War in the US; when will it come?

[American Patriot]

We can only hope the Norks don't miss him.....

[Phil Fiord]

That last video from NK. The fire one. There are clues in there, propaganda though it is.

It shows a couple of times, a mostly legible screen, as from a TV, that states something about a tunnel entrance.

At the end there is that tunnel and a follow in to the bomb that is credited as meaning something about a NK nuke test.

In between those scenes we have what appears to be Obama in flames walking out to do a press conference or similar.

Now, back to the English words on that TV screen. There is also an arrow from the words pointing to a mostly obscured map. The map looks a lot like the wang of Maryland or lower Jersey to me.

I suspect they are actually telling us they have a bomb in a tunnel structure here under a major city, likely NYC or DC. I suspect DC more for the demoralizing effect of the destruction of our countries heart. Granted, if that occurred and Congress and The WH all went, I find not too many would shed tears, but there will be good people who die as well and many who were simply working or living there.

[Ryan Ruck]

With D.C. I think I'd be most sad about the loss of our founding documents.

Then again, they are pretty secure so maybe they'd be okay!

[vector7]

With D.C. I think I'd be most sad about the loss of our founding documents.

Then again, they are pretty secure so maybe they'd be okay!

I thought Obama sold those documents.

[American Patriot]

We have copies.


Reminds me of a song....

"Oh the Norks over there are frightening, but losing DC is enticing.... and since we want them to go... Let it blow, let it blow, let it blow...."

(Sung to the tune of a famous Christmas song....)

hehehe

[Phil Fiord]

I have discussed my analysis with a few people and at the least it has been surmised as a claimed planting of a bomb under a major city.

One thing I thought of is the new deeper NYC subway. There are pictures here: http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/201...ref=magazine#1

It would make sense for an article to be on TV or in print saying "Tunnel Entrance Here".

[vector7]

We have copies.

Yes but why would Obama auction the most accurate and only copy officially authorized by Congress?

Lot 222 / Sale 2227

[DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE]. In Congress, July 4, 1776. The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America. When in the Course of Human Events... [Washington, D.C.] Engraved by W.I. Stone, for the Dept. of State, by order of J.Q. Adams, Secty. of State. July 4 1823.



Enlarge & Zoom


Estimate
(Set Currency)

• $300,000 - $500,000

• Track Lot
• Place Bid

Sale Information

Sale 2227
Fine Printed Books and Manuscripts Including Americana
4 December 2009
New York, Rockefeller Plaza
Contact the Department
Buy Catalog

Lot Description
[DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE]. In Congress, July 4, 1776. The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America. When in the Course of Human Events... [Washington, D.C.] Engraved by W.I. Stone, for the Dept. of State, by order of J.Q. Adams, Secty. of State. July 4 1823.

Folio broadside (30¼ x 26¾ in.), PRINTED ON FINE PARCHMENT. Slight soiling at left-hand and right-hand margins, top edge slightly trimmed, torn with small losses in blank lower right-hand corner, two small holes mended.

"WHEN IN THE COURSE OF HUMAN EVENTS": THE OFFICIAL 1823 ENGRAVING OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

Stone's meticulously prepared, actual-size, engraved facsimile of America's founding document remains the most accurate of existing facsimiles and the only one officially authorized by Congress. In 1820 -- forty-four years after the Declaration of Independence was adopted by Congress and signed in Philadelphia by 56 delegates to the Continental Congress -- Secretary of State John Quincy Adams (the son of a Signer), commissioned William J. Stone to execute a full-scale facsimile of the historic document, the original of which had already suffered fading and wear during its vicissitudes since 1776. The engraving of the very large copperplate, it is reported, took Stone a full three years. Some have contended that a transfer process he used caused "some physical harm to the parchment" of the original (National Archives, Declaration of Independence: The Adventures of A Document, 1976, p.17).

On January 2, 1823, Adams formally notified the Senate that 200 copies had been printed, all on large sheets of parchment similar to that used in the engrossed original. Congress, in a Resolution of 26 May, directed that these be distributed to honor the 50th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The President (James Monroe) and Vice-President were each to receive two copies, two more were allocated to former President James Madison, twenty copies to the two houses of Congress, two copies to each surviving Signer (Jefferson, John Adams and Charles Carroll), and two copies to the Marquis de Lafayette, who was shortly to visit the country whose independence he had helped to secure (one of Lafayette's copies was sold at Christie's, 22 November 1985, lot 194). Congress presented additional copies to colleges and libraries, and few remain today in private hands. A 1991 census counted 31 examples of which 19 were in institutions and twelve privately owned. J. Bidwell, "American History in Image and Text," in Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, vol.98, part 2 (October 1988), no.7; W.R. Coleman, "Counting the Stones--A Census of the Stone Facismiles of the Declaration of Independence," in Manuscripts, vol.43, no.2, pp.97-105. Provenance: Joan B. Kroc (1928-2003) -- The present owner.

Pre-Lot Text
THE PROPERTY OF A MIDWESTERN GENTLEMAN
Department Information

• Books & Manuscripts

Keywords

• Books & Manuscripts

[vector7]

N. Korea threatens pre-emptive attack on U.S.

4:35 AM, Mar 7, 2013 | comments

North Korea is vowing a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the United States. The harsh rhetoric Thursday comes hours ahead of a vote by U.N. diplomats on whether to level new sanctions against Pyongyang for its recent nuclear test.

An unidentified spokesman for Pyongyang's Foreign Ministry said the North will exercise its right for "pre-emptive nuclear strikes on the headquarters of the aggressors" because Washington is pushing to start a nuclear war against the North.


Such inflammatory rhetoric is common from North Korea. But it has been coming regularly in recent days. North Korea is angry over the possible sanctions and over upcoming U.S.-South Korean military drills.

[American Patriot]

Well, as I said before and said again this morning, "We can only hope the North Koreans don't miss DC...."

[American Patriot]

Well... finally, someone has FINALLY said what most of us think to North Korea....

About time.

But, I had to read the French Press to hear this.

Bob Menendez Tells North Korea Attack On U.S. Would Be 'Suicide'

Agence France Presse | By Posted: 03/07/2013 4:49 pm EST












A top US lawmaker warned North Korea Thursday that any pre-emptive nuclear strike against the United States would be suicide, telling Congress the isolated nation posed "a growing threat."


