nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Ukraine gets highly anticipated arms from Germany – Spiegel

 https://www.rt.com/russia/564488-ukraine-germany-iris-system 13 Oct 22,

Kiev has received the IRIS-T air defense system even before Berlin’s own military.

Ukraine has received the first of four IRIS-T SLM air defense systems from Germany, Der Spiegel reported on Tuesday. With its own weapons stockpiles seriously depleted, Germany is gifting this ultra-modern system to Kiev before its own forces.

The system – which comprises a command vehicle, a radar vehicle, and a truck-mounted launcher capable of firing eight missiles – was handed over to the Ukrainian military next to the Polish-Ukrainian border on Tuesday, the German magazine reported.

The handover took place four days after German Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht made an unannounced visit to Ukraine, where she promised her Ukrainian counterpart, Aleksey Reznikov, that his country would receive the IRIS-T “in a few days.” German Chancellor Olaf Scholz pledged to provide this system to Ukraine back in June, with delivery initially slated for November.

In an update on Monday, Lambrecht said that Russia’s devastating missile strikes on Ukrainian military and infrastructure targets that morning showed “how important it is to supply Ukraine with air defense systems quickly.”

Berlin has promised Ukraine at least four IRIS-T systems, each of which can supposedly strike incoming missiles up to 40 kilometers (25 miles) away. Ukraine has reportedly asked Germany for at least a dozen of these systems, and offered to purchase them directly from the manufacturer, Diehl Defense.

Germany’s own military has yet to field a single ground-based IRIS-T system, with the remaining three pledged to Ukraine yet to be manufactured, Der Spiegel reported. Germany has faced persistent criticism from Kiev for its supposed hesitance in donating sufficiently heavy weaponry, but the arms it has sent have left its own stocks depleted. 

Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock warned of “absolute deficits” in Germany’s weapons stocks in August, and a report by Business Insider on Saturday revealed that the Bundeswehr (German Army) has only enough ammunition for two days of warfare.

October 14, 2022 Posted by | Germany, weapons and war | Leave a comment

We’re Being Pushed Toward Nuclear War On A Fiction: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix

the empire depends on keeping its activities obfuscated and unseen while we’re all working to make its machinery visible and transparent. That’s why Assange is in prison.

 https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/were-being-pushed-toward-nuclear?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=78305448&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email Caitlin Johnstone, 14 Oct 22,

We’re being driven toward nuclear war on the completely fictional claim that Putin is a Hitler-like megalomaniac who’s just invading countries completely unprovoked, solely because he is evil and hates freedom, and won’t stop invading and conquering until he’s stopped by force. 

The news media aren’t telling people about the western aggressions which led to this war. They’re not telling people the US is keeping this war going with the stated goal of weakening Russia and is rejecting peace talks and refusing to push for peace. All people are being told is that Putin is another Hitler who won’t listen to reason and only understands violence. The world’s two nuclear superpowers are being pushed closer and closer to direct military confrontation based on a complete fiction which omits mountains of facts.

To participate in this madness is indefensible. It is indefensibly immoral to foist a fictional version of events upon a trusting populace in order to manufacture consent for more and more aggressive acts of brinkmanship with a nuclear superpower. These people are depraved.

Continue reading →

October 14, 2022 Posted by | 2 WORLD, weapons and war | Leave a comment

WE ARE ON A PATH TO NUCLEAR WAR

WAR ON THE ROCKS, JEREMY SHAPIRO, 12 Oct 22, In war, nothing is inevitable and not much is predictable. But the war in Ukraine has a direction that observers can see and that we should name. What began as a criminal Russian aggression against Ukraine has become a proxy war between Washington and Moscow. The two sides are locked in an escalatory cycle that, along current trends, will eventually bring them into direct conflict and then go nuclear, killing millions of people and destroying much of the world. This is obviously a bold prediction and certainly an unwise one to make — in part because if I’m right, I’m unlikely to be around take credit for it. 

President Joe Biden has named this danger, to great criticism, apparently because he believes that acknowledging the danger increases the chances of avoiding such a terrible outcome. Indeed, much can change the current trajectory, but doing so will require purposeful action by both sides specifically intended to avoid direct confrontation. At the moment, neither side seems willing or politically able to take such steps. On the contrary, in Russia nuclear threats are a prominent part of the Russian war strategy. In the United States, commentators condemn those who even name this danger, fearing that doing so will weaken Western resolve. Any mention of such considerations on Twitter, where it is always 1938, inevitably provokes accusations of appeasement and references to Neville Chamberlain.

