Second World War, including both atomic bombs.
Day or night, winter or spring, the silo always felt the same. It was eerily quiet, and mercury vapor lights on the walls bathed the missile in a bright white glow. When you opened the door on a lower level and stepped into the launch duct, the Titan II loomed above you like an immense black-tipped silver bullet, loaded in a concrete gun barrel, primed, cocked, ready to go, and pointed at the sky.
The missile was designed to launch within a minute and hit a target as far as six thousand miles away. In order to do that, the Titan II relied upon a pair of liquid propellants—a rocket fuel and an oxidizer—that were “hypergolic.” The moment they came into contact with each other, they’d instantly and forcefully ignite. The missile had two stages, and inside both of them, an oxidizer tank rested on top of a fuel tank, with pipes leading down to an engine. Stage 1, which extended about seventy feet upward from the bottom of the missile, contained about 85,000 pounds of fuel and 163,000 pounds of oxidizer. Stage 2, the upper section where the warhead sat, was smaller and held about one fourth of those amounts. If the missile were launched, fuel and oxidizer would flow through the stage 1 pipes, mix inside the combustion chambers of the engine, catch on fire, emit hot gases, and send almost half a million pounds of thrust through the supersonic convergent-divergent nozzles beneath it. Within a few minutes, the Titan II would be fifty miles off the ground.
The two propellants were extremely efficient—and extremely dangerous. The fuel, Aerozine-50, could spontaneously ignite when it came into contact with everyday things like wool, rags, or rust. As a liquid, Aerozine-50 was clear and colorless. As a vapor, it reacted with the water and the oxygen in the air and became a whitish cloud with a fishy smell. This fuel vapor could be explosive in proportions as low as 2 percent. Inhaling it could cause breathing difficulties, a reduced heart rate, vomiting, convulsions, tremors, and death. The fuel was also highly carcinogenic and easily absorbed through the skin.
The missile’s oxidizer, nitrogen tetroxide, was even more hazardous. Under federal law, it was classified as a “Poison A,” the most deadly category of man-made chemicals. In its liquid form, the oxidizer was a translucent, yellowy brown. Although not as flammable as the fuel, it could spontaneously ignite if it touched leather, paper, cloth, or wood. And its boiling point was only 70 degrees Fahrenheit.
At temperatures any higher, the liquid oxidizer boiled into a reddish brown vapor that smelled like ammonia. Contact with water turned the vapor into a corrosive acid that could react with the moisture in a person’s eyes or skin and cause severe burns. When inhaled, the oxidizer could destroy tissue in the upper respiratory system and the lungs. The damage might not be felt immediately. Six to twelve hours after being inhaled, the stuff could suddenly cause headaches, dizziness, difficulty breathing, pneumonia, and pulmonary edema leading to death.
http://chicagotonight.wttw.com/sites...0Schlosser.jpg
Powell and Plumb were missile repairmen. They belonged to Propellant Transfer System (PTS) Team A of the 308th Strategic Missile Wing, whose headquarters was about an hour or so away at Little Rock Air Force Base. They’d been called to the site that day because a warning light had signaled that pressure was low in the stage 2 oxidizer tank. If the pressure fell too low, the oxidizer wouldn’t flow smoothly to the engine. A “low light” could mean a serious problem—a rupture, a leak. But it was far more likely that a slight change in temperature had lowered the pressure inside the tank. Air-conditioning units in the silo were supposed to keep the missile cooled to about 60 degrees. If Powell and Plum didn’t find any leaks, they’d simply unscrew the cap on the oxidizer tank and add more nitrogen gas. The nitrogen maintained a steady pressure on the liquid inside, pushing downward. It was a simple, mundane task, like putting air in your tires before a long drive.
Powell had served on a PTS team for almost three years and knew the hazards of the Titan II. During his first visit to a launch complex, an oxidizer leak created a toxic cloud that shut down operations for three days. He was twenty-one years old, a proud “hillbilly” from rural Kentucky who loved the job and planned to reenlist at the end of the year.
Plumb had been with the 308th for just nine months. He wasn’t qualified to do this sort of missile maintenance or to handle these propellants. Accompanying Powell and watching everything that Powell did was considered Plumb’s “OJT,” his on-the-job training. Plumb was nineteen, raised in suburban Detroit.
Although an oxidizer low light wasn’t unusual, Air Force technical orders required that both men wear Category I protective gear when entering the silo to investigate it. “Going Category I” meant getting into a Rocket Fuel Handler’s Clothing Outfit (RFHCO)—an airtight, liquidproof, vaporproof, fire-resistant combination of gear designed to protect them from the oxidizer and the fuel. The men called it a “ref-co.” A RFHCO looked like a space suit from an early-1960s science fiction movie. It had a white detachable bubble helmet with a voice-actuated radio and a transparent Plexiglas face screen. The suit was off white, with a long zipper extending from the top of the left shoulder, across the torso, to the right knee. You stepped into the RFHCO and wore long johns underneath it. The black vinyl gloves and boots weren’t attached, so the RFHCO had roll-down cuffs at the wrists and the ankles to maintain a tight seal. The suit weighed about twenty-two pounds. The RFHCO backpack weighed an additional thirty-five and carried about an hour’s worth of air. The outfit was heavy and cumbersome. It could be hot, sticky, and uncomfortable, especially when worn outside the air-conditioned silo. But it could also save your life.
The stage 2 oxidizer pressure cap was about two thirds of the way up the missile. In order to reach it, Powell and Plumb had to walk across a retractable steel platform that extended from the silo wall. The tall, hollow cylinder in which the Titan II stood was enclosed by another concrete cylinder with nine interior levels, housing equipment. Level 1 was near the top of the missile; level 9 about twenty feet beneath the missile. The steel work platforms folded down from the walls hydraulically. Each one had a stiff rubber edge to prevent the Titan II from getting scratched, while keeping the gap between the platform and the missile as narrow as possible.