"I do not think the regime in Pyongyang wants to commit suicide, but that, as they must surely know, would be the result of any attack on the United States," Senator Bob Menendez told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.


He was speaking as the United Nations adopted tough new sanctions on North Korea for last month's nuclear test, and as Pyongyang said a new war was "unavoidable" on the peninsula because of South Korean-US military exercises.


The North's military "will exercise the right to a pre-emptive nuclear attack to destroy the strongholds of the aggressors," Pyongyang's foreign ministry said.
Menendez told Thursday's committee hearing on US policy towards North Korea that the threat was "absurd."


But he warned: "There should be no doubt about our determination, willingness, and capability to neutralize and counter any threat that North Korea may present."


North Korea has accumulated some 20 to 40 kilos of plutonium, "enough for perhaps six to eight nuclear weapons," Menendez said. It is also seeking the capability to fit a nuclear warhead to an intercontinental ballistic missile.



"In time, if its present course remains unaltered, North Korea will pose a direct threat to the United States," Menendez warned.


"Today, North Korea certainly poses a growing threat to our allies and to American forces in region."

[vector7]

America, North Korea's threats are not coming from a crazy uncle -- they're real

By Christian Whiton
Published March 08, 2013
FoxNews.com




UN Security Council OKs tough North Korea sanctions


North Korea vows it will hit U.S. with a nuclear attack


Dennis Rodman calls North Korean leader 'an awesome...



This week, North Korea threatened to nuke Washington. If that does not constitute a hostile signal, then nothing does. And yet, there is a tendency among Washington officials and Asia hands to ignore Pyongyang’s bellicose language. Problematically, these individuals also downplay North Korea’s capabilities—even as they grow steadily stronger.

Like a crazy uncle, the Kim regime in Pyongyang can be counted on to make truly outrageous statements—often in the wake of truly outrageous conduct. Whether threatening to turn allied cities into a “sea of fire,” labeling the USA as an “imperialist aggressor,” or branding regime critics as “political dwarfs,” Pyongyang’s PR people could make even the ghosts of Nazi propagandists like Joseph Goebbels blush.

With those in allied capitals responsible for defending against North Korea, there is a tendency to tune this out. After all, how can a country with widespread malnourishment, economic output the CIA estimates to be just about 3% of that of its southern neighbor, and a large but obsolete military really purport to take on anyone?

The crazy uncle of Northeast Asia cannot be ignored.

Indeed, after going through the motions of condemning North Korea after one of its brazen acts, officials on both sides of the Pacific tend to forget about Pyongyang until the next incident. This week’s sanctions from the U.N. Security Council, said to “bite hard” by U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice, are nearly identical to previously applied sanctions that proved as vacant as Chinese promises to pressure their client state.

Unfortunately, this tendency to tune out Pyongyang also distracts from what should be an alarming trend: North Korea’s capabilities have been steadily improving.

After Pyongyang’s first nuclear test in 2006 yielded only about one kiloton, U.S. officials refused even to designate North Korea as a nuclear-weapons state. (By comparison, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was about 16 kilotons; the largest U.S. weapon ever tested was 15,000 kilotons.) Similarly, the high frequency with which North Korean missile tests ended in catastrophic failure led to chuckles about the threat from a penny-ante dictator with laughable ambitions who seemed to be living up to a parody of himself.

But as with our own nuclear and rocket programs, every failure is a step on the path to success. Scientists approximate North Korea’s February nuclear test to have achieved a yield of seven kilotons.

In December, its missile test involved a successful multistage separation and put an object into space. While the North Korean military may not yet be able to push a button and launch a nuclear assault on an American city, it is clearly on a trajectory to have that capability one day.

Moreover, even if North Korea never initiates a general war, it is pushing ahead with its most immediate dangerous activity: proliferation.

Everything North Korea has accomplished in recent months has burnished its catalog of weapons systems and know-how. These are routinely sold to rogue regimes around the world. Syria has been a recent customer; North Korea helped it build a carbon copy of Pyongyang’s plutonium-producing reactor (since destroyed by Israel). Iran and North Korea cooperate closely as well. Reports indicate officials from both countries have been present at each other’s nuclear sites. This is the more likely path to North Korea’s nuclear program destroying an American or allied city.

Thus, the crazy uncle of Northeast Asia cannot be ignored. The Obama administration seems to accept this, but the only idea the Washington foreign policy establishment ever has with North Korea is to talk more to the regime. The two previous U.S. administrations tried this, and it is clear Pyongyang only engages in talks to extract foreign aid and buy time; never to follow through with promises to disarm or behave.

Washington should remember what won the Cold War. A combination of opposition within dictatorships and a growing external military posture were the precursors of oppressed people freeing themselves—and ending the threat. To adapt this to North Korea and the changing threat it poses, the U.S. should move intermediate-range nuclear cruise missiles to the region. To make deterrence seem more real, we should also have a NATO-style Nuclear Planning Group with Canada, Japan and perhaps other Pacific allies. This could finally force China to rethink its sponsorship of North Korea, as Beijing’s own security would be negatively impacted for the first time.

Combined with this, the U.S. and other free countries should aid dissenters in North Korea. They are there, but keep their heads down to survive in the gulag nation. Funding independent media broadcast from outside North Korea would replicate something that worked well during the Cold War. It would give an encouraging, peaceful lifeline of information to beleaguered North Koreans.

Freedom for North Koreans—not U.N. pronouncements or endless diplomatic talks—will be the long-awaited harbinger for security in the Pacific.

[vector7]

Understanding North Korea and Iran

by DR. PETER VINCENT PRY

February 26, 2013



The West consistently and unwittingly cooperates with North Korea and Iran by underestimating the advancement, sophistication, and strategic implications of their nuclear weapon and missile programs.

Despite North Korea's successful long-range missile test in December 2012, and now its third successful nuclear test on February 12, 2013, the Obama administration and the press keep reassuring the American people that North Korea is not yet a fully fledged nuclear weapons state - that a North Korean nuclear missile threat to the United States is still years in the future.

The facts do not support this judgment. North Korea is already a major nuclear threat to the United States--an existential threat.

Common wisdom in the press, encouraged by the Obama Administration and North Korea, is that North Korea has not yet miniaturized nuclear warheads for missile delivery, and that its nuclear tests are in pursuit of designing a nuclear missile warhead. Indeed, the Obama administration and the western press both naively took at face value and parroted North Korea's public claim that their third nuclear test is for nuclear warhead miniaturization.