Despite the opprobrium, not naming the danger is unlikely to reduce it. Think tank analysts prefer instead to talk in terms of “scenarios,” wherein we can bury the most likely outcome amongst a few other less likely possibilities. Such exercises are useful for planning purposes, and they appropriately reflect our general inability to predict events on the ground. But scenarios also serve to hide the relative likelihood of the various outcomes. Here I present just the central scenario of nuclear escalation. I take as a starting point that, although we may experience long periods of relative stalemate and we may never arrive at such a horrific outcome, uncontrolled escalation is the path that we are currently on.

Testing the Red Lines

No rational or even sane leader plans to start a nuclear war. And for all of the Russian regime’s risk taking, it does not show signs of suicidal tendencies. The essence of the problem is more insidious than mere insanity: Once an escalatory cycle begins, a series of individually rational steps can add up to a world-ending absurdity. In Ukraine, both sides have publicly pledged that they cannot lose this war. They hold that doing so would threaten their very way of life and the values that they hold most dear. In the Russian case particularly, a loss in Ukraine would seem to threaten regime survival and even the territorial integrity of the country. 

As the war has moved against the Russians, they have drawn numerous red lines to warn the West against escalation. The Russians called the provision of long-range rocket systems near the Russian border “intolerable,” warned against the admission of Sweden and Finland to NATO, and threatened that any attack on Crimea would “ignite judgment day.” In each case, the crossing of these Russian red lines by Ukraine, the United States, or Europe generated some sort of response but fell well short of Russian threats.  

As Russian red lines have proven very pink, they are increasingly questioned in the West. Numerous Western commentators now assert that Russia is a paper tiger and dismiss Russian nuclear threats as “bluster.” The most recent Russian red line warns against the provision of long-range missile systems to Ukraine. The Russian government says that if the United States crosses this line, it would become “a direct party to the conflict.” Given all of the red lines already crossed, however, it is doubtful that U.S. decision-makers see such threats as very meaningful.

The problem that the Russians have had in their signaling is that their decision to escalate likely revolves around the progress that the Ukrainians make on the ground, not on any discrete action (such as the provision of new weapons systems) that the West might take. The likelihood of escalation, in other words, has stemmed from developments on the battlefield, not from the crossing of some arbitrary red line. Experts on the Russian military have long suspected that Russian nuclear signaling is an elaborate bluff meant to instill fear and caution in a weak-willed Western enemy. But events in Ukraine and the possibility of a catastrophic military loss may have changed that calculation. Nobody really knows. It is likely that the Russians don’t know either.

What is clear is that both sides have consistently escalated in Ukraine when they fear that they might lose. The United States and its European partners have continually upped their military assistance to Ukraine, in both quality and quantity, regardless of red lines. Under the pressure of war, they decided to deliver weapons and intelligence that just a few months ago they believed carried too great an escalation risk to provide. They have similarly incrementally increased economic sanctions to the degree that they now appear intended to permanently weaken Russia and destroy the Russian regime, as Biden has said is necessary to end the war. 

The Russians have consistently responded to battlefield setbacks with their own escalations including energy cut-offs to Europe, increased bombing of civilian targets, and recently through the formal annexation of four Ukrainian provinces and the partial mobilization of Russian manpower reserves. This last step carries obvious risks for the Russian regime, as the multiple protests against it across Russia testify, but the leadership preferred those domestic risks to losing the war.

In taking these escalatory steps, both sides have also increased the domestic and geopolitical costs of compromise, thus increasing the incentive for further escalations. Thus, for example, the Russian annexations are intended to signal to foreign and domestic audiences that the occupied parts of Ukrainian territory will now be defended as if they were Russia itself. But it is not just a signal, it also genuinely reduces Russia’s ability to back down and abandon these provinces. This is essence of an escalatory cycle — it contains a logic of its own wherein previous escalations make future ones more likely.

Of course, wars have often escalated but no war since 1945 has ended in nuclear use. Nuclear powers have at times considered their use for warfighting, notably in Korea in 1953 and in Israel in 1973, but have always stepped back from the brink.  In the current situation, both sides have many more steps to take before direct confrontation: ………………………………………………………………………..

