America’s Nuclear Doomsday Submarines
 Meet the Ohio-Class: America’s Nuclear Doomsday Submarines, National Interest, by Sebastien Roblin 16 Oct 19,”………. The most deadly of the real-life kaiju prowling the oceans today are the fourteen Ohio-class ballistic-missile submarines, which carry upwards of half of the United States’ nuclear arsenal onboard.
If you do the math, the Ohio-class boats may be the most destructive weapon system created by humankind. Each of the 170-meter-long vessels can carry twenty-four Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) which can be fired from underwater to strike at targets more than seven thousand miles away depending on the load.
As a Trident II reenters the atmosphere at speeds of up to Mach 24, it splits into up to eight independent reentry vehicles, each with a 100- or 475-kiloton nuclear warhead. In short, a full salvo from an Ohio-class submarine—which can be launched in less than one minute—could unleash up to 192 nuclear warheads to wipe twenty-four cities off the map. This is a nightmarish weapon of the apocalypse. ………. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/meet-ohio-class-americas-nuclear-doomsday-submarines-88386
|
|
Russia showcases its nuclear arsenal with huge war games
|
Russia kicks off huge war games to test its nuclear arsenal, CBS News, BY DARIA LITVINOVA, OCTOBER 15, 2019 MOSCOW — Russia kicked off a sweeping military exercise of its Strategic Missile Forces on Tuesday. The Defense Ministry said the drills would include 16 practice launches of cruise and ballistic missiles.
Dubbed “Thunder-2019,” the war games were set to last three days and involve 12,000 troops, 213 missile launchers, 105 aircraft, 15 surface warships and five nuclear submarines………
Last week, Putin announced that Russia would start developing short- and intermediate-range missiles in response to U.S. plans to deploy such weapons in Asia. They are missiles that were banned for decades under the INF. Russia formally withdrew from the Reagan-era treaty soon after the U.S., which had accused Moscow of working on new missiles that violated the terms of the accord. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-war-games-thunder-2019-test-strategic-nuclear-weapons-today-after-inf-collapse-2019-10-15/ |
|
2019 Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor report
 Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor 2019 is here, https://banmonitor.org/news/nuclear-weapons-ban-monitor-2019-is-here The 2019 report of the Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor was launched at a side event during the UN General Assembly in New York on 16 October. This watchdog measures progress towards a world free of nuclear weapons, by using the 2017 UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) as a yardstick. The report also evaluates the extent to which the policies and practices of all states comply with the prohibitions in the TPNW, regardless of whether they have joined the Treaty yet.
The 2019 report of the Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor, which is researched and published by the organization Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA), identifies 31 mostly European states – including countries like Belgium, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, and Spain – as “nuclear-weapon-complicit states”. These are states that do not themselves possess nuclear weapons but have outsourced their nuclear postures to one or more nuclear-armed allies through arrangements of extended nuclear deterrence, or so-called “nuclear umbrellas”. They have endorsed or acquiesced in the continued possession and potential use of nuclear weapons on their behalf.
– It is not only the nine nuclear-armed states that stand between the international community and its long-standing goal of a world free of nuclear weapons. So do the 31 nuclear-weapon-complicit states. Their role in assisting, encouraging, and inducing continued retention of nuclear weapons had not been given much attention prior to the adoption of the TPNW in the UN in 2017, says the editor of the Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor, Grethe Lauglo Østern of NPA. The nine nuclear-armed states and the 31 nuclear-weapon-complicit states do not support the TPNW, and some of them actively oppose it. The majority of the world’s states, however, stand behind the Treaty. The Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor categorizes a total of 135 countries as TPNW supporters.
– As of October 2019, 32 states are full states parties to the TPNW, while another 48 states have signed it, but not yet ratified it. In addition, 55 countries have voted in favour of the Treaty in the UN, but not yet taken steps to adhere to it, says Østern. Support for the TPNW is high in all regions apart from Europe, where 34 states (or 69%) today are opposed to signing it. Only 17 countries in the world are undecided on the TPNW. The TPNW will be binding, international law when 50 states have ratified it. The Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor shows that the Treaty is moving steadily towards early entry into force, despite obstructionism from nuclear-armed states. At the time of writing, the TPNW had, by a close margin, the second fastest speed of adherence of the treaties on weapons of mass destruction, though significantly slower than the 1968 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Among the states that have ratified the TPNW already are Kazakhstan and South Africa, both of which once had nuclear weapons but subsequently disarmed; two of only four states ever to do so.
– A facts-based debate on the UN prohibition on nuclear weapons is essential if we are to achieve the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. This applies to civil society, and to politicans and diplomats. The Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor gathers and makes available crucial data, says NPA’s secretary general Henriette Westhrin. Even though the nuclear-armed states are resisting the TPNW, Westhrin believes it is important that countries without nuclear weapons now are taking the lead and becoming the first states parties to the Treaty. In doing so they are creating a long-overdue norm that nuclear weapons are unacceptable, and an international framework for their elimination. – The first parties to the TPNW have a responsibility to use this tool to break decades of acquiescence to the nuclear threat and to encourage other states to stop justifying the “benefits” of nuclear weapons. The impact of the TPNW will be built gradually and will depend on how it is received and used by each and every UN member state, says Westhrin. Contact: Grethe Lauglo Østern, Editor of the Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor on +41 78 717 9137 or e-mail: gretheo@npaid.org
|
|
|
Radioactive chlorine from nuclear bomb tests still present in Antarctica
|
Radioactive chlorine from nuclear bomb tests still present in Antarctica, Phys Org, by Abigail Eisenstadt, American Geophysical Union 16 Oct 19, Antarctica’s ice sheets are still releasing radioactive chlorine from marine nuclear weapons tests in the 1950s, a new study finds. This suggests regions in Antarctica store and vent the radioactive element differently than previously thought. The results also improve scientists’ ability to use chlorine to learn more about Earth’s atmosphere. Scientists commonly use the radioactive isotopes chlorine-36 and beryllium-10 to determine the ages of ice in ice cores, which are barrels of ice obtained by drilling into ice sheets. Chlorine-36 is a naturally occurring radioactive isotope, meaning it has a different atomic mass than regular chlorine. Some chlorine-36 forms naturally when argon gas reacts with cosmic rays in Earth’s atmosphere, but it can also be produced during nuclear explosions when neutrons react with chlorine in seawater. Nuclear weapons tests in the United States carried out in the Pacific Ocean during the 1950s and the 1960s caused reactions that generated high concentrations of isotopes like chlorine-36. The radioactive isotope reached the stratosphere, where it traveled around the globe. Some of the gas made it to Antarctica, where it was deposited on Antarctica’s ice and has remained ever since. Other isotopes produced by marine nuclear bomb testing have mostly returned to pre-bomb levels in recent years. Scientists expected chlorine-36 from the nuclear bomb tests to have also rebounded. But new research in AGU’s Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres finds the Vostok region of Antarctica is continuing to release radioactive chlorine into the atmosphere. Since naturally produced chlorine-36 is stored permanently in layers of Antarctica’s snow, the results indicate the site surprisingly still has manmade chlorine produced by bomb tests in the 1950s and in the 1960s……… https://phys.org/news/2019-10-radioactive-chlorine-nuclear-antarctica.html |
|
Removing a nuclear arsenal from Turkish soil is a necessary step in reducing a global danger.
Why Are U.S. Nuclear Bombs Still in Turkey? The best time to get atomic weapons out was several years ago. The second best time is now. The New Republic, By ANKIT PANDAOctober 16, 2019
The American relationship with Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Turkey has been fraught for half a decade, but never this bad. Last week, American troops were intentionally targeted by Turkish artillery units in Northern Syria as Erdoğan’s forces advanced and President Donald Trump ordered the U.S. into a unilateral withdrawal. The Pentagon sternly warned that Turkey’s troops would face “immediate defensive action” from American forces if such an encounter were to be repeated……..
Putin warns on the need for a new nuclear weapons treaty
PUTIN TAKES SWIPE AT TRUMP FOR WITHDRAWING FROM NUCLEAR TREATY: ‘IT WAS NOT WORTH RUINING’, Newsweek,
In an interview with Arabic-speaking journalists ahead of his visit to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, Putin reiterated Russia’s opposition to the withdrawal in February from the INF, which had been signed in 1987 by Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan.
It banned missiles with ranges of between 310 and 3,400 miles but the U.S. and Nato had accused Russia of violating the pact by deploying a new type of cruise missile, a claim Moscow denied.
Putin said: “It think it was a mistake…and that they could have gone a different path. I do understand the U.S. concerns. While other countries are free to enhance their defences, Russia and the U.S. have tied their own hands with this treaty. However, I still believe it was not worth ruining the deal; I believe there were other ways out of the situation.”
Putin said that the U.S. must back a new START Treaty, which expires in 2021, to restrict a race to acquire strategic nuclear weapons.
“The new START Treaty is actually the only treaty that we have to prevent us from falling back into a full-scale arms race. To make sure it is extended, we need to be working on it right now. We have already submitted our proposals; they are on the table of the U.S. administration. There has been no answer so far.
“If this treaty is not extended, the world will have no means of limiting the number of offensive weapons, and this is bad news. The situation will change, globally. It will become more precarious, and the world will be less safe and a much less predictable place than today,” Putin said, according to a transcript of the interview on the Kremlin website.
Putin said that his doubt over the U.S. commitment to nuclear disarmament stretched back to 2002, when under President George W. Bush, Washington withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, which had imposed limits on missile defence systems……… https://www.newsweek.com/putin-start-treaty-trump-arms-race-1464921
USA anxiety over its nuclear weapons stashed in Turkey
The US is rethinking the 50-plus nuclear weapons it keeps in Turkey, Quartz, By Tim Fernholz, 14 Oct 19, Turkish forces are pushing into northern Syria, replacing and sometimes even firing on the US troops retreating at Donald Trump’s orders.
The question of whether Turkey, a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is really a US ally was put to US defense secretary Mark Esper on Fox television this morning. “No, I think Turkey, the arc of their behavior over the past several years has been terrible,” he said.
Which brings up a problem: The US is storing perhaps 50 air-dropped thermonuclear bombs at its Incirlik Airbase in southern Turkey, less than 100 miles from the Syrian border where this conflict is taking place.
The nuclear stockpile dates back to the Cold War, when the US sought to keep a sufficient supply of atomic weapons deployed in Europe to deter potential Soviet aggression. Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, and Italy also host similar arsenals, and the US trains the participating nations in the use of the doomsday devices.
Today, these bombs remain in place largely because of inertia, and the hope that countries like Turkey will see the depot as sufficient reason not to develop nuclear weapons of their own. It doesn’t seem to be working: Last month, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan said he could “not accept” efforts to prevent Turkey from developing its own atomic bombs.
But instability in Turkey and the region, along with Ankara’s close relationship with Russia, have had American strategists talking about re-locating their weapons for years. (The US does not officially discuss the arsenal, but there is no indication that the stockpile has been removed.)……..https://qz.com/1727158/us-rethinking-the-50-plus-nuclear-weapons-it-keeps-in-turkey/
The truly dangerous situation of USA’s nuclear weapons
|
US nuclear weapons policies are alarmingly dangerous. https://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-weapons/us-weapons, 13 Oct 19, The United States tested the first atomic device in July of 1945. Seven years later, it exploded the first thermonuclear weapon—designed in part by Richard Garwin, who now serves on the board of the Union of Concerned Scientists. In the following years, the United States amassed many thousands of nuclear weapons, each capable of immense destruction. At the height of the Cold War, the United States maintained roughly 30,000 nuclear bombs and warheads, though the total number of weapons has fallen, thanks in part to US-Soviet and US-Russian treaties and agreements. The policies governing when, where, and why the United States would use nuclear weapons remain unconscionably risky. The US arsenalAs of 2019, the US arsenal contained some 4,000 nuclear weapons, about half of which are deployed and ready to be delivered. Their destructive capabilities range widely: the most powerful weapon—the “B83”—is more than 80 times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. The smallest weapon has an explosive yield of only 2 percent that of the Hiroshima bomb. Such “low-yield” weapons are designed to be used on the battlefield, increasing the likelihood they may actually be used.
The country’s weapons are deployed in submarines and in 80-foot-deep missile silos across the American west. Others are stored at air force bases, where they can be loaded on long-range bombers. Some 150 US bombs are deployed at airbases in five European countries. The arsenal’s primary purpose is “deterrence”—i.e., it’s intended to dissuade others from launching a nuclear attack. However, current policies allow the United States to use nuclear weapons first against Russia, China, or North Korea, effectively beginning a nuclear war.
New weaponsOver the coming years the Pentagon plans to spend more than a trillion dollars maintaining and rebuilding the entire US nuclear arsenal, which is both unnecessary and unwise. US weapons are maintained and upgraded on an ongoing basis and many don’t require replacement. Certain types should be eliminated altogether because they are redundant and provocative.
The main outcome of the Pentagon’s spending spree may be to spark an arms race with Russia and China, which would be expensive and dangerous—especially in the absence of strong arms control agreements.
PoliciesThe risk of nuclear war has as much to do with policy as it does to do with the weapons themselves. In the United States, the President is granted sole authority to launch nuclear weapons. He or she doesn’t need to consult with anyone beforehand and can issue a launch order with very few checks and balances. It’s also US policy that nuclear weapons can be used first in a non-nuclear conflict with a nuclear-armed state, i.e. not only in retaliation. If the United States crossed the nuclear threshold and started a nuclear war, it would open up our country to a retaliatory attack. Additionally, 400 land-based missiles are kept on hair-trigger alert, meaning they’re maintained in a ready-for-launch status. Current policy allows the United States to launch these missiles on warning of an incoming attack, despite a long history of false alarms and close calls. Collectively, these and other policies increase the risk of nuclear war. Better policies would reduce that risk. |
|
Iran categorically opposes nuclear weapons – Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif
Zarif: Iran categorically opposes nuclear arms, Islamic Republic News Agency Tehran, Oct 12, IRNA – Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in a message referred to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei’s remarks that nuclear weapons are immoral, saying Iran categorically opposes such weapons.
“#Iran’s Leader has long made it abundantly clear that nuclear weapons are immoral & contravene Islamic principles,” Zarif wrote on his Twitter account on Saturday.
“Their development, acquisition, stockpiling & use is thus forbidden,” he added.
Zarif noted: “We’re categorically opposed to nuclear arms as a religious/moral duty & strategic imperative.”
On Wednesday, Ayatollah Khamenei emphasized that making, keeping and utilizing nuclear weapons are banned according to the Islamic law, …….. https://en.irna.ir/news/83514156/Zarif-Iran-categorically-opposes-nuclear-arms
U.S. Congress ponders reckless decision to increase production of plutonium bomb cores or “pits.”
Pits are the triggers for thermonuclear weapons. Currently, the United States does not manufacture plutonium pits on an industrial scale. In its fiscal 2020 budget request the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) seeks authorization to produce at least 80 plutonium pits per year by 2030 at two facilities separated by some 1,500 miles. The Senate NDAA fully funds the request. The House instead authorizes 30 pits per year, all at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in NM. Los Alamos is presently authorized to produce 20 pits annually.
Plutonium pit production at such a large scale represents a major departure from our post-Cold War nuclear weapons policy. Since the Rocky Flats Plant in CO closed in 1989 following a raid by the FBI environmental crimes unit, the United States has produced pits at an annual rate of 11 or fewer. Further, there have been no orders for newly manufactured pits in nearly a decade.
Instead, the government has been utilizing some of the approximately 20,000 plutonium pits in storage at the Pantex Plant in Texas to conduct its ongoing warhead maintenance and refurbishment programs. These pits have very long lifetimes. JASON, a DOD organized group of independent scientific experts, estimated that plutonium pits will last 100 years or more.
Clearly, the Senate NDAA is not meant to maintain the safety and reliability of the existing nuclear weapons stockpile. Instead, future production is intended to enable modified pit designs for new-design warheads, contrary to longstanding U.S. arms control objectives. Given the current moratorium on explosive testing of nuclear weapons, those pits cannot be full-scale tested or, alternatively, could prompt the United States to return to nuclear testing. This would have international proliferation consequences beyond anything we’ve seen since the most dangerous days of the Cold War.
As if to confirm that this is the ultimate plan, NNSA’s Lawrence Livermore National Lab has already begun to create a warhead, called the W87-1, that goes beyond previously-tested limits. The design that Livermore is pursuing contains a novel plutonium pit, unlike any pits in the stockpile or in storage at Pantex. The W87-1 is slated go on top of a new-design intercontinental ballistic missile, the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent. It too is controversial due to unknowns regarding its pending cost, schedule, and significant 
integration challenges to accommodate the new warhead.
Further, the 80 pit per year capability will not be reachable in the time frame NNSA posits, and its facilities may not be able to operate properly at that production rate. A Pentagon-funded report by the Institute for Defense Analyses in 2019 concluded that 80 pits per year is not achievable “on the schedules or budgets currently forecasted” by the NNSA. This problem is compounded by the fact that the Savannah River Site in SC, NNSA’s proposed location to produce 50 of the 80 pits annually, has been plagued with decades of cost overruns and mismanagement. Additionally, Los Alamos’s pit production capability has been crippled by safety lapses, even at the lower rate.
Placing a novel warhead design in the active nuclear weapons stockpile with a substantially untested pit is irresponsible. Rapidly increasing production at sites with spotty records compounds that error with added safety hazards. Increasing plutonium pit production to a rate of 80 or more annually is both reckless and unnecessary.
The Conference Committee can follow the Senate approach that heedlessly increases our country’s risk levels. Alternatively, it can follow a more rational approach to nuclear security by supporting the House NDAA that restricts select funding for nuclear weapons production and deployment — including for expanded plutonium pit production.
Marylia Kelley is the executive director of the Livermore, CA-based Tri-Valley CAREs. For 36 years she has monitored the programs, capabilities and budgets of U.S. nuclear weapons complex, including at Livermore Lab. She has provided testimony on nuclear weapons design and production before the House Armed Services Committee of the U.S. Congress and the California State Legislature. In 2002, she was inducted into the Alameda County Women’s Hall of Fame.
North Korea threatens to resume nuclear, long-range missile tests
North Korea threatens to resume nuclear, long-range missile tests
Pyongyang’s warning follows the weekend breakdown of North Korea-US nuclear talks in Sweden. Aljazeera, 10 Oct 2019 North Korea has called outside condemnation of its weapons launches a “grave provocation” and has threatened to resume nuclear and long-range missile tests.
The warning on Thursday by Pyongyang’s foreign ministry followed the weekend breakdown of North Korea-United States nuclear negotiations in Sweden, the first such talks between the two countries in more than seven months.
North Korea said the talks collapsed because the US didn’t have any new proposals, and whether it maintains its moratorium on major weapons tests was up to Washington………
US-led diplomacy aimed at stripping North Korea of its nuclear programme had been stalemated since the second summit between President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Vietnam in February ended without any agreement.
That summit fell apart after Trump rejected Kim’s demands for major sanctions relief in return for limited steps towards denuclearisation. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/10/north-korea-threatens-resume-nuclear-long-range-missile-tests-191010091337349.html
Submarine launched missiles in Israel’s probably 300 Nuclear Weapons
Israel May Have 300 Nuclear Weapons (Including Submarine-Launched Missiles) National Interest Sébastien Roblin 11 Oct 19, Israel has never officially admitted to possessing nuclear weapons.
Unofficially, Tel Aviv wants everyone to know it has them, and doesn’t hesitate to make thinly-veiled references to its willingness to use them if confronted by an existential threat. Estimates on the size of Tel Aviv’s nuclear stockpile range from 80 to 300 nuclear weapons, the latter number exceeding China’s arsenal.
To forestall such a strategy, Israeli has aggressively targeted missile and nuclear technology programs in Iraq, Syria and Iran with air raids, sabotage and assassination campaigns. However, it also has developed a second-strike capability—that is, a survivable weapon which promises certain nuclear retaliation no matter how effective an enemy’s first strike.
Russia has a pointless, but scary Seaborne Nuclear Weapon
Key point: Moscow’s deadly weapon is pointless but is still apart of mutually-assured-destruction.On May 22, 2018, the Russian submarine Yuri Dolgoruky slipped beneath the waves of the Arctic White Sea. Hatches along the submerged boat’s spine opened, flooding the capacious tubes beneath. Moments later, an undersea volcano seemingly erupted from the depths.
Amidst roiling smoke, four stubby-looking missiles measuring twelve-meters in length emerged one by one. Momentarily, they seemed on the verge of faltering backward into the sea before their solid-fuel rockets ignited, propelling them high into the stratosphere. The four missiles soared across Russia to land in a missile test range on the Kamchatka peninsula, roughly 3,500 miles away.
You can see the launch sequence in this video.
Like the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) operated by United States, China, France, the United Kingdom, and India, the primary purpose of Borei-class submarines is almost unimaginably grim: to bring ruin to an adversary’s cities, even should other nuclear forces be wiped out in a first strike.
Each of the submarine’s sixteen R-30 Bulava (“Mace”) missiles typically carries six 150-kiloton nuclear warheads designed to split apart to hit separate targets. This means one Borei can rain seventy-two nuclear warheads ten times more destructive than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima on cities and military bases over 5,800 miles away.
The Borei is the most advanced SSBN in the Russian Navy, and is designed to replace its seven Soviet-era Delta-class SSBNs. Throughout most of the Cold War, Soviets submarines were noisier than their Western counterparts, and thus vulnerable to detection and attack by Western attack submarines. …….
The Bulava has an unusually shallow flight trajectory, making it harder to intercept, and can be fired while the Borei is moving. The 40-ton missiles can deploy up to forty decoys to try to divert defensive missiles fire by anti-ballistic missiles systems like the Alaska-based
Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. https://news.yahoo.com/russia-terrifying-seaborne-nuclear-weapon-053000241.html
A-bomb survivor Toshiki Fujimori urges nuclear haves and have-nots to join hands on abolition
Fujimori, 75, assistant secretary-general at the Japan Confederation of A- and H-Bomb Sufferers Organizations (Nihon Hidankyo), urged both sides to join forces to bring about a peaceful world.
Fujimori was exposed to radiation from the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945, while his mother was carrying him on her back to a hospital. After the bombing, six of his 12 family members died, Fujimori said.
Three days after, the second U.S. atomic bomb devastated Nagasaki.
NEW YORK – Hibakusha Toshiki Fujimori called for nuclear states and non-nuclear states to cooperate on abolishing atomic weapons as a meeting on the subject was held at U.N. headquarters in New York on Thursday.
Fujimori, 75, assistant secretary-general at the Japan Confederation of A- and H-Bomb Sufferers Organizations (Nihon Hidankyo), urged both sides to join forces to bring about a peaceful world.
Fujimori was exposed to radiation from the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945, while his mother was carrying him on her back to a hospital. After the bombing, six of his 12 family members died, Fujimori said.
Three days after, the second U.S. atomic bomb devastated Nagasaki.
India and Pakistan sliding toward potential nuclear war
Kashmir crackdown: A warning of nuclear war between India and Pakistan, Axios, Dave Lawler $ Oct 19, India and Pakistan are sliding toward potential nuclear war, according to the president of Pakistani-controlled Kashmir. The warning comes as Pakistan attempts to rally global outrage against its neighbor and rival.
Catch up quick: On Aug. 5, India revoked the constitutional autonomy of Jammu and Kashmir — the state it controls within the disputed Himalayan territory — while instituting a communications blackout and a curfew enforced by hundreds of thousands of troops.
1 This Month
Protect Sazan Island from the Trump family! https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/protect_sazan_island_from_the_trump_family_loc/?bqFCVab&v=174511&cl=22707147157&_checksum=5e9dde668860e8231c33699735e16a1fbf22ab2cb01da50c999fe8732b9775ef&utm_source=email&utm_medium=blast_email&utm_campaign=174511
25 June- THE PUKE ON NUKES
Thursday, June 25, 2026
7pm Central Time (8pm ET, 6pm MT, 5pm PT) UTC – 5
From NRC & DOE Deregulation to Techno-Fascist Billionaires Going Nuclear, Plus a Few Songs from Atomic Cabaret REGISTER
26 June – Radiation Trainwreck at the NRC / Join the Protect Better Campaign – https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/4ZlZ5_qLSHGiLSCg8FF6Bg#/registration
Cuba Is Not a Failed State – It Is a Besieged State
PETITION: “Global Appeal to Endorse Palestinian Right of Return of Refugees”
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- June 2026 (142)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 