Yet this claim is almost certainly disinformation designed to conceal that North Korea's nuclear weapon program is advanced far beyond warhead miniaturization. Miniaturization to develop a nuclear warhead is not difficult to do, and can be accomplished even without nuclear testing.

North Korea and Iran both have strategic reasons to mislead and conceal from the West the true status of their nuclear and missile programs. They intend that the U.S. and its allies will underestimate those programs, fail to act in time to stop them, and be strategically surprised when North Korea and Iran become nuclear super-powers, and progenitors of a dystopian new world order.

North Korean Missiles--Nuclear Armed Now

The press appears to have forgotten that the U.S. intelligence community, under then Director of Central Intelligence, R. James Woolsey, testified to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on January 25, 1994, that North Korea then had enough plutonium for at least one nuclear weapon, and already had the bomb.

So today, the Obama administration and the press expects us to believe that North Korea has still not figured out how to make a nuclear warhead for missile delivery, after nearly 20 years of trying.

Clinton administration mythology has it, largely accepted by a compliant press, that President Clinton's Agreed Framework initiative slowed or stopped North Korea's nuclear weapon program until an overly aggressive Bush administration provoked North Korea to resume warhead development with its first nuclear test in 2006.



This is nonsense.

I served on the congressional North Korea Advisory Group during the Clinton administration. We warned the White House, the press, anyone who would listen, that North Korea was cheating on the Agreed Framework. During the Clinton years, North Korea forged full speed ahead on its nuclear weapons program--including with a clandestine uranium centrifuge program, to supplement the known plutonium program for North Korea's advancing nuclear arsenal.



Unfortunately, the press was not interested and our NKAG Report went virtually unreported.

So, North Korea achieved a nuclear weapons capability during the Clinton administration in 1994, and not during the Bush administration with their first test in 2006. We know from our own experience, and from that of other nations, that nuclear testing is not necessary to develop a nuclear weapon. Little Boy, the first nuclear weapon ever built, was developed and used successfully by the U.S. to destroy Hiroshima, without nuclear testing. Hiroshima was the test.

We also know from our own experience, and from that of other nations, that it does not take 20 years to miniaturize a nuclear warhead for missile delivery.

By 1948, just a few years after the 1945 bombing of Hiroshima with Little Boy, that weighed 9,700 pounds, the United States was already building highly miniaturized Atomic Demolition Munitions, like the T-1 ADM, that weighed only 150 pounds. By 1953, just eight years after Hiroshima, the United States built its first missile nuclear warhead, the W-7, also deliverable by a variety of platforms. The hard part was developing a ballistic missile to deliver the warhead, which was not achieved by the U.S. until 13 years after Hiroshima, in 1958.

Today, however, North Korea and other nuclear weapon states are not re-inventing the nuclear wheel. They can draw on a vast treasure trove of declassified information about U.S. nuclear weapons development. Moreover, North Korea and other nuclear weapon states are using modern 21st Century technology, and do not have to rely upon primitive 1930s and 1940s era technology, as did the United States during the Manhattan Project and its early nuclear weapons program. Further, North Korea and other nuclear rogues help each other, and also get help from China and Russia.

For these reasons, North Korea and other states like Pakistan and Israel have nuclear weapon programs far more sophisticated than is widely recognized by the press.

Pakistan, for example, developed a nuclear warhead for its Ghauri medium-range missile in just one year, after its first nuclear test in 1998. Israel, we know from the defection of Israeli nuclear weapons expert Mordechai Vanunu, from the analysis of U.S. nuclear weapons experts and the respected Wisconsin Project, has a wide array of highly sophisticated nuclear weapons. These include miniaturized nuclear warheads for Israel's Jericho medium-range missile, thermonuclear weapons, nuclear artillery, and neutron warheads--all achieved without nuclear testing. South Africa too developed a nuclear arsenal, now dismantled, without nuclear testing.

The press that thinks North Korea is still trying to miniaturize a warhead for missiles, appears not to have noticed that, according to the U.S. and international intelligence communities, North Korea has already mastered miniaturization and is already armed with nuclear missiles.

In 2011, the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lt. General Ronald Burgess, testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that North Korea has weaponized its nuclear device into warheads for ballistic missiles. In 2009, European intelligence agencies headquartered in Brussels and supporting NATO concluded that North Korea has armed with nuclear warheads its Nodong missiles capable of striking Japan.

The CIA's top East Asia analyst publicly stated that North Korea had successfully miniaturized nuclear warheads for missile delivery in a 2008 interview.

Super-EMP Warhead--Nation Killer

The Obama administration and its allies in the press also want us to believe that North Korea's current "nuclear devices" are not a real threat because of their low explosive yield, only a few kilotons. Supposedly, North Korea after 20 years and three nuclear tests is still struggling to make a crude first generation atomic bomb.

In fact, almost certainly, North Korea now possesses a highly advanced third generation nuclear warhead that could destroy the United States with a single blow.

North Korea's nuclear tests in 2006, 2009, and recently in 2013 were all low yield. Some reports claim the 2013 test might have been as much as 10 kilotons, but the official position of the National Director of Intelligence, Lt. General James Clapper, is that the 2013 test too yielded only "several kilotons." This is not much. In contrast, the primitive U.S. Little Boy bomb that destroyed Hiroshima had a yield of 10-15 kilotons. In the 1970s, a Princeton physics student named Aristotle Phillips proved that even he could design, as a college project, a nuclear weapon like Little Boy, an experiment he described in his 1978 book Mushroom. Does North Korea not have a library card?

If North Korea's nuclear weapon is an ordinary nuclear warhead designed to create a big explosion, then it is not much of a threat. The lethal radius of "several kilotons" is so small, and the miss distance of North Korean missiles is so great, that such a warhead might well explode harmlessly in the countryside, and do little damage to the targeted city.

Yet North Korea is happy with its mysterious "nuclear device," has declared all its tests successful, and has weaponized it into warheads. Is North Korea arming its missiles with nuclear duds? Are they stupid?

In 2004, the Congressional Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Commission was warned by a delegation of Russian generals that Russia had developed a "Super-EMP" nuclear warhead, and that design information for this weapon had leaked to North Korea. A Super-EMP warhead is a nuclear weapon specially designed to produce an enormous burst of gamma rays that generates an extraordinarily powerful electromagnetic pulse, capable of destroying even the best protected electronics, thereby paralyzing military forces and blacking out power grids and collapsing critical infrastructures everywhere--across an entire nation the size of the United States.

One signature of a Super-EMP weapon is that it has a very low explosive yield, just several kilotons, or even less if it is more efficient, because the weapon is converting the energy of the nuclear warhead into gamma rays.

In 2004, the Russian generals told the EMP Commission that North Korea was getting help developing a Super-EMP nuclear weapon from contractors from Russia, China, Pakistan and elsewhere, and could probably test such a weapon "in a few years." A few years later, in 2006, North Korea tested its mysterious "nuclear device" that produced an explosive yield of only several kilotons, and so was derided by the Western press as a failure--but hailed as a success by North Korea.

Independently of the Congressional EMP Commission, South Korean military intelligence several times warned their government, in stories reported in South Korean press, that Russians are in North Korea helping them develop a Super-EMP nuclear warhead. In response, the South Korean government launched projects to harden their military communications and other critical infrastructures.

In 2010, according to some reputable European analysts, radioisotope data indicates North Korea may have conducted two clandestine nuclear tests of a very low yield "nuclear device" of sophisticated fusion design. This is indicative of a weapons program that is very technologically advanced, and consistent with development of a Super-EMP warhead.

In 2012, a military commentator for the People's Republic of China told a Hong Kong journal that North Korea has Super-EMP nuclear warheads.

The Congressional EMP Commission warned in its 2004 and 2008 reports that the electromagnetic pulse from a single nuclear weapon detonated at high-altitude over the United States could have catastrophic consequences nation-wide. One warhead making an EMP attack could collapse the national electric grid and other critical infrastructures--communications, transportation, banking and finance, food and water--that sustain modern civilization and the lives of millions.

Just as aqueducts were the cornerstone of classical Roman civilization in antiquity, so electric grids are the most critical infrastructure to all modern societies. Super-EMP weapons threaten the technological foundations of modern civilization that makes possible the prosperity and large populations of the United States and other developed nations in the 21st Century.

All nuclear weapons produce gamma rays and EMP. However, a Super-EMP attack on the U.S. would cause much more and much deeper damage than a primitive nuclear weapon, and so would increase confidence that the catastrophic consequences will be irreversible. A Super-EMP attack would inflict maximum damage and be optimum for realizing a world without America.

North Korea's ICBM

The Obama administration estimates, and the press dutifully reports, that North Korea is still years away from having an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that can strike the United States. This estimate is based on the assumption that North Korea is seeking a normal ICBM that would deliver an ordinary atomic or nuclear warhead, designed to blast a city, necessitating a heavy re-entry vehicle and heat shield, the missile to be launched on a normal ballistic trajectory for striking a city, and capable of delivering a payload of about one ton (2,000 pounds). According to these estimates, even when North Korea finally perfects its ICBM--some three to five years in the future--it will only have sufficient range to strike Hawaii, Alaska, and maybe the west coast of the U.S. mainland.

However, North Korea appears to have borrowed more from the Russians than the design of a Super-EMP warhead.

During the Cold War, the USSR experimented with a secret weapon, the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS), that used an ICBM like a Space Launch Vehicle to put a nuclear warhead into orbit, like a satellite. Instead of using the ICBM to lob the warhead on a more accurate arcing ballistic trajectory, flying along the shortest range to target, like an artillery shell, the FOBS lofted the warhead into a "fractional" or partial orbit, sacrificing accuracy for limitless range.

FOBS could reach any nation or threaten any target anywhere on Earth.

A Super-EMP warhead does not weigh much, and could probably be delivered by North Korea's Fractional Orbital Bombardment System, successfully tested in December 2012, against any nation on Earth. Thus, North Korea already possesses an ICBM and poses a mortal nuclear threat to the United States, and to all nations on Earth--right now.

North Korea, during the successful test of its ICBM on December 12, 2012, orbited a satellite weighing 100 kilograms (about 200 pounds). One design of a Super-EMP warhead would be a modified neutron bomb, more accurately an Enhanced Radiation Warhead (ERW) because it produces not only many neutrons but also many gamma rays. As noted earlier, gamma rays cause the EMP effect. One U.S. ERW warhead (the W-82) deployed in NATO during the Cold War weighed, including its heavy casing, less than 50 kilograms. Since the EMP attack entails detonating the warhead at high-altitude, above the atmosphere, the warhead does not even need a heavy re-entry vehicle and heat shield.
North Korea's ICBM does not have to be accurate to make an EMP attack against the United States.

The EMP field is so large that detonating anywhere over the U.S. would have catastrophic consequences. North Korea orbited its satellite around the Earth at an altitude of about 500 kilometers. The trajectory of North Korea's satellite is no accident--they deliberately aimed for and achieved this orbit and altitude, as announced before their launch.

An altitude of 500 kilometers would be ideal for making an EMP attack that places the field over the entire lower 48 United States.
North Korea's ICBM, delivering an EMP attack by means of an inaccurate satellite warhead, would likely miss its horizontal aimpoint over the geographic center of the U.S. by tens of kilometers. Bursting the warhead at an altitude of 500 kilometers would compensate for this inaccuracy by creating an EMP field big enough to cover everything. North Korea's satellite did not pass over the United States--but a slight adjustment in its trajectory would have flown it over or near the U.S. bull's eye for a high-altitude EMP burst.

Surprise Attack

The primary purpose of the Fractional Orbital Bombardments System, that North Korea appears to have borrowed from Russia, is to make a surprise nuclear attack. FOBS is stealthy as it can strike from any direction, from unexpected directions, not just from the shortest direction or by using the trajectory that would be normal for an ICBM. Because FOBS looks like a Space Launch Vehicle, not an ICBM making a nuclear attack, this disguise optimizes chances for achieving surprise.

During the Cold War, Moscow experimented with a stealthy way of delivering a nuclear attack on the United States using a Fractional Orbital Bombardment System to elude radar detection. This would entail launching an ICBM southward, away from the United States, so it appears non-threatening, and delivering the warhead like a satellite on a south polar orbit, so the nuclear attack comes at the U.S. from the south.
During the Cold War--and today--the United States has no Ballistic Missile Early Warning Radars or missile interceptors facing south. We would not even see an attack from the south coming.