This is only a scenario. None of it is inevitable, of course. But this is the path that we are currently on and the likelihood of it coming to pass grows by the day as one side or the other becomes more desperate. The consequences of this path are deeply ruinous. It should be named.  https://warontherocks.com/2022/10/the-end-of-the-world-is-nigh/

October 12, 2022 Posted by | 2 WORLD, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Crimean Bridge Attack: Ukraine’s Sabotage Teams Take Orders From Washington, Senior Official Reveals

 https://sputniknews.com/20221010/crimean-bridge-attack-ukraines-sabotage-teams-take-orders-from-washington-senior-official-reveals-1101698419.html Ilya Tsukanov, 12 Oct 22, The 19-km bridge linking the Crimean Peninsula to the Russian mainland sustained serious damage following the detonation of a truck bomb on one of its road sections on Saturday morning. Ukrainian officials boasted to US media that Kiev was responsible.

Ukrainian officials keep their US counterparts abreast of Kiev’s sabotage ops and other anti-Russian actions, Sergey Pashinsky, the head of the Association of Ukraine’s Defense Enterprises, accidentally revealed.

“We are planning several operations. My position is: we must and are obliged to inform our American partners about them. And those operations which I am conducting right now – I have the opportunity to conduct operations myself, I http://cut channels this is also the CIA http://cut have their own intentions. Because I understand that the US also carries responsibility for them and has the right to veto all of our operations,” Pashinsky said, speaking to infamous Russian pranksters Vladimir ‘Vovan’ Kuznetsov and Alexei ‘Lexus’ Stolyarov, who posed as US officials.

Pashinsky clarified that he has been in charge of some major Ukrainian military actions, including operational planning on Zmeiny (‘Snake’) Island – the small but strategically significant island situated off the western coast of Romania in the Black Sea, and which saw heavy fighting between Ukrainian and Russian forces earlier this year.

“I planned the Zmeiny Island operation, I carried it out personally [using] Ukrainian Bohdan and French Caesar [howitzers]. Yes, this was my operation in its entirely,” the official said.

Pashinsky indicated that operations against a piece of infrastructure like the Crimean Bridge became possible only once the US gives the green light.

“As soon as you tell me that the US approves the sabotage of the Crimean Bridge, the situation can move forward. [Laughs]. A verbal message is enough for me. We don’t want to take responsibility of this scale for ourselves, while Mr. Zelensky – I don’t know, I don’t even want to know about this situation,” Pashinsky said.

“The Crimean Bridge is an important artery, but on the other hand I think you know [Vladimir] Putin better than I do. That is, who can analyze Putin’s actions in the event of sabotage against the Crimean Bridge? Who?” the official asked.

The pranksters did not clarify whether the interview with Pashinsky was conducted before or after Saturday’s sabotage attack.

Two senior Ukrainian officials told the New York Times on Sunday that Ukrainian intelligence were behind the attack on the bridge, one of them grading the success of the attack as “excellent” and saying that the operation “showed the failure of the Russian system to guarantee the security even of the most significant and sacred targets.”

Ukrainian officials also publicly gloated over the act of terror, with presidential advisor Mikhail Podolyak saying the bridge attack was only “the beginning” and that “everything illegal must be destroyed” and “everything stolen must be returned to Ukraine.”

“Today was not a bad day and mostly sunny on our state’s territory. Unfortunately, it was cloudy in Crimea. Although it was also warm,” President Vladimir Zelensky said in a sarcasm-laden address to the nation on Saturday night.

Russia launched a series of missile strikes deep into Ukraine on Monday in the wake of the bridge attack after confirming Ukrainian special forces’ involvement, with the strikes targeting Ukrainian energy infrastructure and military command and communications posts across the country. President Putin warned that strikes would be followed up if Ukrainian attacks against Russian infrastructure continue.

October 12, 2022 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

How nuclear testing leaves lasting environmental scars

 https://www.dw.com/en/nuclear-testing-north-korea-environment-biodiversity/a-6341. Edited by: Tamsin Walker 13 Oct 22,

With analysts predicting further nuclear tests in North Korea, the planet stands to lose. The ongoing environmental effects of nuclear testing are felt worldwide and for millions of years.

Since late September, North Korea has launched a flurry of ballistic missile tests as part of what experts believe is a program to develop so-called tactical nuclear weapons. If the reclusive state were to move beyond testing missiles to testing actual nuclear warheads, as some analysts are predicting, it would not only ramp up political tensions, but also pose a significant environmental threat. 

In the past, countries such as the United States, the former Soviet Union and the United Kingdom tested their nuclear weapons in the open atmosphere and in the sea — and around Pacific Islands, the Australian desert, mainland US, remote parts of the USSR and other places. These tests left contaminated landscapes and spread their radioactive clouds far afield. 

Thanks to global treaties, nuclear tests were largely moved underground after 1963, a slightly preferable scenario environmentally speaking. And since a 1996 test ban, only India, Pakistan and North Korea have tested weapons at all. 

North Korea is the only country known to have conducted tests in the 21st century. 

The impact of nuclear testing on mammals

“The legacy of nuclear weapons testing has been absolutely catastrophic for humans and for the environment,” said Alicia Sanders, the policy research coordinator at the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. 

One of the unique consequences for the environment, she added, “is that it lasts essentially forever.”

Putting aside the development required to set up test sites, the first major effects are felt in the microseconds after the explosion. 

A 2015 paper on the environmental impact of military actions found that nuclear blasts represent an extreme threat to local biodiversity. 

The massive energy released in the thermal emission from the blast — comprising light and heat — kills any organisms unfortunate enough to be near the epicenter. Depending on the yield of the bomb, even organisms several kilometers away face lethal temperatures. What remains is a charred mess.  

The effect from the thermal shock on animals is not well researched, but humans face serious, life-threatening burns even several kilometers away, depending on the power of the bomb. A similar effect is assumed for other mammals. They also suffer from the pressure of the blast, which causes lung damage and hemorrhaging.

And animals that aren’t killed immediately are more likely to die from infections in the days and weeks following the explosion, leading to a localized die-off event, the 2015 review found.

The impact on plants, birds and marine life

Plants are also not spared the effects of a nuclear blast. The sheer force strips trees of their foliage, tears down branches and uproots vegetation.  

For fish, meanwhile, the impact is similar to that of a non-nuclear explosion, but on a much larger scale. The US tests in Alaska, and those of France in French Polynesia in the late 1960s and early 70s were associated with large-scale die-offs of fish, as their gas-filled swim bladders ruptured.

Marine mammals and diving birds suffered similarly, post-mortem analysis showed. However, marine non-vertebrates appeared to be more resistant to pressure waves as they do not have gas-containing organs, according to defense studies at the time. 

Long-term environmental impacts

During the Cold War, the United States detonated scores of nuclear weapons in atmospheric tests in the Pacific. Entire islands were incinerated and many are still uninhabitable. Local residents were forced to leave. A 2019 study found that some of the affected areas had radiation levels 1,000-times that of those found in Chernobyl and Fukushima. 

Significant long-term environmental consequences of nuclear testing are the contamination of surface soil and groundwater, land disturbances in the form of craters or partially collapsed mountains — as in the case of the North Korean testing site — and the addition of radionuclides to sediments in seabeds.

Atmospheric nuclear tests spread radionuclides — unstable particles that releases radiation as they break down — far and wide, contaminating topsoil.

But even in underground testing, high pressure conditions can propel radionuclides into the atmosphere — a phenomenom known as venting — where they can be carried by winds and deposited far away from the test sites and enter food-chains.

Ankit Panda, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s nuclear policy program, says Pyongyang has thus far avoided the pitfall of venting.

“The North Koreans have actually, with their last five nuclear tests at least, been very effective at preventing the venting of radionuclides,” he said. “Because some of these radionuclides can even offer hints about the specific materials that are being used in the nuclear device.”

At the very least, underground tests deposit huge quantities of radioactive material which will remain there for millions of years. The long-term ecological damage from such contamination is unknown.  

The impact on drinking water

Underground testing also poses a threat of radionuclides leeching into drinking water.

Studies at the US nuclear testing site near Las Vegas, found that some contaminants released by underground nuclear tests can get into the surrounding water. Plants and animals are particularly liable to pick up radioactive strontium and caesium, which are easily spread in water.

With a half-life of 30 years, these two radionuclides can cause health issues in the food chain for decades. A common shrub in New Mexico, chamisa, has roots that extend deep into the ground, bringing strontium back up to the surface near the Los Alamos testing site in New Mexico, from where it can be widely distributed as the leaves fall, decay, and contaminate the soil understory.

“Animals will eat from contaminated land and that becomes very dangerous. These can be key sources of food for people,” ICAN’s Sanders said.

Organizations such as ICAN continue to push for complete denuclearization. 

Until that happens, one factor that might help clean up the legacy of nuclear testing is a provision in the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which requires signatories to provide assistance to victims of nuclear weapons and begin to remediate contaminated environments. States should next year begin initial assessments of environmental damage and use that as a basis for future remediation efforts. 

October 12, 2022 Posted by | environment, North Korea, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Even a small nuclear test by North Korea would be a big US worry

Mint, 13 Oct 22,

s North Korea moves closer to its first nuclear test in five years, one of the biggest worries for the US and its allies might be a relatively small blast.

Kim Jong Un has made clear he wants to build an arsenal of “tactical” nuclear weapons, meaning lower-yield bombs that could be used on the battlefield rather than on whole cities. First it must produce miniaturized warheads to fit on the expanding array of short-ranged ballistic missiles it has designed to threaten US troops and their allies in Asia. 

This week, Kim said a barrage of missiles launched in recent days were intended for tactical nuclear strikes, while warning Washington that any attempted attack could be met by strikes at American forces in South Korea and Japan. The comments were a fresh sign that North Korea could be preparing for its first nuclear test since September 2017, something the US has been ringing alarm bells about for months………..

While there were more than 2,000 tests of nuclear devices in the decades after the US bombed Japan in 1945, North Korea remains the only country that has conducted physical detonations of atomic bombs this century, according to data from the Arms Control Association. Nuclear powers such as the US now rely on supercomputers to simulate tests of their weapons to predict performance and reliability. …..

Kim has embarked on a two-pronged nuclear strategy of developing tactical weapons for the Asian region and far more powerful thermonuclear devices for longer-range missiles that can hit the US mainland. The US, Japan and South Korea have all said North Korea is ready to conduct a test at its mountainous Punggye-ri test site, where it has held all of its previous six tests……………

“Tactical” is an inexact term for a nuclear weapon that could be used within a theater of war, which to North Korea probably includes South Korea, Japan and US assets in places such as Guam. A tactical weapon has a less powerful warhead and is delivered at a shorter range. The explosive yields can be of less than 1 kiloton, but many are in the tens of kilotons……..

Tactical nuclear weapons can still cause massive destruction and non-proliferation advocates argue their use could quickly spin out of control. Such concerns were evident in US President Joe Biden’s warning last week that any use of such weapons by President Vladimir Putin in Ukraine could lead to “Armageddon.”………………

Kim laid out a nuclear weapons plan just before Biden’s inauguration in January 2021 that called for smaller and lighter weapons. He also urged the development of a solid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missile that would be quick to deploy and strike strategic targets within 15,000 kilometers (9,320 miles) — a thinly veiled reference to the US.

The North Korean leader oversaw the launch of two long-range cruise missiles that flew in figure-8 loops over the country for a total of about 2,000 kms, the official Korean Central News Agency reported Thursday. Cruise missiles, which can carry nuclear warheads, are designed to fly below radar and there are no United Nations resolutions barring Pyongyang from tests……….

Kim has shown that he has mastered tactical delivery systems by testing almost 70 short-range missiles since 2019. These are quick to deploy, designed to evade US-operated interceptors in the region and capable to hitting American military bases in South Korea in less than five minutes after launch………….https://www.livemint.com/news/world/even-a-small-nuclear-test-by-north-korea-would-be-a-big-us-worry-11665618154062.html

October 12, 2022 Posted by | North Korea, weapons and war | Leave a comment

France won’t retaliate with nuclear weapons if Russia uses them in Ukraine

French President Emmanuel Macron says he intends to avoid ‘global war’

 https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/europe/2022/10/13/france-wont-retaliate-with-nuclear-weapons-if-russia-uses-them-in-ukraine/ Soraya Ebrahimi, Oct 13, 2022,

France will not respond with nuclear weapons should Russia use them against Ukraine, French President Emmanuel Macron has said.

“Our doctrine rests on the fundamental interests of the nation,” Mr Macron told public broadcaster France 2 on Wednesday.

“They are defined clearly and wouldn’t be directly affected at all if, for example, there was a ballistic nuclear attack in Ukraine, in the region.”

It was the first time he has discussed France’s nuclear deterrence doctrine regarding Ukraine in detail.

Mr Macron said it was not good to talk about it too much.

So far, despite his threats, there is no sense that Russian President Vladimir Putin is moving nuclear assets.

Mr Macron said Mr Putin must “return to the table” to discuss peace in Ukraine and that he thought Kyiv would have to negotiate with him at some point.

“Today, first of all, Vladimir Putin must stop this war, respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity and come back to the table for talks,” he said.

Asked if he would back a Ukrainian offensive to recapture Crimea, which was annexed by Russia in 2014 in a move not recognised internationally, Mr Macron said that “at some point as the conflict develops”, Russia and Ukraine “will have to come back to the table”.

“The question is whether the objectives of the war will only be reached by military means,” he said, although “it’s up to the Ukrainians to decide” what those aims should be.

When reminded that Ukraine no longer wanted to negotiate with Mr Putin, Mr Macron replied: “I tell you that at some point … it will be necessary. That’s why I have always refused maximalist positions.”

He said France would supply air defence systems to Ukraine after Russia’s wave of air strikes this week, which was aimed at “breaking Ukrainian resistance”.

“We’re going to deliver … radars, systems and missiles to protect them from these attacks,” Mr Macron said.

He said France was also negotiating to send another six Caesar mobile artillery units.

Putin vows continued ‘tough’ attacks against Ukraine – video

He said the war had entered “an unprecedented stage” since the weekend because “for the first time all over Ukraine civilians have been killed … and electricity and heating facilities have been destroyed”.

“The aim of the Russians these last few days has been to break, to shatter Ukrainian resistance,” Mr Macron said.

He acknowledged that France was “unable to deliver as much as the Ukrainians ask for. I’m obliged to keep some for us to protect ourselves and our eastern flank (of Nato)”. The extra Caesar guns were made for Denmark, but talks are under way to redirect them to Ukraine.

October 12, 2022 Posted by | France, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Ukraine held talks with Britain for destruction of Crimean bridge

 https://apa.az/en/europe/ukraine-held-talks-with-britain-for-destruction-of-crimean-bridge-382809—15 August 2022,

Deputy of the Rada Goncharenko announced negotiations with Wallace on the destruction of the Crimean bridge, APA reports.

Ukraine held talks with British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace on a plan to destroy the Crimean Bridge at the NATO summit in June, Verkhovna Rada deputy Oleksiy Goncharenko said.

The parliamentarian drew attention to the statement of expert Igor Korotchenko, who said on the air of the Rossiya 1 TV channel that, according to some information, the plan for striking the bridge was allegedly being developed under the personal supervision of the head of the British military department.

“Ben Wallace and I discussed the plan to destroy the Crimean bridge back in June,” Goncharenko wrote, posting a photo from the talks, which, in addition to him and the head of the British Ministry of Defense, shows British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

In July, Aleksey Arestovich, an adviser to the head of Vladimir Zelensky’s office, said that Ukraine could attack the Crimean Bridge as soon as the first technical opportunity appeared.

October 12, 2022 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

NYT: Senior Ukrainian official confirms Ukraine orchestrated truck bomb attack on Crimean Bridge

Chris Menahan, InformationLiberation, Oct. 09, 2022,

The New York Times reported Saturday evening that a “senior Ukrainian official” corroborated Russian reports that Ukraine was behind the truck bomb attack on the Crimean bridge which killed at least three civilians.

From The New York Times, “Blast on Crimean Bridge Deals Blow to Russian War Effort in Ukraine”:

The blast and fire sent part of the 12-mile Kerch Strait Bridge tumbling into the sea and killed at least three people, according to the Russian authorities. A senior Ukrainian official corroborated Russian reports that Ukraine was behind the attack. The official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of a government ban on discussing the blast, added that Ukraine’s intelligence services had orchestrated the explosion, using a bomb loaded onto a truck being driven across the bridge.

[…] It was unclear if the driver of the truck, who died in the blast, was aware there were explosives inside. In video captured by a surveillance camera on the bridge, a huge fireball is seen, seeming to consume several vehicles. A small sedan and a tractor-trailer truck driving side by side appear at the epicenter of the blast. The explosion caused two sections of the bridge to partly collapse.

The truck driver was identified by Russian media as 51-year-old Mahir Yusubov of Azerbaijan.

Yusubov reportedly received an order to transport fertilizer through the internet and may have had his truck wired with explosives by Ukrainian special-ops units who used him as an unwitting suicide bomber.…………………………… more http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=63391

October 11, 2022 Posted by | incidents, secrets,lies and civil liberties, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US lawmakers propose halting arms sales to Saudi Arabia

Despite promising to make the kingdom a ‘pariah,’ the Biden government has approved billions in weapon sales to Riyadh

The Cradle, By News Desk- October 10 2022,

Lawmakers from the US Democratic party, Richard Blumenthal and Ro Khanna, have proposed legislation to put an end to US arms sales to Saudi Arabia as a response to the decision by OPEC+ to cut production output levels.

According to the two lawmakers, Riyadh’s support for Moscow, as it is seen by Washington, calls for a “far-reaching review of the US-Saudi relationship.”

In an opinion piece co-written by Blumenthal and Khanna, released by US media outlet Politico on 9 October, they wrote: “The Saudi decision was a pointed blow to the US, but the US also has a way to respond: It can promptly pause the massive transfer of American warfare technology into the eager hands of the Saudi.”

Although US President Joe Biden previously vowed to make the kingdom a “pariah,” US arms have continued to make their way into Saudi hands, helping fuel Riyadh’s war against Yemen. Right after taking office, Biden approved $650 million in air-to-air missiles to Saudi Arabia.

On 2 August, Biden approved and notified Congress of a possible multibillion-dollar weapons sale to both Saudi Arabia and the UAE, totaling as much as $5.3 billion. If the legislation to halt sales to the kingdom passes, the US stands to lose billions of dollars, making it unlikely that such a decision would be ratified…………………..more https://thecradle.co/Article/news/16681

October 11, 2022 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Belarus has no intention to go to war with neighbors, but it will defend itself — defense minister

TASS, Mon, 10 Oct 2022

Belarus will not go to war with neighboring states provided there are no wrong steps on their part, Defense Minister Viktor Khrenin said on Monday.

“We don’t want to be at war with Lithuanians or Poles, let alone Ukrainians. If you don’t want to and don’t take wrong steps, then there will be no war,” the Defense Ministry’s press-service quotes Khrenin as saying.

He urged Ukraine not to provoke the Belarusian side and to refrain from spreading fake news about an allegedly impending attack by Minsk……………….

more https://www.sott.net/article/473013-Belarus-has-no-intention-to-go-to-war-with-neighbors-but-it-will-defend-itself-%E2%80%94-defense-minister—

October 11, 2022 Posted by | Belarus, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Jeffrey Sachs: end Ukraine proxy war or face “armageddon”

October 9, 2022 Posted by | politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Zelensky aide attempts to walk back call for ‘preemptive strike’

It’s not clear what Zelensky meant by a “pre-emptive strike”. He might not have meant that NATO/USA should use a nuclear weapon.

But – he might well have meant that USA/NATO should strike at Russian nuclear sites

And that would indeed mean a Nuclear Pre-emptive Strike

 https://www.rt.com/russia/564204-zelensky-no-nuclear-strike/ 7 Oct 22, The Ukrainian president didn’t urge NATO to attack Russia with nuclear weapons, he pointed out.

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky’s call for a preemptive NATO strike against Russia should not be interpreted as a request to attack the country, his press secretary has insisted.

“Colleagues, you have gone a bit too far with your nuclear hysterics and hear ‘nuclear strikes’ where there are none,” Sergey Nikoforov wrote on Facebook on Thursday, responding to widespread alarm over the president’s words.

The press secretary pledged that Ukraine will never resort to nuclear threats, calling it something only the “terrorist state Russia” would do.

Moscow has denied that its senior officials were threatening anybody when they described the country’s official nuclear posture, in the context of warning NATO members against attacks on Russia.

Hours earlier, Zelensky told the Australian Lowy Institute that NATO should carry out preemptive strikes against Russia so that it “knows what to expect” in the event that it uses atomic weapons.

Such an attack would “eliminate the possibility of Russia using nuclear weapons,” the Ukrainian leader claimed. He urged the US and its allies to make a show of force, recalling how he appealed to other nations for preemptive measures against Russia before Moscow sent troops into Ukraine in late February.

“I once again appeal to the international community, as it was before February 24: preemptive strikes so that they [Russians] know what will happen to them if they use it, and not the other way around,” he said.

His press secretary also noted that before the hostilities started, “the only measures we talked about were preemptive sanctions”.

Russian officials have accused Zelensky of trying to provoke a global nuclear war. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova described him as “a monster, whose hands can destroy the planet,” after being pumped with Western weapons.

The Russian military doctrine allows the use of nuclear weapons in a conventional conflict, if Moscow believes that the existence of the country is under threat. Russian officials have repeatedly warned against escalating the crisis in Ukraine, stating that it could spiral out of control and result in a global nuclear exchange.

October 8, 2022 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Lavrov explains why Russia sees Ukraine as a threat – Zelensky asked NATO for a pre-emptive nuclear strike.

 https://www.rt.com/russia/564206-lavrov-zelensky-preemptive-strike/ 7 Oct 22, President Zelensky did ask NATO for a preemptive nuclear strike, despite claims to the contrary, the Russian foreign minister said.

A call by Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky for NATO members to deploy nuclear weapons against Russia is a reminder of why Moscow launched military action against his country, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said.

“Yesterday, Zelensky called on his Western masters to deliver a preemptive nuclear strike on Russia,” Moscow’s top diplomat stated during a media conference on Wednesday

In doing so, the Ukrainian leader “showed to the entire world the latest proof of the threats that come from the Kiev regime.” Lavrov said Russia’s special military operation had been launched to neutralize those threats.

He dismissed as “laughable” an attempt to downplay Zelensky’s words made by his press secretary, Sergey Nikoforov.

We all remember how [Zelensky] declared in January Ukraine’s intention to acquire nuclear weapons. Apparently, this idea has long been stuck in his mind,” the Russian minister said.

On Thursday, Zelensky told the Australian Lowy Institute that NATO must carry out preemptive strikes against Russia so that it “knows what to expect” if it uses its nuclear arsenal. He claimed that such action would “eliminate the possibility of Russia using nuclear weapons,” before recalling how he urged other nations to preemptively punish Russia before it launched its military action against his country.

“I once again appeal to the international community, as it was before February 24: Preemptive strikes so that [the Russians] know what will happen to them if they use it, and not the other way around,” he said.

His spokesman then claimed that people interpreting Zelensky’s words as a call for a preemptive nuclear strike were wrong, and that Ukraine would never use such rhetoric.

October 8, 2022 Posted by | politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

2022 Nobel Peace Prize award violates the purpose of the prize

2022: Nobel Committee Gets Peace Prize Wrong Yet Again,  https://davidswanson.org/2022-nobel-committee-gets-peace-prize-wrong-yet-again/ 7 Oct 22,

The Nobel Committee has yet again awarded a peace prize that violates the will of Alfred Nobel and the purpose for which the prize was created, selecting recipients who blatantly are not “the person who has done the most or best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment and promotion of peace congresses.”

With its eyes on the news of the day, there was no question that the Committee would find some way to focus on Ukraine. But it steered clear of anyone seeking to reduce the risk of that thus-far relatively minor war creating a nuclear apocalypse. It avoided anyone opposing both sides of the war, or anyone advocating for a ceasefire or negotiations or disarmament. It did not even make the choice one might have expected of picking an opponent of Russian warmaking in Russia and an opponent of Ukrainian warmaking in Ukraine.

Instead, the Nobel Committee has chosen advocates for human rights and democracy in Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine. But the group in Ukraine is recognized for having  “engaged in efforts to identify and document Russian war crimes against the Ukrainian civilian population,” with no mention of war as a crime or of the possibility that the Ukrainian side of the war was committing atrocities. The Nobel Committee may have learned from Amnesty International’s experience of being widely denounced for documenting war crimes by the Ukrainian side.

The fact that all sides of all wars have always failed and always will fail to engage in humane operations is possibly why Alfred Nobel set up a prize to advance the abolition of war.  It’s too bad that prize is so misused. Because of its misuse, World BEYOND War has created instead the War Abolisher Awards.

October 7, 2022 Posted by | Sweden, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »