IN the height of the Cold War, Russia and America found themselves locked in a chilling race to nuke the Moon, declassified military documents reveal.
Following the end of the Second World War in 1945, the USSR and the USA spent decades trying to prove their military might to the world.
During this tense era, the two global superpowers found themselves locked in an arms race which saw them spend decades scrambling to develop the most powerful armaments.
As the arms race morphed into a space race, the two nations set their sights on the Moon, and made it their goal to extend their influence beyond the Earth’s atmosphere.
Now, declassified documents have revealed just how far the superpowers were prepared to go, as they hatched terrifying plans to obliterate part of our moon with a nuclear strike. Codenamed Project A119, a plan cooked up by the US Air Force in 1958 set out how America could prove their might once and for all.
Physicist Leonard Reiffel was put in charge of the project, which had the terrifying goal of detonating a nuclear warhead on the Moon. The team of military and physics experts planned to explode a warhead the same size as the bomb dropped on Hiroshima on our planet’s natural satellite.
The detonation would light up the Moon’s surface, generating a sphere of dust which would blot out any hopes of Russia winning the arms race. At the time, the team believed that they could feasibly hit a target on the Moon within an accuracy of two miles.
However, by January 1959 US military bosses were convinced that the public backlash against such a senseless strike would be enormous, and the risks of a malfunction in the launch were too great.
After that realisation, America’s leaders turned their attention to putting people, rather than weapons, in space.Meanwhile, the Soviets were cooking up a scheme of their own as part of a project codenamed E-4.
This plan involved striking the Moon with a nuclear missile of their own, although this plot faced the same overwhelming risks and difficulties as the Americans’ secret plans. These chilling Cold War revelations come after we revealed the secret US plans which could have led to the total destruction of the USSR.
While North Korea can still learn a lot from a failed missile test and use those lessons to advance their program, they have failed to demonstrate capability with missile types the US perfected in the 1970s — and cyber espionage may be to blame.
Asked about North Korea’s unsuccessful missile test by CBS’ John Dickerson on “Face the Nation” on Sunday, President Donald Trump refused to address whether or not the US had anything to do with the rogue nation’s missile failures.
“I’d rather not discuss it. But perhaps they’re just not very good missiles,” said Trump. Pressed further on possible US sabotage of North Korea’s missiles, Trump did not deny it. “I just don’t want to discuss it.”
In the past, US leaders have forcefully denied cyber attacks on other countries, but Trump only reiterated his preference for not telegraphing his intentions or plans in military ventures.
Indeed North Korea lacks the missile manufacturing infrastructure of a world power like Russia or the US, but a recent New York Times report uncovered a secret operation to derail North Korea’s nuclear-missile program that has been raging for three years.
Essentially, the report attributes North Korea’s high rate of failure with Russian-designed missiles to US meddling in the country’s missile software and networks.
But to those in the know, the campaign against North Korea came as no surprise. Dr. Ken Geers, a cybersecurity expert for Comodo with experience in the NSA, told Business Insider that cyberoperations like the one against North Korea were actually the norm.
While the fact that the US hacked another country’s missile program may be shocking to some, “within military intelligence spaces this is what they do,” Geers said. “If you think that war is possible with a given state, you’re going to be trying to prepare the battle space for conflict. In the internet age, that means hacking.”
North Korea’s internal networks are fiercely insulated and not connect to the larger internet, however, which poses a challenge for hackers in the US, but Geers said it’s “absolutely not the case” that computers need to connect to the internet to be hacked.
Furthermore, Geers said, because of the limited number of servers and access points to North Korea’s very restricted internet, “If it ever came to cyberwar between the US and North Korea, it would be an overwhelming victory for the West.”
“North Korea can do a Sony attack or attack the White House, but that’s cause that’s the nature of cyberspace,” Geers said. “But if war came, you’d see Cyber Command wipe out most other countries’ pretty quickly.”
Just as chilling is the 1949 follow up to Plan Totality – known as Operation Dropshot – which reveals how the US was really ready to obliterate the USSR with terrifying force.
And we also recently revealed details of the chilling plans drawn up by Soviet generals to survive an all-out war with NATO and conquer the remains of the European continent.
Plan Totality was the name given to a last-ditch nuclear strategy cooked up by American generals in the wake of the Second World War REVEALED By GEORGE HARRISON 15th January 2017,
A DECLASSIFIED military plan reveals that America was prepared to plunge the world into a nuclear conflict just as World War 2 had been brought to an end.
Plan Totality was the name given to a last-ditch nuclear strategy cooked up by American generals in the wake of the Second World War.
Despite the successes of Soviet and American cooperation in toppling Nazi Germany, the conclusion of the war put relations between the two superpowers on ice.
The former Allies fell out when America began to suspect that the then-Soviet Union was plotting to sweep into the charred remains of the European continent to conquer it themselves.
Fearing global domination by the USSR, America prepared for the worst and hatched a number of military plans and simulations designed to beat back a Russian invasion of Western Europe. Plan Totality was established by US General Dwight D. Eisenhower in the summer of 1945, following the Potsdam Conference – where the Allies decided how to carve up defeated Germany.
The chilling strategy involved plans to obliterate 20 Soviet cities with America’s newly-tested atomic arsenal.
Moscow, Leningrad and Stalinsk were all in the American firing line, with military planners claiming that all of the biggest Soviet cities could be wiped out in one surprise strike.
Between 20 and 30 atomic bombs were set to be dropped if it came to it – a move which could have resulted in Russia and America wiping each other off the map.
However, all was not as it seemed, and the supposedly secret plan ended up leaked to the world soon after it was drawn up. In fact, America didn’t have anywhere near 20 atomic bombs at the time, and only had 27 bombers capable of delivering the few devices available.
The real genius of Plan Totality was that it was a complete bluff, which was deliberately leaked with the intention of tricking the USSR into thinking that America’s military was more powerful than it really was. Plan Totality was just one component of then-President Truman’s “Giant Atomic Bluff”, a military strategy aimed at scaring America’s enemies into submission.
Unfortunately, the USSR saw through it, prompting the arms race which could have resulted in the death of billions.
Just as chilling is the 1949 follow up to Plan Totality – known as Operation Dropshot – which reveals how the US was really ready to obliterate the USSR with terrifying force.
And we also recently revealed details of the chilling plans drawn up by Soviet generals to survive an all-out war with NATO and conquer the remains of the European continent.
North Korea already is a nuclear power. Its first nuclear test was over a decade ago, and analysts say it probably has enough material for a dozen bombs today…… there are absolutely no good reasons to start another Korean War.
North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons Are Not Reason Enough to Start a War, TIME, Charlie Campbell / Beijing Apr 28, 2017 More than 2 million people were killed in the 1950-3 Korean War, including almost 40,000 Americans. Some 7,000 U.S. soldiers are still listed as missing. Countless families were torn apart by the conflict, which is still officially ongoing, as it was only ended by armistice rather than a peace treaty. It remains one of modern history’s longest wars.
These facts are important to remember when a U.S. President says, “There is a chance that we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea,” as Donald Trump did in an exclusive Reuters interview published Thursday.
The regime of North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un is a perennial headache for the international community. In recent years, North Korea has shelled South Korean islands and sunk a Naval corvette, claiming dozens of lives, including civilians. To fund its weapons program, the regime produces narcotics, fake currency and uses cybercrime across the globe.
On Feb.13, it even unleashed VX nerve agent — a U.N.-certified Weapon of Mass Destruction — at Kuala Lumpur International Airport to assassinate of Kim Jong Nam, Kim Jong Un’s estranged half-brother. It has abducted possibly hundreds of foreign nationals. At home, its own citizens are subject to “crimes against humanity,” according to a 2014 U.N. report.
However, what’s spurred Trump’s saber-rattling is North Korea’s nuclear program. Pyongyang has tested five nuclear bombs to date, and appears poised for a sixth. It also frequently tests missiles that may one day be able to reach the continental U.S. “[We can] can tip new-type intercontinental ballistic rockets with more powerful nuclear warheads and keep any cesspool of evils in the earth, including the U.S. mainland, within our striking range,” Kim Jong Un said after watching a rocket test last year.
Trump says that if North Korea cannot be persuaded from dismantling its nuclear weapons then military action maybe unavoidable. On April 8, he ordered a U.S. navy strike group — an “armada,” he called it — to the Korean peninsula. The obvious problem is that Seoul — home to half of South Korea’s 50 million people, including 200,000 Americans — lies within range of North Korea’s artillery, and possibly even nuclear weapons.
Trump’s gamble is that Kim Jong Un would shy away from retaliating against a U.S. strike on his nuclear facilities, cognizant that American military superiority means any full-scale war would undoubtedly result in his regime’s complete destruction…….
Trump told Reuters that he operates under the assumption that Kim Jong Un is “rational.” But backed into a corner, is Trump willing to bet nuclear apocalypse on that?
But even if North Korea were not to retaliate, there’s no guarantee strikes would achieve their goal of permanently retarding the regime’s nuclear program. Plus there would be dire strategic consequences. Beijing would be livid. The U.S. would have started yet another 21st Century war, utterly alienating international public opinion, tearing up its hard-fought Asian security alliance and inviting Chinese hardliners to push it out of the region. According to an August 2016 study by Brown University, the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan — in which the U.S. military has been involved — have directly cost 370,000 lives since 2001. (Not that we’ve stopped counting.)
However, the broader point is that North Korea, for all its many and egregious faults, is a state hell-bent on survival. It might have nuclear weapons, but the regime cannot use them without guaranteeing its own destruction……..
Unfortunately, there is little chance the regime will voluntarily give up its nuclear weapons. Kim Jong Un is very aware of the fates of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi and Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, who were both toppled after abandoning their nuclear aspirations. He believes a nuclear bomb guarantees the security of his regime. And he might be right.
For lack of any better option, the U.S. and its allies should utilize the countless strategic advantages that won the Cold War, because the tussle with North Korea is still part of that ideological reckoning. ……
In an interview with Reuters today, Mr Trump admitted a major conflict with North Korea was possible but said it wasn’t his preferred outcome.
“There is a chance that we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea. Absolutely,” Mr Trump told Reuters in an Oval Office interview ahead of his 100th day in office on Saturday.
He maintained he wanted to resolve the dispute peacefully.
Meanwhile, the commander of US Pacific Command, Admiral Harry B Harris Jr, warned it was only a matter of time before Kim Jong-un is capable of launching a nuclear warhead towards the US.
“The crisis on the Korean peninsula is real — the worst I’ve seen,” he said in an interview with Fox News. “There is some doubt within the intelligence community whether Kim Jong-un has that capability today or whether he will soon, but I have to assume he has it, the capability is real, and that he’s moving towards it.”
Two to Tango With Nuclear Weapons The president shouldn’t have sole authority to trigger nuclear war., US News, By Peter D. ZimmermanApril 26, 2017Somewhere in the American southwest, not so very far from civilization, there is a fenced and guarded compound within another fenced and guarded compound in the distant reaches of a large military base……Beneath the fence is a vault where nuclear weapons wait ……
Under the prairies of Montana or the Dakotas underground bunkers are buried adjacent to a bomb-proof silo containing a Minuteman intercontinental missile…….
Somewhere under the ocean a missile submarine receives a message. The captain and his executive officer separately decode and authenticate it.
It always requires two people, two separate actions, to launch, steal, sabotage or tinker with an atomic warhead. This is the inviolable two person rule intended to prevent misuse of a nuclear weapon. ……
But the system deliberately breaks down at the single point where failure would be catastrophic. Only one person need act in order to launch all American nuclear weapons. The president. There is no two-person rule for ordering a strike. Nobody except the president needs to agree; nobody in the chain from president to launch officer has authority to question the order. If the president orders a launch, the system executes it. The service members involved may have their doubts, but years of military training have conditioned them that even this order must be obeyed………
The United States vowed that never again would a potential enemy be able to launch a surprise attack to which this country could not respond instantly and in kind.
This made sense during the height of the Cold War when the United States, terrified by the prospect of a nuclear Pearl Harbor, sought to ensure that a counter strike could not be thwarted by a clumsy decision-making process that would require more time than the country expected to have………
At least twice the Soviet Union and the United States have come very close to launching nuclear weapons based on the warnings provided by radar and satellite systems. A Soviet officer did not pass a notification of a rocket launch to the Kremlin at a time he knew that tensions between the powers were minimal. A good thing; it was not a nuclear missile but a small scientific rocket launched from a Norwegian island and carrying an innocent payload. The Soviets had been notified in advance of the launch, but somehow the message was lost.
Bad weather has sometimes fooled American defenses into thinking that a flight of geese was actually a nuclear missile, and only good judgment stopped the alert in its tracks. But human intervention is only legal going up the chain to the president. It’s ruled out if the president sends down a message ordering a launch, even if he or she is mistaken.
Nor is there any way at all to stop a drunk president, an angered and offended president, an insane one, or merely a bored and curious one from simply ordering the opening of the football and the launch of one or more nuclear weapons………
the president and the Congress must work together now, ignoring partisanship, to prevent an accidental, or even an intentional nuclear holocaust. It is time to extend the two person rule to the top of the pyramid, so that not even the president can start a nuclear war alone.
Peter D. Zimmerman, a nuclear physicist, was chief scientific adviser of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and the Bureau of Arms Control at the State Department. He also served as chief scientist of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He is professor emeritus of science and security in the Department of War Studies at Kings College London and lives in Northern Virginia. https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2017-04-26/the-president-shouldnt-have-sole-authority-ove
The High Costs of US Warmongering Against North Korea TruthOut, Wednesday, April 26, 2017 By Christine Ahn, Truthout | News Analysis
“………..Contrary to Trump’s campaign rhetoric that he “would be very, very cautious” and not be a “happy trigger” compared to Hillary Clinton, the Trump administration has mercilessly and without coherence dropped massive US bombs throughout the Middle East. With regards to Korea, the Trump administration has said that all options are on the table, including military action. Trump announced that the US launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles on Syria over dinner with President Xi Jinping at Mar-a-Lago in a clear message to China that it must either rein in North Korea, or the United States will take unilateral action. It was soon after that Donald Trump told the world that the US was “sending an armada, very powerful” toward North Korea, even though it wasn’t.
A Long History of US Military Brutality Against Korea
But North Koreans don’t need to look at Syria or Afghanistan, or at Libya or Iraq, to understand the sheer brutality of US military power. They have their own history of surviving indiscriminate US bombing during the Korean War that destroyed 80 percent of North Korean cities and claimed one in four relatives.
More bombs were dropped on Korea than on all of Asia and the Pacific islands during World War II. According to the memoir Soldier by Anthony Herbert, the most decorated veteran of the Korean War, in May 1951, one year into the war, General MacArthur offered this testimony before Congress:
The war in Korea has already almost destroyed that nation of 20,000,000 people. I have never seen such devastation. I have seen, I guess, as much blood and disaster as any living man, and it just curdled my stomach…. After I looked at that wreckage and those thousands of women and children and everything, I vomited…. If you go on indefinitely, you are perpetuating a slaughter such as I have never heard of in the history of mankind.
Curtis LeMay, who took over for MacArthur, later wrote, “We burned down just about every city in North Korea and South Korea both … we killed off over a million civilian Koreans and drove several million more from their homes.”
While all parties to the Korean War, including the North Korean People’s Army, committed heinous acts, Americans must remember this tragic history because it very much underlies the North Korean mindset and their enormous will to survive, underscoring how counterproductive “strategic patience” is.
Thinking that it’s a matter of making North Korea hurt enough, shows a fundamental misunderstanding of a key attribute of the [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea] state and society which has an extraordinary capacity to absorb pain. They have maybe suffered more than anyone since 1945. They’re like a boxer, they’ll never beat you but you can never knock them down. No matter how hard you hit them, they get back up.
And the sober lesson that the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations ultimately arrived at was that there was no military option.
In 1994, President Bill Clinton considered a preemptive strike on North Korea’s Yongbyon nuclear reactor, but the Pentagon concluded that even limited action would claim a million lives in the first 24 hours — and this was well before Pyongyang possessed nuclear weapons. President Obama, too, considered surgical strikes, but as David Sanger reported in the New York Times, obtaining such timely intelligence was nearly impossible and “the risks of missing were tremendous, including renewed war on the Korean peninsula.” Any military action by Washington will undoubtedly trigger a counter-reaction from Pyongyang that could instantly kill a third of the South Korean population.
To most Americans, Korea is a problem “over there.” It’s not. The situation on the Korean Peninsula has for 70 years been dictated by US foreign policy. In 1945, at the end of WWII, the United States, along with the Soviets — as victors over Japan in the Pacific Theater — divided the Korean peninsula. Two young officers in the State Department literally tore a page out of the National Geographic and drew a line across the 38th parallel, taking Seoul and giving Pyongyang to the Soviets.
The Korean people, who were preparing for their liberation from 35 years of Japanese colonial rule, had organized one of the most vibrant grassroots democratic people’s committees in history. Instead of liberation, they got two military occupations and became the front line of the Cold War. The division of Korea led in 1948 to the creation to two separate states: the Republic of Korea in the south, and the Democratic People’s Republic in the north, which ultimately led to the 1950-53 Korean War.
The atrocious war was temporarily halted on July 27, 1953, when US Army Lieutenant General William Harrison, representing the UN Command, and North Korean General Nam Il, representing the Korean People’s Army and the Chinese People’s Volunteers, signed the Armistice Agreement. Article IV, paragraph 60, called for the official end of the Korean War by replacing the Armistice with a peace treaty.
Hopes for Diplomacy and Peacebuilding
Today, the US still has wartime operational control over South Korea and jurisdiction over half the DMZ. There are 28,500 US troops across South Korea, and it’s the US missile defense system, THAAD, which has prompted massive protests across South Korea and is straining Seoul’s relations with Beijing. The rapid deployment of THAAD — ahead of schedule and pushed during the political vacuum in South Korea — is just the latest example of US intrusion into Korean affairs to further its own geopolitical interests.
But just as the security of Korean peoples is tied to US policy, Korea has very much influenced human security in the United States. Fifty years ago, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. presciently noted, “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.” In fact, Korea has been the justification for US military expansion in the Asia Pacific, and inaugurated the military-industrial complex and massive spending that has built the greatest war-making force in world history. According to University of Chicago historian Bruce Cumings, “It was the Korean War, not Greece or Turkey, or the Marshall Plan or Vietnam that inaugurated big defense budgets and the national security state that transformed a limited containment doctrine into a global crusade that ignited McCarthyism just as it seemed to fizzle, and thereby gave the Cold War its long run.”
Sadly, the conflict with North Korea is being used as further justification to increase the US military budget. In February, President Trump requested an additional $54 billion for the military — a 10 percent increase — while making drastic cuts to social welfare programs. This is on top of the already bloated $598 billion US military budget, which is the world’s largest and more than the next seven highest-spending countries combined. “The Pentagon spends an estimated $10 billion a year on overseas bases,” according to the Los Angeles Times. “More than 70% of the total is spent in Japan, Germany and South Korea, where most US troops abroad are permanently stationed.”
The good news is that on May 9, South Korea will be holding a snap presidential election after the impeachment and imprisonment of its corrupt politician Park Geun-hye, whose hardline policy against North Korea strained inter-Korean relations. The leading candidate, Moon Jae-in, has pledged to improve relations with Pyongyang, noting that diplomatic relations are the best bet to ensure South Koreans’ security. As South Koreans work to improve peace on the Korean Peninsula, our job here in the United States is to strengthen the connection between the struggles for democracy, justice and liberation throughout the Asia Pacific, including South Korea, Okinawa and the Philippines, which are very much tied to our struggle for a just world built on food, land, water, health care and education. http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/40367-the-high-costs-of-us-warmongering-against-north-korea
White House meeting with full Senate on North Korea sends alarming signal from an unprepared president, ShareBlue, By Leah McElrath |APRIL 26, 2017 The Trump administration’s unusual step of inviting the entire Senate to the White House for a security briefing on North Korea, in addition to Donald Trump’s recent heated rhetoric, suggests he might be preparing for military action — a dangerous and terrifying scenario this ill-tempered and ignorant president is most certainly not capable of handling.
Donald Trump has engaged in a great deal of “saber-rattling” about North Korea, including his claim of “sending an armada” to the region, but his administration’s recent actions suggest they could be preparing for much more than tough talk.
The Trump administration took the highly unusual step of inviting the entire U.S. Senate to the White House on Wednesday for a national security briefing by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, with Mattis, Dunford, and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats also in attendance. The State Department also announced that Tillerson will chair a special ministerial meeting of the United Nations Security Council about North Korea on Friday.
Trump’s young presidency is already in trouble, with record low approval ratings, multiple investigations into his campaign’s possible collusion with Russia, and an inability to enact any significant legislation, despite GOP control of both the House and Senate.
For a president desperate to prove his first 100 days are not a total failure, engaging in military action against North Korea, which poses an actual, though not imminent, threat to U.S. national security, could be the opportunity he is seeking to show his strength as a leader……….
The White House’s actions have not gone unnoticed by national intelligence and security expert Malcolm Nance, who questioned whether the White House might not only be briefing the Senate on Wednesday, but also asking for “war powers”:……..
Earlier this month, in response to Trump’s unilateral decision to use military force in Syria and Afghanistan and reports that he was considering a pre-emptive strike against North Korea, Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi issued a statement demanding that Speaker Paul Ryan initiate classified discussions about Trump’s use of force. Her effort was an attempt to leverage Congress’ constitutional war-related powers to hold Trump’s executive branch accountable. Unsurprisingly, however, Ryan scheduled no such meetings.
What is perhaps most concerning about the possibility that the Trump administration could be preparing for military action against North Korea is Trump’s failure to demonstrate any understanding whatsoever of the consequences of military action, and specifically, the use of nuclear weapons.
During the presidential campaign, Trump presented conflicting views of nuclear weapon use, and his administration’s policy on nuclear weapon use is also uncertain. In December, Trump indicated a willingness to engage in a new nuclear arms race with Russia, saying during an appearance on MSNBC, “Let it be an arms race. We will outmatch them at every pass and outlast them all.”
Retired General Michael Hayden: Possible I Won’t Vote In This Election | Morning Joe | MSNBC
During his campaign, Trump refused to say he would not use nuclear weapons. He also showed a lack of understanding about the difference between nuclear weapons and conventional munitions, and he indicated that he was not familiar with the concepts of deterrence and disarmament. In fact, during an hour-long national security briefing in 2016, Trump repeatedly asked, “If we have nuclear weapons, why can’t we use them?”
SCARBOROUGH: What concerns you most about Donald Trump?
HAYDEN: How erratic he is, Joe. I can argue about this position or that position. I do that with the current president, but he [Trump] is inconsistent. And when you’re the head of a global superpower — inconsistency, unpredictability, those are dangerous things. They frighten your friends, and they tempt your enemies. So I would be very, very concerned.
FORD: General Hayden, Harold Ford, very very quickly: Who amongst your peers that you respect greatly — whether they think like you or don’t think like you — do you know that’s advising Mr. Trump.
HAYDEN: No one.
[Stunned utterances and looks from other panel members.]
SCARBOROUGH: I have to follow up with that, but, then, I’ll be very careful here. Several months ago, a foreign policy expert — on an international level — went to advise Donald Trump, and three times he [Trump] asked about the use of nuclear weapons. Three times he asked. At one point, “If we have them, why can’t we use them?” That’s one of the reasons why he just doesn’t have foreign policy experts around him.
[Stunned utterances and looks from other panel members.]
Three times in an hour briefing: “Why can’t we use nuclear weapons?”
BRZEZINSKI: Be careful, America, and be careful, Republican leaders. Your (unintelligible) is blowing up.
SCARBOROUGH: So, General Hayden, I want to ask, one more time, and it may be classified, but, the steps. Donald Trump decides to use a nuclear weapon. What is the time frame between his decision and when the nuclear weapons are launched?
HAYDEN: Joe, it’s scenario dependent, but the system is designed for speed and decisiveness. It’s not designed to debate the decision.
With a cabinet full of generals, a decimated State Department, GOP control of both the House and the Senate, and a Republican Party unwilling to hold the Republican president accountable to any laws or norms, the reality is Trump has unchecked power when it comes to military action, including use of nuclear weapons.
Trump’s unpopularity, the ongoing questions about his election, and his demonstrated ignorance about a range of critical and complicated issues — from geopolitics to nuclear weapons — all add up to a dangerous situation with North Korea in which Trump is clearly in over his head and lacks the knowledge, experience, and sober advice to handle it.
US missile shield aims to cover sudden nuclear strike against Russia – General Staff Rt.com 27 Apr, 2017 The United States is pursuing global strategic domination through developing anti-ballistic missile systems capable of a sudden disarming strike against Russia and China, according to the deputy head of operations of the Russian General Staff.
There is an obvious link between Washington’s prompt global strike initiative, which seeks capability to engage “any targets anywhere in the world within one hour of the decision,” and the deployment of missile launch systems in Europe and aboard naval vessels across the globe, Lt. Gen. Viktor Poznikhir said at a news briefing on Wednesday.
“The presence of US missile defense bases in Europe, missile defense vessels in seas and oceans close to Russia creates a powerful covert strike component for conducting a sudden nuclear missile strike against the Russian Federation,” Poznikhir explained.
While the US keeps claiming that its missile defenses are seeking to mitigate threats from rogue states, the results of computer simulations confirm that the Pentagon’s installations are directed against Russia and China, according to Poznikhir.
American missile attack warning systems, he said, cover all possible trajectories of Russian ballistic missiles flying toward the United States, and are only expected to get more advanced as new low-orbit satellites complement the existing radar systems.
“Applying sudden disarming strikes targeting Russian or Chinese strategic nuclear forces significantly increases the efficiency of the US missile defense system,” Poznikhir added.
American ABM systems are not only creating an “illusion” of safety from a retaliatory strike but can themselves be used to launch a sneak nuclear attack on Russia.
In a blatant breach of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the standard land-based launching systems can be covertly rearmed with Tomahawk cruise missiles instead of interceptors – and the Pentagon’s denial of this fact, according to Poznikhir, is “at the very least unconvincing.”
Moreover, Washington’s unilateral withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, signed in 1972 with the Soviet Union, allowed it to develop more advanced weapons that can now not only pose a threat to targets on the ground but in space as well………https://www.rt.com/news/386276-us-missile-shield-russia-strike/
Trump sends Cruise missile-carrying nuclear submarine to South Korean port as he warns Kim Jong Un ‘is a problem that needs to be finally solved’
The USS Michigan arrived on Monday ahead of a possible Tuesday nuke trial
Tuesday is the 85th anniversary of the start of the North’s Korean People’s Army
The US, Japan and South Korea are meeting in Tokyo to discuss North Korea
Trump has also invited the entire Senate to the White House on Wednesday
And the UN Security Council on North Korea will also meet on Friday
Japan and China are to meet too; China is an unhappy ally of the hermit state
North Korea has refused to stop its nuclear tests and is threatening more trials
The USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier strike group is also heading to the peninsula
By Reuters and Dailymail.com ReporterDAILY MAIL, 25 April 2017 A nuclear-powered US submarine arrived in a South Korean port on Tuesday in a show of force amid concerns that North Korea may attempt another missile launch or nuclear test on Tuesday.
The port call in Busan by the USS Michigan came as an American aircraft carrier strike group continued steaming towards Korean waters.
And as tensions in the area continued to rise, the top nuclear envoys from South Korea, Japan, and the US met in Tokyo to discuss North Korea’s refusal to give up its nuclear program.
On Monday, US President Donald Trump called for tougher new UN sanctions on Pyongyang, saying the North was a global threat and ‘a problem that we have to finally solve’.
The USS Michigan’s armament comprises four torpedo tubes and 154 BGM-109 Tomahawks. It was modified to remove its nuclear armaments in the mid-2000s.
Japan’s chief cabinet secretary, Yoshide Suga, told a media briefing that China’s nuclear envoy, Wu Dawei, would also hold talks with Japanese Foreign Ministry officials on Tuesday.
A ministry source said Wu was likely to meet his Japanese nuclear counterpart on Wednesday.
Matching the flurry of activity in North Asia, the State Department in Washington said on Monday US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson would chair a special ministerial meeting of the UN Security Council on North Korea on Friday.
Tillerson, along with Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and Joint Chiefs chairman General Joseph Dunford, would also hold a rare briefing for the entire US Senate on North Korea on Wednesday, Senate aides said……..
Two Japanese destroyers conducted exercises on Monday with the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier strike group that is headed for waters off the Korean peninsula, sent by Trump as a warning to the North.
The South Korean military is also planning to conduct joint drills with the carrier group.
As those drills continued, the USS Michigan arrived in the South Korean port of Busan on Tuesday, the US Navy said. The nuclear-powered submarine is built to carry and launch ballistic missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles.
As well as his military show of force, Trump has also sought to pressure China to do more to rein in its nuclear-armed neighbor.
China, North Korea’s sole major ally, has in turn been angered by Pyongyang’s belligerence, as well as its nuclear and missile programs.
China warns North Korea another nuclear weapons test would take relations beyond ‘point of no return’
Warning comes amid fears of new launch to mark anniversary of Pyongyang’s military, Independent, Lizzie Dearden@lizziedearden , 25 Apr 17, North Korea has been warned not to go past the “point of no return” with another nuclear test by China, as the US and South Korea carry out high-profile military exercises.
An editorial in the Global Times, regarded as a mouthpiece for the ruling Communist Party, said Beijing was hoping for a peaceful outcome but had “very limited influence on the entire situation”.
“The game of chicken between Washington and Pyongyang has come to a breaking point,” it added, saying that if North Korea followed through on vows to carry out a sixth nuclear test, “it is more likely than ever that the situation will cross the point of no return.“All stakeholders will bear the consequences, with Pyongyang sure to suffer the greatest losses.”
“China is very much the economic lifeline to North Korea so, while nothing is easy, if they want to solve the North Korean problem, they will,” the US President tweeted on Saturday.
As North Korea’s chief source of trade, food and fuel aid, Beijing has come under increasing pressure to use its influence to dissuade Kim Jong-un from continuing weapons development that has generated international alarm.
But the Chinese government is wary of any measures that could threaten the North Korean regime’s existence, and provoke a potential nuclear war or a new government in Pyongyang beholden to Washington and Seoul.
A spokesperson for the Chinese foreign ministry, Lu Kang, said diplomatic channels remained “smooth [with] normal exchanges” on Tuesday, amid fears of a new test to coincide with the 85th anniversary of the Korean People’s Army.He urged all sides to exercise restraint and refrain from any actions that could push tensions even higher. “The current situation on the Korean Peninsula is complicated and sensitive and the tension is high,” he added.
“We urge all sides concerned to keep restrained and calm and refrain from taking actions that could escalate tensions.”
So why is there so little public protest today?………
It would be a terrible thing if it takes a disastrous nuclear war between the United States and North Korea to convince people that nuclear war is simply unacceptable.
Why Is There So Little Popular Protest Against Today’s Threats of Nuclear War? Common Dreams, Lawrence Wittner, 26 Apr 17, In recent weeks, the people of the world have been treated to yet another display of the kind of nuclear insanity that has broken out periodically ever since 1945 and the dawn of the nuclear era.
On April 11, Donald Trump, irked by North Korea’s continued tests of nuclear weapons and missiles, tweeted that “North Korea is looking for trouble.” If China does not “help,” then “we will solve the problem without them.” North Korean leader Kim Jong Un responded by announcing that, in the event of a U.S. military attack, his country would not scruple at launching a nuclear strike at U.S. forces. In turn, Trump declared: “We are sending an armada, very powerful. We have submarines, very powerful, far more powerful than the aircraft carrier. We have the best military people on earth.”
During the following days, the governments of both nuclear-armed nations escalated their threats. Dispatched to South Korea, U.S. Vice President Mike Pence declared that “the era of strategic patience is over,” and warned: “All options are on the table.” Not to be outdone, North Korea’s deputy representative to the United Nations told a press conference that “thermonuclear war may break out at any moment.” Any missile or nuclear strike by the United States would be responded to “in kind.” Several days later, the North Korean government warned of a “super-mighty preemptive strike” that would reduce U.S. military forces in South Korea and on the U.S. mainland “to ashes.” The United States and its allies, said the official statement, “should not mess with us.”
Curiously, this North Korean statement echoed the Trump promise during his presidential campaign that he would build a U.S. military machine “so big, powerful, and strong that no one will mess with us.” The fact that both Trump and Kim are being “messed with” despite their possession of very powerful armed forces, including nuclear weapons, seems to have eluded both men, who continue their deadly game of nuclear threat and bluster.
And what is the response of the public to these two erratic government leaders behaving in this reckless fashion and threatening war, including nuclear war? It is remarkably subdued. People read about the situation in newspapers or watch it on the television news, while comedians joke about the madness of it all. Oh, yes, peace and disarmament organizations condemn the escalating military confrontation and outline reasonable diplomatic alternatives. But such organizations are unable to mobilize the vast numbers of people around the world necessary to shake some sense into these overwrought government officials.
The situation was very different in the 1980s, when organizations like the Nuclear Weapons Freeze Campaign (in the United States), the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (in Britain), and similar groups around the world were able to engage millions of people in protest against the nuclear recklessness of the U.S. and Soviet governments―protest that played a key role in curbing the nuclear arms race and preventing nuclear war.
So why is there so little public protest today?………
Theresa May would fire UK’s nuclear weapons as a ‘first strike’, says Defence Secretary Michael Fallon
‘We have made it very clear that you can’t rule out the use of nuclear weapons as a first strike’Independent, Rob Merrick Deputy Political Editor @Rob_Merrick , 24 Apr 17,
Theresa May would fire Britain’s nuclear weapons as a ‘first strike’ if necessary, the Defence Secretary has said.
Michael Fallon said the Prime Minister was prepared to launch Trident in “the most extreme circumstances”, even if Britain itself was not under nuclear attack.
The statement came as the Conservatives continued to exploit Labour divisions on the retention of the Trident deterrent, to warn of the“very dangerous chaos” if Jeremy Corbyn becomes prime minister……..
“In the most extreme circumstances, we have made it very clear that you can’t rule out the use of nuclear weapons as a first strike,” Mr Fallon said.
Asked in what circumstances, he replied: “They are better not specified or described, which would only give comfort to our enemies and make the deterrent less credible.
“The whole point about the deterrent is that you have got to leave uncertainty in the mind of anyone who might be thinking of using weapons against this country.”
Mr Fallon also insisted that critics of Trident – including senior military figures who have ridiculed the idea that it is an effective deterrent – were “absolutely wrong”……..
“The Labour party is very clear we are committed to a credible nuclear credibility at the minimum end of the scale. That is Labour party policy and it will be in the manifesto,” Mr Gwynne said.
But he appeared to rule out a first strike, adding: “We would not be in a position where the first choice would be to press that red button. It is a deterrent because we have them.
Britain would be ‘literally erased from the face of the earth’ if it launched a nuclear attack, warns Russian MP Another translation says Britain would be ‘razed to the ground’ in a retaliatory strike, Independent, Samuel Osborne@SamuelOsborne93, 24 Apr 17, Britain would be “literally erased from the face of the earth” in a nuclear war, a Russian MP has warned.
Franz Klintsevich, a retired colonel, was responding to comments from Defence Secretary Michael Fallon, who said “in the most extreme circumstances, we have made it very clear that you can’t rule out the use of nuclear weapons as a first strike.”
Mr Klintsevich said if Britain were to launch a preemptive strike, then “not having the biggest territory, it will literally be erased from the face of the earth.” Another translation, carried by the Russian news agency TASS, says Britain would be “razed to the ground” in a retaliatory strike.
Sir Michael’s comments came in response to Labour divisions over retaining the Trident deterrent, with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn suggesting renewal might not be in the party’s election manifesto — only to be corrected later by party colleagues.
Speaking to BBC Radio Four’s Today Programme, Sir Michael said Labour had left voters “completely unsure as to what would actually happen to our nuclear deterrent.”
He said Prime Minster Theresa May would be ready to use Trident as a “pre-emptive initial strike”…….
Mr Klintsevich, who is deputy chairman of the upper house of the Russian parliament’s defence and security committee, called Sir Michael’s comments “disgusting” and said it “deserves a tough response”. He added: “In the best case this statement should be taken as an element of psychological war — which looks particularly disgusting in such a context.
“Otherwise, it sounds really bad, because a reasonable question arises: Against whom is Great Britain going to preemptively use nuclear weapons?”
If Britain intended to use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state, he added, “then probably English people desperately want to share the laurels of the USA who threw nuclear bombs at defenceless [Japanese cities] Hiroshima and Nagasaki [in 1945].”
Reuters is reporting that “sales of nuclear shelters and radiation-blocking air purifiers have surged in Japan in recent weeks…”
One company, Oribe Seiki Seisakusho, appears to be doing particularly well, receiving eight orders for nuclear shelters in April and selling all 50 of its $5,000-a-piece, poison gas filtering air purifiers.
According to Newsweek, the buying activity may have been prompted, at least in part, by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s recent warning to other Japanese government officials that “there is a possibility that North Korea already has a capability to put sarin on warheads to strike the ground.”
Meanwhile, the Japan Times reported last month that Oga, a Japanese city in Akita Prefecture, conducted the country’s first evacuation drill “on the premise of a ballistic missile falling into Japanese waters off Akita, [and] was aimed at promptly relaying information while facilitating the swift and safe evacuation of residents.” The media outlet further notes that the drill included participation by an elementary school, among others.
In addition to these protective measures, Japan has been working with the U.S. and its neighbor South Korea to detect and possibly intercept approaching missiles.