The airmen entered the launch duct at level 2. Far above their heads was a concrete silo door. It was supposed to protect the missile from the wind and the rain and the effects of a nuclear weapon detonating nearby. The door weighed 740 tons. Far below the men, beneath the Titan II, a concrete flame deflector shaped like a W was installed to guide the hot gases downward at launch, then upward through exhaust vents and out of the silo. The missile stood on a thrust mount, a steel ring at level 7 that weighed about 26,000 pounds. The thrust mount was attached to the walls by large springs, so that the Titan II could ride out a nuclear attack, bounce instead of break, and then take off.
In addition to the W-53 warhead and a few hundred thousand pounds of propellants, many other things in the silo could detonate. Electroexplosive devices were used after ignition to free the missile from the thrust mount, separate stage 2 from stage 1, release the nose cone. The missile also housed numerous small rocket engines with flammable solid fuel to adjust the pitch and the roll of the warhead midflight. The Titan II launch complex had been carefully designed to minimize the risk of having so many flammables and explosives within it. Fire detectors, fire suppression systems, toxic vapor detectors, and decontamination showers were scattered throughout the nine levels of the silo. These safety devices were bolstered by strict safety rules.
Whenever a PTS team member put on a RFHCO, he had to be accompanied by someone else in a RFHCO, with two other people waiting as backup, ready to put on their suits. Every Category I task had to be performed according to a standardized checklist, which the team chief usually read aloud over the radio communications network. There was one way to do everything—and only one way. Technical Order 21M-LGM25C-2-12, Figure 2-18, told Powell and Plumb exactly what to do as they stood on the platform near the missile.
“Step four,” the PTS team chief said over the radio. “Remove airborne disconnect pressure cap.”
“Roger,” Powell replied.
“Caution. When complying with step four, do not exceed one hundred sixty foot-pounds of torque. Overtorquing may result in damage to the missile skin.”
“Roger.”
As Powell used a socket wrench to unscrew the pressure cap, the socket fell off. It struck the platform and bounced. Powell grabbed for it but missed.
Plumb watched the nine-pound socket slip through the narrow gap between the platform and the missile, fall about seventy feet, hit the thrust mount, and then ricochet off the Titan II. It seemed to happen in slow motion. A moment later, fuel sprayed from a hole in the missile like water from a garden hose.
“Oh man,” Plumb thought. “This is not good.”
From Command and Control by Eric Schlosser. Reprinted by arrangement with The Penguin Press, a member of Penguin Group (USA) LLC, A Penguin Random House Company. Copyright © Eric Schlosser, 2013.
Here's info from Bill Gertz on that State Department report on the nuclear warheads.
For The First Time, Russia Has More Deployed Nuclear Warheads Than U.S.
Report on case of Army Pfc. Bradley Manning identifies lapses in security, personnel procedures
October 1, 2014
By Bill Gertz
For the first time, Russia, which is in the midst of a major strategic nuclear modernization, has more deployed nuclear warheads than the United States, according to the latest numbers released by the State Department.
Russia now has 1,643 warheads deployed on intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and heavy bombers. The United States has 1,642, said the fact sheet released Wednesday.
The warhead count for the Russians, based the Sept. 1 report required under the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), shows an increase of 131 warheads since the last declaration on March 1. The U.S. reported a warhead increase of 57 during the same period. It is not clear why the warhead numbers increased.
The treaty limits each side to 1,550 deployed warheads, 700 deployed missiles and bombers and 800 deployed and non-deployed launchers.
On New START delivery systems, the latest fact sheet reveals that the current Russian arsenal of deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles, silo-launched ballistic missiles and heavy bombers is 528, up from 498.
Mark Schneider, a former Pentagon strategic weapons specialist, said the latest fact sheet confirms Russian officials’ promises during New START ratification to increase their deployed nuclear arsenal
“While so little information is released under New START that there is no way to say for sure, the Russian increases appears to reflect the arming of the two new Borey class ballistic missile submarines,” Mr. Schneider said.
“All U.S. numbers have declined since New START entry into force,” he added. “The fact that this is happening reflects the ineffectiveness of the Obama administration’s approach to New START.”
Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, ranking Republican on the Senate Committee on Armed Services, called for a new U.S. policy aimed at halting Moscow’s nuclear arms buildup.
“Not only did Russia violate the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed by President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987, it did so while negotiating with the Obama administration over New START, a 2010 arms reduction treaty,” Mr. Inhofe stated in a recent op-ed in Foreign Policy. “The White House was at best nave to Russian duplicity; at worst it was complicit.”
Mr. Inhofe stated that Russian deception in negotiating an arms reduction treaty while building up nuclear arms “poses a direct threat to the United States.”
Vladimir Putin vows that United States 'will never subjugate Russia'
Russian president echoes Al Capone as he says 'weapons and politeness' are better than 'politeness alone' http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...n_3110566b.jpg
President Vladimir Putin takes part in the plenary meeting of the United People's Front's Second Action Forum in Moscow Photo: EPA
By Tom Parfitt, Moscow
5:45PM GMT 18 Nov 2014
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/template/...e/comments.gif1066 Comments
Vladimir Putin issued a defiant message to the West on Tuesday, accusing the United States of trying to "subjugate" Russia while promising it would never succeed.
The Russian president also appeared to channel Al Capone, the Chicago mobster, when he joked that "weapons and politeness" were more effective than "politeness alone".
Meeting supporters at a forum in Moscow, Mr Putin corrected another speaker who said that the United States wanted to humiliate Russia.
"They don't want to humiliate us, they want to subjugate us, to solve their problems at our expense," he said. "They want to bring us under control." Mr Putin added: "Throughout history no one has ever succeeded in doing that to Russia and they never will."
The president was speaking to members of the All-Russia People's Front, a coalition of groups that back him.
His characteristically sharp-tongued delivery suggested Mr Putin was keen to dispel any idea that he had been cowed at the G20 summit in Brisbane over the weekend, which he left early after a series of Western leaders upbraided him over Russia's military intervention in the Ukraine crisis.
Before his speech on Tuesday, the Russian leader was shown a new military vehicle described as a cross between a car and an armoured personnel carrier.
Manufacturers had jokingly labelled the vehicles "polite armoured cars" – in reference to "the polite people", a phrase that became popular in the spring to describe the Russian soldiers who led the Kremlin's takeover of Ukraine's Crimea peninsula.
On seeing the machine, Mr Putin quipped: "You can get a lot more done with weapons and politeness than you can with politeness alone."
The phrase appeared to echo a saying attributed to Al Capone: "You can get much further with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone."
Gun-lobbyists in the US also use the slogan: "An armed society is a polite society." Mr Putin said that events in Crimea and Ukraine – where pro-Moscow rebels have carved out a de facto independent territory in the Russo-phone east of the country – had united the Russian people.
"Our nation has shown the way with real civil participation, empathy and patriotism, and it has demonstrated its unity," he said.
Mr Putin defended the government's decision to introduce a ban on food imports from western states that imposed sanctions on Russia over its alleged meddling in Ukraine. He said those countries had "put themselves in a spot" by introducing sanctions and provoking the Russian measures in response.
Subjugate? Where'd that come from?
Out of the minds of lunatics?
U.S. says reduced defence role for atom bombs, Britain against ban now
https://s1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/F...b5cec5193.jpeg
By By Fredrik Dahl | Reuters – 21 hours ago
http://i.usatoday.net/news/gallery/2...horizontal.jpg
By Fredrik Dahl
VIENNA (Reuters) - The United States said on Tuesday it is relying less on nuclear weapons as part of its defence planning, but Britain argued against banning such arms now.
Both powers, taking part for the first time in an international conference on the humanitarian impact of atomic bombs, spoke in support of pursuing the goal of a world free of such weapons of mass destruction.
The three other officially recognised nuclear weapon states -- Russia, France and China -- stayed away from the meeting. Many of the 157 states taking part are critical of what they see as slow progress on nuclear disarmament.
"We have reduced the role of nuclear weapons in the defence of our nation and our allies and it is the policy of the United States to not develop new nuclear warheads," U.S. non-proliferation envoy Adam Scheinman said.
He gave no more details on the reduced role.
However, in a possible allusion to tense ties with Russia, he added: "Progress requires a willing partner and a conducive strategic environment."
The United States and Russia hold more than 90 percent of the world's nuclear warheads.
The conference comes amid talk of a new Cold War between the West and Russia over the Ukraine crisis, during which President Vladimir Putin has pointedly stressed Moscow's nuclear arsenal.
Under the 1970 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the five recognised atomic bomb "haves" agreed to work towards eliminating their bombs, while the "have-nots" pledged not to pursue them. A treaty review conference is scheduled for 2015.
Pakistan and India, which both have nuclear weapons, have not signed the NPT. They attended the Vienna talks, as did Iran, which rejects Western accusations it too wants to build a bomb.
Israel, which is believed to have the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal and is also outside the NPT, did not attend.
Critics say there has been more emphasis on meeting the non-proliferation goal than getting the five major powers to fulfil their part of the deal. The five say that much progress has been made since the Cold War, with a sharp reduction in stocks.
Britain said the approach of those arguing for banning such bombs now or for fixing a timetable for their elimination failed "to take account of, and therefore jeopardises, the stability and security which nuclear weapons can help to ensure".
"A declaratory ban, or a timetable not underpinned by the necessary trust, confidence and verification measures, would jeopardise strategic stability," Ambassador Susan le Jeune d'Allegeershecque added, advocating a step-by-step approach.
Mexico earlier called for a "diplomatic process leading to the negotiation and conclusion of a legally binding instrument for the prohibition of nuclear weapons".
(Editing by Angus MacSwan)
The Nuclear Gun Is Back On The Table
Both in private and in public, Russia is making explicit references to its nuclear arsenal
November 17, 2014
I never had much time for the Greenham Common women. As a mildly reactionary student of the 1980s, I regarded them – and their protest camp outside a British nuclear-weapons base – as silly and misguided. After all, decades of experience taught that nuclear deterrence worked.
Thirty years on and the nuclear peace is still holding. But I am becoming a little less secure in my belief that nukes will never be used.
There are three reasons for my anxiety. First, the spread of nuclear weapons to unstable countries such as Pakistan and North Korea. Second, the growing body of evidence about how close the world has come, at various times, to nuclear conflict. My third reason for worry is more immediate: a significant increase in threatening nuclear talk from Russia.
Both in private and in public, the Russians are now making increasingly explicit references to their country’s nuclear arsenal. A couple of weeks ago, I witnessed a prominent Russian warn an audience, at a private seminar in Washington, that “President [Vladimir] Putin has put the nuclear gun on the table.” The Russian president has indeed told an audience at home that outsiders should not “mess with us”, because “Russia is one of the leading nuclear powers”.
Last week, Pravda – the Soviet mouthpiece during the cold war – ran an article headlined, “Russia Prepares Nuclear Surprise for Nato”. It crowed that Russia has parity with the US in strategic nuclear weapons and boasted: “As for tactical nuclear weapons, the superiority of modern-day Russia over Nato is even stronger. The Americans are well aware of this. They were convinced before that Russia would never rise again. Now it is too late.”
My only hesitation in writing about this is that I have little doubt that one aim of all this nuclear posturing from Moscow is precisely to get western commentators talking about a Russian nuclear threat. Russia is desperate to stop the west supplying military aid to Ukraine. So, they want to get across the message that any such escalation would provoke a ferocious reaction from Moscow and – who knows – perhaps even the use of nuclear weapons.
Mr Putin seems to adhere to what Richard Nixon called the “madman theory” of leadership. The former US president explained: “If the adversary feels that you are unpredictable, even rash, he will be deterred from pressing you too far. The odds that he will fold increase greatly.” President Putin may be right in calculating that, by putting the nuclear gun on the table, he can always out-madman Barack Obama, the coolly rational US president.
Nonetheless, even assuming that the Russian nuclear talk is a bluff, it is still dangerous – since to make the bluff intimidating, the Russians have to raise tensions and take risks. Last week, General Philip Breedlove, commander of NATO forces in Europe, said that Russia had “moved forces that are capable of being nuclear” into Crimea. As fighting in Ukraine continues, the danger of Russia and NATO misreading each other’s intentions increases.
Historians of the cold war have shown that mistakes and miscalculation have brought the world closer to accidental nuclear warfare more often than is commonly realised. A recent report by Britain’s Royal Institute of International Affairs, entitled, “Too Close for Comfort” documents several incidents. Some involved computer malfunctions that led either the US or the USSR to believe that they were under nuclear attack. As the report notes: “Individual decision making, often in disobedience of protocol and political guidance, has on several occasions saved the day.”
Several of the most dangerous near-misses took place during periods of heightened political tension between Moscow and Washington. The most famous such incident was the Cuban Missile crisis of 1962. A more recent instance – with a stronger contemporary resonance – was the Able Archer incident of November 1983.
In September of that year, the Soviet Union had shot down a Korean Air civilian airliner, killing 267 people. That tragedy, like the shooting down of a Malaysia Airways flight over Ukraine this year, had significantly raised east-west tensions with the Russians, then as now, accusing America of militarism and plans for world domination.
Against this background, NATO staged a military exercise that acted out a western nuclear strike on the USSR. Operation Able Archer was so thorough and so realistic that many in Moscow interpreted it as preparation for a NATO first-strike. In response, the Russians readied their own nuclear weapons. It appears that intelligence services alerted the west to how Able Archer was being seen in Moscow, allowing for de-escalation.
One lesson of that episode is that the existence of a “hotline” between Moscow and Washington is no guarantee that the two sides will not blunder. Another is that any ambiguous moves, involving nuclear weapons, can cause a dangerous panic.
My parents’ generation got grimly used to living in the shadow of the bomb. But for my generation, the very idea of nuclear warfare seems like something from science-fiction or even dark comedy, such as Dr Strangelove. But the world’s nuclear arsenals were not abolished after the cold war. Sadly, we may now be returning to an era in which the threat of nuclear warfare can no longer be treated as the stuff of science fiction.
US Now Concerned About Russia's Emerging Nuclear and Strategic Military Capabilities
by Staff Writers
Washington DC (Sputnik) Jan 16, 2015
http://fakti.org/sites/default/files...l_hejn_123.jpg
The United States is concerned about Russia's emerging strategic capabilities in nuclear, space, cyber security spheres, Commander of US Strategic Command Adm. Cecil Haney said on Thursday.
"Russia has had more than a decade of investments in modernization across their strategic nuclear forces. This is not about the continuation of the cold war <...>This is about emerging capability at a time of significant concerns in Russians execution of their near abroad strategy," Adm. Haney said at the event devoted to strategic deterrence in Atlantic Council, Washington, DC.
The commander went on by saying that Moscow has significant cyber capability and also "has publicly stated they are developing counter space capabilities."
"Russian leaders openly maintain that Russia's armed forces have anti-satellite weapons and conduct anti-satellite research," Adm. Haney noted. The commander also reminded of the news of "Russian strategic bombers penetrating the US and ally air defense identification zones on multiple occasions this year."
"[Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin continues to stress the importance of Russia's strategic forces,"Adm. Haney said adding that President Putin was seen during major strategic force exercises in 2013 and 2014.
Relations between Russia and the United States have deteriorated following Crimea's reunification with Russia in March 2014 and the escalation of an armed conflict in Ukraine's southeast.
The United States and its allies have introduced several rounds of sanctions against Russia over its alleged involvement in the Ukrainian crisis. The restrictive measures target Russia's defense, banking and energy sectors, as well as a number of individuals.
http://www.thestar.com.my/%7E/media/...&h=413&crop=1&
Source: Sputnik International
Russian General Warns Of World War 3, Russia’s Nuclear Weapons Plans For The World
http://cdn.inquisitr.com/wp-content/...ld-665x385.jpg
A new Cold War is the talk of international politics in 2015, but a former Russian general is warning that the world stands on the brink of a “hot war,” not Cold War 2. In addition, it’s “jokingly” claimed that keeping the “U.S. territory at gunpoint” by threatening World War 3 may be the most effective method of combating the United States.
In a related report by the Inquisitr, Vladimir Putin recently signed and enacted a new Russian military doctrine which proposes that Russian nuclear weapons defense systems near Europe will be expanded, based upon joint defense projects with China, India, and other countries.
Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev also warns that the Ukraine crisis may transform into World War 3, claiming that a nuclear war between Russia and the U.S. is possible.
Former member of Russian Joint Chiefs of Staff Colonel-General Leonid Ivashov spoke to Pravda in a recent interview, and when he was asked about non-nuclear deterrence he responded with a very dark joke.“One should keep the U.S. territory at gunpoint to be able to immediately act on the territory. The group should target the Federal Reserve, but I’m joking here, of course. Yet, there is some truth in this joke, because, as a rule, it is financial oligarchs, who need to start wars.”Ivashov suggests that the Ministry for Foreign Affairs should start a “combat mission” against the United States to “cause the damage with the use of economics methods.” In particular, he suggests targeting oil supplies and other commodities necessary for waging war. But Ivashov believes that placing Russian nuclear weapons in strategic locations like Latin America would be the best deterrent.
“Bingo – they have the U.S. territory at gunpoint, and this is what the Americans fear most. They invest a lot of money in missile defense not to wage wars on their own territory. They will be happy to stage wars anywhere, but not on their own territory. We need to find some power to create a group that could, in case of aggression against Russia, act on the territory of the United States. Now that would be a factor of deterrence. They say that the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the Russian Ministry of Defense work on that already.”Although Ivashov believes a large focus on Russia’s nuclear weapons should be a factor, he also notes that the United States has “not upgraded one single ballistic missile, and they do not build new ones either.”
http://cdn.inquisitr.com/wp-content/...em-670x490.jpg
This decision has led to the number of Russian nuclear weapons surpassing the number of U.S. nuclear missiles. Under the new U.S. directive that was put into place in 2003, it’s said the U.S. military has focused on positioning high-precision vehicles in strategic locations that use the AEGIS Ballistic Missile System.
“Thus, the Americans plan to destroy our remaining ballistic missiles in the boost phase of their flight. For these purposes, the Americans create this missile defense. Afterwards, AEGIS systems will disable the warheads of the missiles that have been launched. The Americans do their best to devalue the Russian nuclear missile potential. And they can succeed.”If “non-nuclear powers show aggression against Russia, threatening the existence and the territorial integrity of Russia,” then Russia will preemptively use tactical nuclear weapons, according to the former Russian general. Due to the technological balance of power being in favor of the United States and its allies, Ivashov apparently believes this effort will fail since most of Russia’s neighbors are all under the “American nuclear umbrella,” and that World War 3 may be around the corner.
“It just so happens that it is only Mongolia and Finland that can be the countries against which we can use nuclear weapons, if they threaten us. The situation has changed dramatically, and we are standing on the brink of a war – not a cold, but a hot war. Therefore, today Russia hastily takes efforts to rebuild the defensive capacity of the armed forces and change the military doctrine.”As part of this plan for modernizing Russia’s nuclear weapons and military capabilities, Leonid Ivashov claims the space group and long-range aircraft need to be upgraded. He believes that Russia has relied upon the “nuclear shield” as the primary factor of nuclear deterrence, but this shield does not guarantee safety “because we do not see a situation when we can push the button, even for a retaliatory attack.”
Again, I say... "I'm shocked" that anyone would even consider Russia a problem, let alone a danger to the world...
Quote:
Originally Posted by vector7
Hmm...I've seen this posted somewhere else before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vector7
Russia ends US nuclear security alliance
Accord worked to keep stockpiles secure
http://c.o0bg.com/rf/image_960w/Bost...105049510A.jpg
54 Comments Print
18l oosenukes - In this Wednesday, Dec. 24, 1997 file photo, soldiers prepare to destroy a ballistic SS-19 missile in the yard of the largest former Soviet military rocket base in Vakulenchuk, Ukraine, 220 kilometers (137 miles) west of Kiev. The U.S. helped Ukraine and other ex-Soviet nations secure former Soviet nuclear weapons and dismantle some of them under the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program initiated by Sens. Sam Nunn and Richard Lugar. (Associated Press)
AP/File
The United States helped Russia secure and dismantle nuclear weapons in the Cooperative Threat Reduction programs.
By Bryan BenderGlobe Staff January 19, 2015
WASHINGTON — The private diplomatic meetings took place over two days in mid-December in a hotel overlooking Moscow’s Red Square.
But unlike in previous such gatherings, the sense of camaraderie, even brotherhood, was overshadowed by an uncomfortable chill, according to participants.
In the previously undisclosed discussions, the Russians informed the Americans that they were refusing any more US help protecting their largest stockpiles of weapons-grade uranium and plutonium from being stolen or sold on the black market. The declaration effectively ended one of the most successful areas of cooperation between the former Cold War adversaries.
“I think it greatly increases the risk of catastrophic terrorism,” said Sam Nunn, the former Democratic senator from Georgia and an architect of the “cooperative threat reduction” programs of the 1990s.
Official word came in a terse, three-page agreement signed on Dec. 16. A copy was obtained by the Globe, and a description of the Moscow meeting was provided by three people who attended the session or were briefed on it. They declined to be identified for security reasons.
Russia’s change of heart was not unexpected.
The Globe reported in August that US officials were concerned about the future of the programs, because of increased diplomatic hostilities between the United States and Russia. The New York Times reported in November that it appeared likely many of the programs would end.
RELATED: 8/2014: US-Russia work on nuclear materials in jeopardy
On hand for the Moscow meeting were nearly four dozen of the leading figures on both sides who have been working to safeguard the largest supplies of the world’s deadliest weapons, according to the three-page agreement.
The group included officials from the US Department of Energy, its nuclear weapons labs, the Pentagon, and the State Department, and a host of Russian officials in charge of everything from dismantling nuclear submarines to arms control.
Specialists said the final meeting was a dismaying development in a joint effort that the United States has invested some $2 billion in and had been a symbol of the thaw between East and West and of global efforts to prevent the spread of doomsday weapons. An additional $100 million had been budgeted for the effort this year and many of the programs were envisioned to continue at least through 2018.
Since the cooperative agreement began, US experts have helped destroy hundreds of weapons and nuclear-powered submarines, pay workers’ salaries, install security measures at myriad facilities containing weapons material across Russia and the former Soviet Union, and conduct training programs for their personnel.
Officials said estimates of how much bomb-grade material has either been destroyed or secured inside the former Soviet Union is classified but insist the stockpiles are enough to make many hundreds of atomic bombs.
The work has been driven by deep concern that large supplies of nuclear material could be stolen by terrorists seeking weapons of mass destruction or diverted by underpaid workers susceptible to bribes.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision last year to invade the Ukrainian territory of Crimea and then back an armed rebellion in eastern Ukraine prompted a series of US and EU sanctions against Russia, which stirred fears that the era of nuclear cooperation was at risk.
Now security upgrades have been cancelled at some of Russia’s seven “closed nuclear cities,” which contain among the largest stockpiles of highly enriched uranium and plutonium, according to the official “record of meeting” signed by the sides in December.
The Russians also told the Americans that joint security work at 18 civilian facilities housing weapons material would cease, effective Jan. 1. Another project at two facilities to convert highly enriched uranium into a less dangerous form also has been stopped.
Lack of US funding and expertise also jeopardizes planned construction of high-tech surveillance systems at 13 buildings that store nuclear material, as well as a project to deploy radiation detectors at Russian ports, airports, and border crossings to catch potential nuclear smugglers.
http://www.transasianaxis.com//c.o0b.../nukesgraf.jpg
A limited amount of cooperation will continue in other countries that have highly enriched uranium that originated in Russia. The two sides also will continue working on ways to secure industrial sources of radioactive material, which could be used to make a “dirty bomb.’’ The Russian decision will not affect inspections that both sides regularly conduct of each other’s active nuclear arsenals as part of arms control treaties.
But that is little consolation for those like Siegfried S. Hecker, one of the nation’s premier experts on nuclear weapons. Hecker, a former head of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, has traveled more than 40 times to Russia since 1992 as part of the joint security efforts. While he said vast improvements have been made in Russia’s atomic security since the end of the Cold War, “you’re never done.”
“They need continuous attention and international cooperation,” he said in an interview. “You cannot afford to isolate your country, your own nuclear complex, from the rest of the world.”
The Russian embassy in Washington, and the Russian State Atomic Energy Corporation in Moscow, did not respond to requests for comment. In the December document, the Russians said they are capable of securing their own nuclear facilities, out of Russia’s federal budget.
But a number of former US government officials and nuclear experts expressed doubts about the Russian pledge, pointing to recent economic troubles.
“The Russians say they are going to put a lot more of their resources into this,” said Nunn, who is cochairman of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, a Washington nonprofit that works to reduce the dangers of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. “That would be good news if they do, but with their economic challenges now and with the huge distrust built because of Ukraine and the deterioration of the ruble, the proof will be in the pudding.”
Another key architect of the programs, former Republican senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, who last visited some of the facilities in 2012, said he wonders if the Russians have the expertise needed to keep track of the vast amount of nuclear bomb material.
“The housekeeping by the Russians has not been comprehensive,” Lugar said in an interview. “There had been work done [with the United States] hunting down nuclear materials. This is now terminated.”
Some warn that the distrust on both sides could bleed into other areas, including arms control treaties.
“It’s important for the US and Russia to have nuclear security, but it is also important for us to believe we have nuclear security,” said Matthew Bunn, a weapons proliferation specialist at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. “That’s hard to do just by saying so.”
US government officials, for their part, insist they are trying to make the best of it.
“We are encouraged that they statedmultiple times that they intend to finish this work,” said David Huizenga, who runs the nonproliferation programs at the National Nuclear Security Administration, an arm of the Department of Energy. Huizenga led the US delegation to Moscow last month.
But he said US officials still hope that the Russians will change their mind and restart a partnership that by most accounts has significantly strengthened global security.
“[It will be] harder to resurrect if we don’t actually engage in any meaningful way,” Huizenga said.
Russia Deploys Nuclear ICBM Launchers On Combat Patrol
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 02/05/2015 12:56 -0500
Perhaps it is a coincidence that a day before John Kerry's arrival in Kiev (a visit which "coincided" with a 35% devaluation of the local currency) where among other things the US statesman discussed the possibility of official (as opposed to unofficial) deliveries of US "lethal support" to the civil war torn and now hyperinflation country, that Russia decided to put its nuclear ICBMs on combat patrol missions in various Russian regions. Specifically, according to Tass, "About 700 units of military equipment, including launchers are deployed in the positioning areas in the Tver, Ivanovo, Kirov, Irkutsk regions, as well as in Altai Territory and the Mari El republic."
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...M%20ICBM_0.jpg
More:
The Topol, Topol-M and Yars mobile ballistic missile launchers have been put on combat patrol mission in six Russian regions, Russian Defense Ministry spokesman for Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN) Colonel Igor Yegorov said on Wednesday.
"The Topol, Topol-M and Yars mobile launchers are drilling combat duty tasks in six regions of the country with extended combat patrolling time. About 700 units of military equipment, including launchers are deployed in the positioning areas in the Tver, Ivanovo, Kirov, Irkutsk regions, as well as in Altai Territory and the Mari El republic," Yegorov said.
According to him, the time of winter combat patrolling has been extended to nearly a month this year. "This means that each missile regiment will spend about 60 days per year on combat patrolling routes," he said.
Topol is a ground-based mobile strategic intercontinental ballistic missile system. The Topol-M ICBM system belongs to the fifth generation of strategic missiles. The three-stage solid-propelled single warhead missile has a silo and mobile version. Yars is a solid-propelled mobile and silo-based intercontinental ballistic missile with multiple warhead.
Now all that is needed is for Emmett Fitz-Hume and Austin Millbarge to show up and to confirm the old saying that "a weapon unused is a useless weapon", especially if said weapon belongs to Northrop Grumman, Lockheed or General Dynamics.
Emmett Fitz-Hume and Austin Millbarge? LOL
That sinister 'flexibility' Obama promised Russia finally emerges
BY ANDREW MALCOLM
09:44 AM ET
http://www.investors.com/image/Putin...13_600.jpg.cms
Then, I'll take my sanctions and go home. (AP)
Who knew 35 months ago what Barack Obama really meant when he 'secretly' pleaded with Russia's Dmitry Medvedev for patience and space so he could steal the 2012 election and gain more "flexibility."
"On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it's important for him to give me space," Obama said with a brotherly arm pat, noting 2012 was his last election. Medvedev responded, "I will transmit this information to Vladimir."
It was long thought that Obama's gaffe, caught on an open mic during one of those frequent summits national leaders feel the need for, dealt only with the Democrat giving away more to Russia on missile defense. (Scroll down to hear the whispers not intended for his own countrymen's ears.)
But Obama has elongated the nuclear "negotiations" with Iran to no end and Russia's benefit. Obama slapped sanctions on Russia that have surely hurt the Russian economy but produced zero effect on that country's relentless military destabilization of Ukraine.
And Obama has dithered more than a year now, with many more months to come apparently, over providing vital defensive weapons for Ukraine's elected government to fight Russian-backed insurgents. Obama's Codeword: Strategic Patience. Dmitry and Vlad are no doubt appreciative.
Obama talked with the Russian leader Tuesday and, according to the White House, the American threatened to raise the costs for his Ukraine intervention. Economic sanctions have not worked there or in Iran, so more of them will?
Such phone call accounts do not include the other leader's response, which was likely "LOL."
Obama has vowed to "degrade and ultimately destroy" the terrorist army of ISIS. But he's only bombing here and there. He's ordered retirement of the A-10 Warthog, America's best ground-attack weapon. And Obama has halted purchases of all new Tomahawk missiles. Other than that, Obama's all-in the terrorist fight.
Now come new Obama prevarications on terrorism. He and aides have performed amusing linguistic contortions to avoid calling Islamic terrorists Islamic terrorists. On Fox News Sunday Gen. Michael Flynn, recently retired head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, warned: "You can't defeat an enemy that you don't admit exists."
And a new Rasmussen Reports poll finds Americans seeing through Obama's guise. A substantial majority of likely voters say he's not spoken strongly enough against ISIS' atrocities.
In a lengthy interview with Vox.com, Obama said Americans are being distracted from the most important genuine issue facing the world by a commercial media focusing on scary accounts of terrorist beheadings and fiery deaths.
http://www.investors.com/image/Flynn...ADirAP.jpg.cms
Gen. Michael Flynn, Ret. (AP)
"My first job is to protect the American people," Obama stated. "It is entirely legitimate for the American people to be deeply concerned when you've got a bunch of violent, vicious zealots who behead people or randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris."
That sounds like someone who could see a clear link between the Crusades of 1096 A.D. and ISIS of 2015.
Where to begin on Obama's way-too convenient formulation? First of all, an armed Muslim with al Qaeda links walking into a kosher deli to fatally shoot four Parisians, all of them Jews, is hardly a random act of violence. Despite his chronic grandiosity, if Obama says it and aides applaud, that doesn't make it true.
Secondly, they must not teach Jewish history at Harvard Law School. The name Zealots originally refers to Jews, not deranged Muslim gunmen. Zealots were a first century Jewish sect that practiced violence against Roman occupiers because only God could be their ruler.
Then, believe it or not, in the interview Obama likened global terrorism to a city's ordinary crime problems that require a vigilant mayor. "But we also have to attend to a lot of other issues," Obama insisted. "And we've got to make sure we're right-sizing our approach so that what we do isn't counterproductive."
And what, the families of Kayla Mueller or that incinerated Jordanian pilot or the Benghazi Four or anyone who remembers the original 9/11, might ask does this president see as the paramount threat facing the United States today?
Climate change.
It's got nothing to do with merit. Americans don't grasp this truth, Obama explains, simply because "it's not a sexy story."
The scariest part of this latest Oval Office delusion is that, unlike most normal people, the current U.S. commander-in-chief may actually believe it.
Russian Nuclear Missile Forces Conduct Large-Scale Exercises Across Country
By Dennis Lynch @neato_itsdennis on February 12 2015 9:26 AM
http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibti...?itok=7T11OCZq
Russia's Strategic Missile Forces have conducted exercises involving 30 regiments on preparedness, combating chemical weapons attacks and anti-sabotage techniques. Russian Defense Ministry
Russia’s nuclear missile force staged large-scale exercises across the vast country Thursday consisting of drills to combat sabotage and chemical weapons attacks. More than 30 regiments of the Strategic Missile Forces were involved in 12 regions, according to Itar-Tass, a Russian news agency close to the government.
“According to the drill scenario, simulated enemy’s sabotage groups planted mines on the combat patrolling route sections and used toxic agents in the field. Engineer troops, radiological, chemical and biological defense forces, as well as anti-sabotage units have been engaged in the exercises,” said Defense Ministry spokesman Col. Igor Yegorov. Russia’s Strategic Missile Forces plan to test-fire their new Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile in 2017. The Sarmat would replace the Cold War-era R-36 missile, nicknamed “Satan” by NATO, which is the largest ICBM ever made.
Russia’s stockpile of 8,400 nuclear warheads is the largest in the world, surpassing the U.S.’s 7,500. Both nuclear superpowers have taken steps over the last 25 years to reduce their stockpiles under landmark accords agreed upon following the end of the Cold War.
Meanwhile, the Russian navy launched nuclear combat exercises in international waters in the Arctic last week, which was rumored to be in response to NATO’s plans to bolster defenses in the ex-Soviet Baltic states on Russia’s western border. Russia’s nuclear submarine fleet was involved in the exercises and engaged in simulated ballistic missile launches and Arctic navigation, according to Newsweek.
The Russian government announced late last year that it would upgrade its nuclear weapons capabilities as a part of a wider military modernization over the next decade. That includes building a "guaranteed nuclear deterrent,” according to President Vladimir Putin.
Putin emerged Thursday morning from a marathon, 17-hour negotiation with his Ukrainian, French and German counterparts to hammer out a peace deal in Ukraine, where the Ukrainian government and pro-Russian rebels have fought a nearly yearlong conflict that's claimed the lives of more than 5,400 people. The West accuses Putin of directly intervening militarily on behalf of the rebels, but he denies that allegation.
High tensions over the Ukraine conflict have brought East-West relations to their lowest since the end of the Cold War. Defense officials in NATO member states expressed concern over Russia’s nuclear modernization plans at last week’s Munich Security Conference and discussed upgrading and modernizing their own nuclear deterrent forces in response, according to Reuters.
This IS real, unlike the fake borg slides.
Russia To Add 40 New Intercontinental Missiles This Year
June 16, 2016
Russia's military will add over 40 new intercontinental ballistic missiles this year alone that are capable of piercing any missile defenses, President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday in a blunt reminder of the nation's nuclear might amid tensions with the West over Ukraine.
Putin spoke at the opening of an arms show at a shooting range in Alabino just west of Moscow, a huge display intended to showcase Russia's resurgent military.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg accused the Russians of "nuclear saber-rattling," and said that was one of the reasons the western military alliance has been beefing up its ability to defend its members.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, briefing reporters via teleconference from Boston, where he is recovering from surgery on a broken leg, called Putin's announcement concerning.
"We're trying to move in the opposite direction," Kerry said. "We have had enormous cooperation from the 1990s forward with respect to the structure of nuclear weapons in the former territories of the Soviet Union. And no one wants to see us step backwards."
He said Putin could be posturing.
"It's really hard to tell," Kerry said. "But nobody should hear that kind of an announcement from the leader of a powerful country and not be concerned about the implications."
Russia-West relations have plunged to their lowest point since Cold War times over Moscow's annexation of Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula and support for a pro-Russia separatist insurgency in eastern Ukraine. The U.S. and the EU have slapped Russia with economic sanctions, and Washington and its NATO allies have pondered an array of measures in response to Russia's moves.
The three Baltic members of the alliance, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, have asked NATO to permanently deploy ground troops to their nations as a deterrent against an increasingly assertive Russia. And Polish Defense Minister Tomasz Siemoniak says he and U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter have held talks about placing U.S. heavy army equipment in Poland.
The NATO chief said he expected Carter to brief other alliance members on the proposal to stockpile tanks and other weapons and supplies in Eastern Europe during a NATO defense ministers meeting next week.
"I welcome all efforts to defend and protect allies," Stoltenberg said in Brussels.
Moscow bristled at the plans, warning Washington that the deployment of new U.S. weapons near Russian borders would foment dangerous instability in Europe.
"The United States is inciting tensions and carefully nurturing their European allies' anti-Russian phobias in order to use the current difficult situation for further expanding its military presence and influence in Europe," the Russian Foreign Ministry said.
"We hope that reason will prevail and it will be possible to save the situation in Europe from sliding toward a military standoff, which could entail dangerous consequences," the ministry added.
The NATO chief said the alliance had to respond to Russia's actions by "increasing the readiness and the preparedness of our forces."
"We are responding by making sure that NATO also in the future is an alliance which provides deterrence and protection for all allies against any threat," Stoltenberg said.
In his speech at the arms show, Putin vowed to continue a big arms modernization program despite the nation's economic downturn. He specifically mentioned the Armata tanks and other new armored vehicles, which were first shown to the public during a Red Square military parade last month.
The Russian leader also noted the military was to start testing its new long-range early warning radar intended to monitor the western border and later will deploy another one in the east.
"Over 40 new intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of penetrating any, even the most technologically advanced missile defense systems, will join the nuclear forces in the current year," he said.
Last year, the military received 38 ICBMs, according to Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu. Modernizing the nation's nuclear forces is a top priority for the military, which needs to gradually decommission its aging Soviet-built ICBMs.
Stoltenberg described the Russian arms buildup as destabilizing.
"They are developing new nuclear capabilities and they are also using nuclear rhetoric more in the way they are messaging their defense strategy and defense posture," Stoltenberg said. "This nuclear saber-rattling of Russia is unjustified. It's destabilizing and it's dangerous."
Putin said the re-armament program should help encourage the nation's economic growth and spearhead innovations. Independent experts warn, however, that a weapons upgrade that envisages spending 22 trillion rubles (over $400 billion) on new weapons through 2020 would be an unbearable burden now when the Russian economy has plunged into recession.
Despite the gloomy economic outlook, Russian arms makers used the arms show to publicize costly new weapons that even the Soviet Union couldn't afford.
The navy revealed a project of an aircraft carrier capable of carrying 90 aircraft. It also showed a mock-up of a new amphibious landing ship, a vessel similar to the Mistral-class ship built on Russian orders in France, whose delivery has been suspended over the Ukrainian crisis.
Amid the current spike in Russia-West tensions, Washington accused Moscow of violating its obligations under a landmark nuclear arms control treaty by flight-testing a ground-launched cruise missile with a range prohibited by the treaty. Russia rejected the accusations, and, in its turn, alleged that some elements of the U.S. missile defense shield violate the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces, or INF, treaty.
The RIA Novosti news agency on Tuesday quoted Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov as saying that Moscow is ready to hold consultations to discuss the mutual complaints.