Two U.S. PAVE PAWS Large Phased Array Radars--designed to look for submarine missiles launched from the Atlantic and Pacific toward the U.S. east and west coasts--do look southward with the edges of their radar fields. However, there is a gap between the fields, a hole in the radar coverage, larger than the Yucatan Peninsula, and in that general location.

Miroslav Gyurosi in The Soviet Fractional Orbital Bombardment System describes Moscow's development of the FOBS as part of "a long running campaign of strategic deception against the West through the whole Cold War period, and the protracted development of the Soviet FOBS nuclear weapon system presents an excellent case study of such." Miroslav Gyurosi:

The Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS) as it was
known in the West, was a Soviet innovation intended to exploit the limitations
of U.S. BMEW radar coverage. The idea behind FOBS was that a large
thermonuclear warhead could be inserted into a steeply inclined low
altitude polar orbit, such that it would approach the CONUS from any
direction, but primarily from the southern hemisphere, and following a
programmed braking maneuver, re-enter from a direction which was not
covered by U.S. BMEW radars.

"The first warning the U.S. would have of such a strike in progress would be the EMP...," writes Gyurosi.

The trajectory of North Korea's ICBM test of December 12, 2012, looked very much like a Fractional Orbital Bombardment System for EMP attack. The missile launched southward, away from the United States, sent the satellite over the south polar region, approaching the U.S. from the south, at the optimum altitude for EMP attack--although the test trajectory deliberately avoided passing over the U.S.
North Korea now appears to be armed with a FOBS capability to make a surprise nuclear attack against the United States--or against any and all nations on Earth--with Super-EMP.

Iran

Might North Korea sell Super-EMP warheads and its stealthy Fractional Orbital Bombardment System with global reach to Iran? North Korea and Iran have been collaborating all along.

Iran may already have a FOBS capability, as it has successfully launched two satellites on polar orbits, assisted by North Korean missile technology and North Korean technicians.

Iran launched its satellites southward, over the Indian Ocean, flying them over the polar region to approach the U.S. from the south. Like North Korea, Iran did not fly its satellites over the U.S. But a slight adjustment in trajectory would have sent them over the geographic center of the lower 48 United States. Like North Korea, Iran orbited its satellites at about 500 kilometers altitude, optimum for placing an EMP field over the entire contiguous United States.

Iranian scientists were present at all three North Korean nuclear tests, according to press reports. North Korean scientists are known to be present in Iran. North Korea has been denounced by the United Nations for selling a facility to Syria for developing nuclear weapons, which was bombed by Israel. So if North Korea has sold nuclear weapons technology to Syria, why not Iran?

Conceivably, Iran could already have or be close to developing a Super-EMP warhead. Reza Kahlili, the only CIA operative to successfully penetrate the scientific wing of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, reports that Iran acquired several tactical nuclear warheads from Russia--including a neutron warhead. As noted earlier, a neutron or Enhanced Radiation Warhead would be well suited for making an EMP attack.
In June 2002, when concern about Iran's nuclear weapons program was just beginning in the West, Russian General Yuri Baluyevsky, Deputy Chief of the Russian General Staff, declared: "Iran does have nuclear weapons. These are non-strategic weapons...As for the danger of Iran's attack on the United States, the danger is zero."

This startling declaration, little reported in the Western press, by Russia's second highest military officer--who was soon promoted to Chief of the General Staff, the highest rank, equivalent to the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff--appears to confirm Reza Kahlili's warning that Iran already has tactical nuclear warheads from Russia.

How did General Baluyevsky know so much about Iran's nuclear weapons program, and why was he so complacent about Iran already having tactical nuclear weapons? After the fall of the USSR, in 1995 a military think tank called INOBIS, that serves the Russian General Staff, wrote a paper recommending that Russia deliberately proliferate missile and nuclear weapon technology to nations hostile to the United States. Nuclear proliferation would balance growing U.S. power, and thwart Washington's efforts to establish a New World Order dominated by America.

Is it possible that the Russian General Staff followed the INOBIS policy, deliberately transferred tactical nuclear weapons, including an Enhanced Radiation Warhead, and purposely leaked the secret of the Super-EMP nuclear warhead to North Korea and Iran? Is it possible that Russian leaders, or at least some Russian faction, regretted this policy by 2004, fearing they had created a Frankenstein Monster, and so warned the EMP Commission?

If Iran acquires or develops a Super-EMP warhead, Iran's targets or that of its terrorist proxies will be the populations of America and Israel. A fatwa or religious edict by Ayman al Zawahiri, a spiritual and operational leader of international terrorists, including al Qaeda, advocates the use of nuclear weapons against the American people because, "There is no doubt that the greatest enemy of Islam and Muslims at this time is the Americans." Zawahiri approves the use of nuclear weapons against both America and Israel, and encourages striking America first so that "the United States vanishes and is followed by Israel."

World Order to World Chaos

The Obama administration and the press cautions that a North Korea and Iran armed with nuclear weapons could endanger their neighbors, like South Korea and Israel, and provoke wider nuclear proliferation. This grossly understates the real threat.

In fact, North Korea and Iran imperil the political and economic gains made by Mankind since the Enlightenment, by arming themselves with what are essentially "anti-technology weapons" that could inflict a worldwide blackout and, figuratively and literally, turn the clock of history back to the Dark Ages.

The Congressional EMP Commission estimates that, given the nation's current unpreparedness, an EMP attack would plunge the United States into a protracted, perhaps permanent, blackout--and within one year about two-thirds of the national population, 200 million Americans, would probably perish from starvation, disease, and societal collapse.

Therefore, Super-EMP warheads mated to FOBS missiles that can reach any nation on Earth with an EMP attack, will confer upon North Korea and Iran an Assured Destruction capability against the United States, and the world. The geopolitical consequences of this development are so extremely grave that U.S. and global security have, in effect, gone over the "strategic cliff" into free-fall. Where we will land, into what kind of future, is as yet unknown.

Nevertheless, some very bad developments are foreseeable. Iran will certainly be inspired by North Korea's example to persist in the development of its own nuclear weapon and ICBM programs to pose a mortal threat to the United States. North Korea will continue to help Iran.

If North Korea and Iran both acquire the capability to threaten America and the world with EMP genocide, this will destroy the foundations of the existing world order based on the U.S. acting as a superpower, which has since 1945 halted the cycle of world wars and sustained the global advancement of freedom. North Korea and Iran being armed with Assured Destruction capability changes the whole strategic calculus of risk for the United States in upholding its superpower role, and will erode the confidence of U.S. allies--perhaps to the point where they need to develop their own nuclear weapons.

Most alarming, we are fast moving to a place where, for the first time in history, failed little states like North Korea and Iran, that cannot even feed their own people, will have power in their hands to blackmail or destroy the largest and most successful societies on Earth. North Korea and Iran perceive themselves to be at war with the United States, and are desperate, highly unpredictable characters. When the mob is at the gates of their dictators, will they want to take America with them, down into darkness?

For nearly a decade the Congressional EMP Commission and other major U.S. Government studies have been warning about the catastrophic consequences of an EMP attack from Iran, North Korea, China, Russia or their terrorist proxies--a story unreported by the Obama administration or the mainstream media. The New York Times, the Washington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS and the other usual suspects are not interested.

[vector7]

BREAKING: Russia and China to do BIGGEST EVER military drills off Japan and South Korea!


March 7th, 2013
153 25 0 2 246

(translated from a Chinese news source)




The Russian Defense Ministry sources said Saturday, the Russian military is discussed in June this year, the Russian Pacific Fleet and Beihai fleet at sea the Chinese naval real live-fire exercises, exercise locations in Japan Haidabide Bay; in addition, the Russian ” peace mission in -2013 ” air army joint military exercises are high-level multiple round.

Russia said the Russian Navy League play, this will be the largest ” “. In fact, precisely, is ” Russia navy in recent years the largest “, may have more than 20 ships, tugs are included. The predicted joint exercises out ship number equivalence, estimation of Russia will each 10 ships, but in last year’s joint exercises in the Yellow Sea is the result of 16 Chinese naval ship, the Russian Pacific fleet includes tug, a total of 7 vessels.

Russian military experts believe that, this will be held military exercises at sea bright spot is ” crossing ” and ” cooperative “,followed by the exercise scenario that joint maritime defense and meet operational, seize the theater air, sea, electromagnetic power cooperative.

Russian experts said, China Sea fleet will pass through the Tsushima Strait or the Korea Strait, China Sea fleet if can pass through the soya strait between Russia and Japan, after a series of chain between Russian controlled, directly into the North Pacific, it can be called on the U.S. – Japan is a ” shake “.

http://www.cjdby.net/junbeidongtai/2...tary-2957.html

[vector7]

North Korea video shows US Capitol Building destroyed by missile strike

Film also shows the White House being targeted


Missile ... North Korean video shows US Capitol building blown up

By HARRY HAYDON

Published: 19th March 2013

A NORTH Korean military propaganda video posted online shows the US Capitol Building being blown up by a missile strike.

The controversial video - published on government website Uriminzokkiri - also shows a target graphic appearing on the White House.


Video:Capitol Building in "Flames" in N Korean video


WEBSITE posts propaganda film showing an attack on the White House and the Capitol Building


Subtitles on the provocative video say: "The White House is caught by our sighting device.
"The inner citadel is within our striking range of an atomic bomb."


Attack ... video also shows White House in missilie targets

The secretive hermit state - led by Kim Jong-un - has in the past couple of weeks threatened the US with nuclear war in response to US sanctions.

It has also vowed to hit out at South Korea and the US for conducting joint military drills - which they say are rehearsals for war.

US B-52 bombers today participated in an ongoing military drill to demonstrate its strong alliance with South Korea in the face of the North's threats.


Outrage ... video shown on North Korean gorvernment site shows military drill


The drill - called Foal Eagle - runs annually between March 1 and April 30.

US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel said last week that the country planned to install 14 additional anti-missile interceptors in response to a growing nuclear threat from North Korea.

[vector7]

Analyst: Russia prepping military to fight U.S.

Washington, NATO seen as top global threats

Published: 1 day ago

by F. Michael Maloof Email | Archive Subscribe to feed

F. Michael Maloof, staff writer for WND and G2Bulletin, is a former senior security policy analyst in the office of the secretary of defense.More ↓



WASHINGTON – The Russian military doctrine adopted in 2010 after the “reset” with the Obama administration considers the U.S. and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, the main threats Moscow must be prepared to fight, according to Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.

This is the assessment of Alexei Arbatov, a former Duma, or parliament, deputy and currently head of the Center for International Security of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Recent events have underscored the prospect due to the firing of Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov, who served under then-President Dmitry Medvedev, who now is the Russian prime minister.

Russian President Vladimir Putin replaced Serdyukov with Sergei Shoigu, who is more in line with Putin’s outlook on the future role and capabilities of the military.

Under Medvedev, Serdyukov had a different approach, which was to more closely work with the West in an effort to obtain Western technologies and know-how to modernize not only Russian infrastructure but also the military.

All of that went away with Putin’s more confrontational approach with the U.S. and his efforts to blunt American nfluence in Central Asia, which Moscow claims is in its sphere of influence.

Putin also aims to recreate a post-Soviet empire by incorporating the former Soviet republics into a Eurasian Union, a duty-free zone that he sees rivaling the European Union in years to come.

According to Arbatov, Russia’s defense and foreign policies now reflect that Russia is surrounded by enemies led by the U.S. Moscow is concerned that the U.S. and its NATO allies will invade Russia at any time.

Arbatov said the U.S. is using the pro-democracy opposition inside Russia to subvert Putin’s regime and intends to use that opposition to invade Russia.
In addition, he said that the West intends to use military power to seize Russia’s natural resources.

Instead of looking to the West for modern technologies, Arbatov said Moscow will use its own technologies to improve Russian military capability in the future.

Already under Putin, there has been an increase in the work to target and divert militarily critical Western technologies, reminiscent of its actions at the height of the Cold War during the Soviet period.

To offset NATO’s eastward expansion, Moscow intends to bolster its security arrangement under the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, or SCO, which is comprised of China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

Just as the 2010 Russian military doctrine still holds a nuclear weapons deterrent as the cornerstone of Russian security, there have been increasing indications that Moscow will be looking to develop more of a conventional force to counter what it perceives are new, more conventional threats.

WND/G2Bulletin recently pointed out that Putin doesn’t just want to reform the Russian military but to boost its capabilities and to deal with the new realities stemming from the Arab Spring and its military experiences based on the 2008 Russian invasion of Georgia.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/analyst-r...GxtRtIiB9ov.99

[vector7]

N Korea threatens to strike Hawaii, US mainland

By North Asia correspondent Mark Willacy, AFP

Updated Wed Mar 27, 2013 1:15am AEDT

Video: N Korea threatens Guam, Hawaii and US mainland (ABC News)
Photo: North Korea successfully launched a long-range rocket in December 2012. (Reuters: KCNA)
Related Story: N Korea threatens to attack US military bases
Related Story: US flies B-52 bombers in support for S Korea
Related Story: N Korea says nukes will not be traded for aid
Related Story: N Korea says nukes will not be traded for aid
Map: Korea, Democratic People S Republic Of

North Korea has put its strategic rocket units on combat-ready status, with orders to prepare for possible strikes against the United States mainland and Hawaii.
But many analysts doubt that Pyongyang even has the capability to hit the US.

The North Korean regime is enraged that the US has recently flown B-52 bombers over the Korean Peninsula, and has accused Washington of preparing an invasion.

In response, the North Korean army command has ordered all artillery troops and strategic rocket units to be ready for combat.


A statement from the Korean People's Army supreme command ordered rocket units to be prepared to attack "all US military bases in the Asia-Pacific region, including the US mainland, Hawaii and Guam".

Despite its successful long-range rocket launch in December, most experts believe North Korea is years from developing a genuine inter-continental ballistic missile that could strike the continental United States.

Hawaii and Guam would also be outside the range of its medium-range missiles, which would be capable, however, of striking US military bases in South Korea and Japan.

North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un has spent the past few weeks touring frontline military units, monitoring live fire artillery drills and making inflammatory speeches about wiping out the enemy.

Sabre-rattling and displays of brinkmanship are nothing new in the region, but there are concerns that the current situation is so volatile that one accidental step could escalate into serious conflict.

"We are closely monitoring the situation. So far there has been no particular North Korean troop movement," a South Korean defence ministry spokesman said.
North Korea's patron and sole major ally China was quick to urge calm from all sides.

"We hope that relevant parties will exercise restraint so as to ease the tension," foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said.

The supreme command announcement came days after the South Korean and US militaries signed a new pact, providing for a joint military response to even low-level provocative action by North Korea.

While existing agreements provide for US engagement in the event of a full-scale conflict, the new protocol addresses the response to a limited provocation such as an isolated incident of cross-border shelling.

It guarantees US support for any South Korean retaliation and allows Seoul to request any additional US military force it deems necessary.

North Korea shelled a South Korean border island in November 2010, killing four people.

ABC/AFP

[vector7]

No Longer Unthinkable: Should US Ready For ‘Limited’ Nuclear War?

By Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. on May 30, 2013 at 4:57 PM



AI FORCE ASSOCIATION HQ: For more than 60 years, most Americans have thought of nuclear weapons as an all-or-nothing game. The only way to win is not to play at all, we believed, because any use of nukes will lead to Armageddon. That may no longer be the game our opposition is playing. As nuclear weapons proliferate to places that might not share our reluctance to use them in small numbers, however, the US military may face a “second nuclear age” of retail Armageddon for which it is utterly unprepared.

Outside the US, both established and emerging nuclear powers increasingly see nuclear weapons as weapons that can be used in a controlled, limited, and strategically useful fashion, said Barry Watts, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, arguably the Pentagon’s favorite thinktank. The Cold War “firebreaks” between conventional and nuclear conflict are breaking down, he wrote in a recent report. Russia has not only developed new, relatively low-yield tactical nukes but also routinely wargamed their use to stop both NATO and Chinese conventional forces should they overrun Moscow’s feeble post-Soviet military, Watts said this morning at the headquarters of the Air Force Association. Pakistan is likewise developing tactical nukes to stop India’s much larger military. Iran seeks nuclear weapons not only to offset Israel’s but to deter and, in the last resort, fend off an American attempt to perform “regime change” in Tehran the way we did in Baghdad. The US Air Force and Navy concept of “AirSea Battle” in the Western Pacific could entail strikes on the Chinese mainland that might provoke a nuclear response.

It’s precisely because US conventional power is so overwhelming that the temptation to turn to nuclear weapons to redress the balance is so irresistible. Ten years ago, the Iraqis sidestepped American dominance in the middle of the spectrum of conflict – regular warfare with tanks, planes, and precision-guided non-nuclear weapons – by going low and waging guerrilla warfare, for which the US proved painfully unprepared. In the future, nuclear proliferation means more and more countries will have the option to sidestep US conventional power by going high and staging a “limited” nuclear attack, for which we aren’t really prepared either. Indeed, some countries, notably a nuclear Iran with its terrorist proxies and North Korea with its criminal ties and special operations forces, could outflank America’s conventional military from both sides at once.

So, could the US military keep going after losing an Army brigade or a Navy aircraft carrier to a tactical nuclear strike? “I don’t think we’ve thought about continuing to do conventional operations in an environment in which some nuclear weapons have been used, [not] since the Cold War,” Watts told me after his talk. “You’ve got to have equipment that continues to work in that environment, and, in general, we don’t.”

For example, one of the ways the Army economized on its new “Nett Warrior” communications gear for foot troops was to scrap the requirement for its circuit to survive the electromagnetic pulse, or EMP, from a nuclear detonation, which can spread far below the lethal blast and radiation effects: Such shortcuts make sense for Afghanistan and Iraq, but not for Korea.

“So there are a lot of things you might want to invest in, to put it mildly,” said Watts.

One particularly controversial suggestion Watts offered is for the US to invest in new tactical nuclear weapons of its own. Currently, Watts argued, if an enemy attacks with a relatively low-yield atomic bomb, America’s choices for a response are limited to conventional strikes or thermonuclear weapons, with very little in between.

“The problem is most of the warheads we’ve retained… are huge weapons,” Watts said. “The ones on the [submarine-launched] Trident missiles are 450 kilotons.” The Air Force’s B-61 warhead is small enough to fit in the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, and its yield can be “dialed down” to as low as an 0.3 kiloton yield, but the B-61 is a 60-year-old design that’s been out of production for years, although old bombs have been modernized. Said Watts, “Congress’s absolute prohibition about developing new warheads… makes it very difficult for us to have credible nuclear weapons that could be used in a limited way, not at the Armageddon level.”

Adversaries are less likely to be deterred by America’s nuclear arsenal if they decide we won’t strike back with our big bombs in response to a limited, low-yield nuclear attack on US troops. It’s even less credible the US will retaliate massively if the adversary stages the nuclear strike on its own soil as a last-ditch defense against “regime change,” as Russia has wargamed and as Iran is no doubt tempted to do. Least credible of is US nuclear retaliation for a nuclear attack that doesn’t actually kill anyone: An enemy with even modest space capability can detonate a nuclear warhead high in the atmosphere, where it will generate a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (or HEMP) that disrupts the electronics on which the US military depends without actually taking any lives. (Congress has held hearings on electromagnetic pulse in the past, albeit focused on threats to the American homeland rather than US forces abroad, but legislative interest has waned since the 2012 defeat of Maryland Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, the Hill’s foremost hawk on EMP).

Whether it’s morality or lack of suitable weapons that holds the US back from retaliating to a limited nuclear attack in kind, the American military at least needs to plan for how to take an atomic hit and keep on going. “You may end up fighting a nuclear/EMP environment even though you’re not using those kinds of weapons yourselves,” Watts said.

Watts is less worried about the threat of nuclear terrorism than he is about nation-states. He doubts Iranian mullahs, for example, would trust even their favorite proxies, Hezbollah, with a nuclear weapon. But he’s skeptical of the conventional wisdom that the Chinese have sworn never to use nuclear weapons except in response to a nuclear attack on them.

“If you start digging into the literature [by Chinese strategists], they say all the politically correct things in the front of the book about how we’re not going to use nuclear weapons first,” Watts said. As you read more deeply, however, he found an unnerving willingness to consider nuclear detonations to generate EMP, for example, under the special circumstances of what Chinese doctrine called “local high-tech warfare under informationalized conditions.”

Such special circumstances might well arise in a Western Pacific war, perhaps triggered by a Sino-Japanese clash over the Senkaku Islands, in which the US came to an ally’s defense by waging a long-range AirSea Battle. In theory, both sides could swear off strikes on each other’s homelands and try to limit the fighting to the air and sea. But there’s one big problem: While America’s main weapons for a naval battle are ships, submarines and aircraft launched from carriers at sea, China’s naval arsenal depends heavily on long-range sensors and missiles based on land. The US would either have to take shots from Beijing’s best weapons without responding or escalate to an attack on China’s coastal provinces.

Watts did not discuss this topic in detail, but another strategist at the discussion did. “The issue is escalation… if you cross the Chinese coastline,” said Peter Wilson, a national security consultant. “How do you keep the war regional?” Even if the US strike causes no Chinese casualties – for example, a precision missile or even cyber attack that shut down China’s power grid – “the reply may be a HEMP shot over Hawaii.”

“We’ve gotten very used to bombing countries, going downtown and working our will” from Baghdad to Belgrade, Wilson said. When the target has nuclear weapons, however, even using America’s fading conventional superiority starts looking a lot more dangerous.

[American Patriot]

yes

[Phil Fiord]

Pretty sad when we have to consider the limited use of nuclear as a reality. Still, I echo a yes.

[vector7]

'Everything Is Up for Grabs’: Beck Explains Why World War III Could Be on the Horizon

Jun. 4, 2013 8:30pm Erica Ritz


(Photo: TheBlaze TV)

Glenn Beck dedicated the entire hour of his television program Tuesday to the follow-up of what he says got him into “so much trouble” during the so-called Arab Spring: a chalkboard that predicted the protests would cascade, and that radicals would work with Islamists overturn stability.

We will be discussing this story and all the day’s news on our live BlazeCast beginning at 3 pm ET:

On Tuesday, Beck told his audience where he believes the road will now lead: World War III.

“The one thing that always gets me in trouble is usually I am way ahead of the game, and I have no perception of time,” Beck said. “I see things on a flat wall. They are coming, but it won’t be tomorrow.”

He added: “I hope with everything in me that I’m wrong, but the pattern of history is incredibly consistent…Everything is up for grabs in the world, and the rush for power is on.”

Beck argued that there are currently three dominant groups:

‘The Caliphate’: “It is the stated goal of Muslim Brotherhood leaders and many far left Islamists to re-establish the Caliphate, the Ottoman Empire, or the global Islamic state,” Beck said, playing video of Islamist leaders across the globe saying just that.

But, he added, this group is divided between Sunni and Shia Muslims. While Sunni Muslims — who dominate much of post-Arab Spring North Africa, Saudi Arabia, and the Muslim Brotherhood — aim to implement an Islamic state, Beck said the radical Shiites who wield influence in places like Iran, Assad’s Syria, and Pakistan are more focused on hastening the return of the twelfth imam. They believe he will only appear when the world is drowned in blood and chaos, so they aim to create those conditions.

“But either way, they both [believe] they control the entire world in the end,” Beck said.

‘The Controllers’: “Whether they are communists, socialists, fascists, progressives, Fabian socialists, bankers, Bilderbergs, Nazis, drug lords, Mayor Bloomberg… ” Beck stated. “[This is] anyone who wants either wants power in their own little fiefdom, or wants to control the planet through the United Nations or whatever. Anyone who wants a slice of that ‘control’ pie.”

He put countries like Russia, China, and North Korea in the “control” category.

‘Those That Just Want to Survive’: But throughout the world, most people aren’t thinking in terms of global domination, Beck said. Most people just want to live their lives, or, depending on where they live, just want enough food and water to get by. Beck put about 90% of the world into this category.

“That, unfortunately, this is the group that loses in the end, because this group is always forced to choose between stuff and sacrifice,” Beck said. “They have to choose sides eventually.”

“The problem is, nobody is offering you a real choice,” Beck said, proceeding to draw out the potential “new map.”



“The only way we stand in the end is to stand for something. If we don’t, we’ll have to choose between one of [the first] two groups,” Beck declared.

At the end of the show, Beck invited Patrick Poole, the national security expert at PJ Media, and Frank Gaffney, the former assistant secretary of defense and the founder of the Center for Security Policy, to weigh in on his conclusions.

All three agreed that Syria is a lynchpin, and that intervention will have major, international ramifications.

“We’re watching flash points developing all over the world,” Gaffney added. “North Korea, China, Sweden, Venezuela and what’s coming next in Latin America, Africa…The problem is, we’ve got these tectonic shifts that are taking place, and we’re not an anchor.”
Watch the entire segment below: