AFRL’s STEM Academy provides curriculum and hands-on activities for students in kindergarten through high school including rocket launch competitions and simulated Mars missions.
Space News, Debra Werner, October 3, 2023 #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclear-free #NoNukes
“……….. Air Force Research Laboratory’s Space Vehicles Directorate along with other military space organizations at Kirtland, including the Space Systems Command Innovation and Prototyping Directorate and the Space Rapid Capabilities Office, are funding science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education, expanding internship programs and bolstering local and long-distance recruitment efforts.
Since 2019 when Congress established the U.S. Space Force, demand for military, civilian and contractor space professionals across the country has grown. Demand is particularly acute in New Mexico, a state with about 2.1 million employees……………
Internships and Fellowships
AFRL brings high school, college and postgraduate researchers to Kirtland for summer internships. The goal is to “expose people to some of the things we do, because some of the things we do here are pretty cool,” Erwin said. “They can be offsets for things like not being able to pay people as much money” as private industry.
Science and engineering staff members at AFRL publish research topics online. Students can apply to work on specific topics.
“Those topics run all the way from things that are appropriate for a freshman in high school to advanced research, where we’re writing papers for journals and conferences for a PhD candidate,” Erwin said.
STEM Education
AFRL’s STEM Academy provides curriculum and hands-on activities for students in kindergarten through high school including rocket launch competitions and simulated Mars missions.
To meet growing demand, military space organizations seek to attract workers living in New Mexico and encourage other people to move there.
…….The Space Force, meanwhile, is working with state and local governments and nonprofits like the Space Valley Coalition and NewSpace Nexus on STEM programs that encourage New Mexico students to consider space careers and stay in-state.
The Innovation and Prototyping Acquisition Delta also is strengthening ties with universities.
Former president Donald Trump allegedly revealed highly classified information about American nuclear-powered submarines to a wealthy Australian who regularly paid large sums to one of his companies, according to a report from ABC News.
Mr Trump reportedly disclosed the extremely sensitive information to a billionaire member of his Mar-a-Lago social club, which is housed at the location where he allegedly hoarded hundreds of classified documents for more than a year after his term as president — and his authorisation to possess such documents — had come to an end.
Citing sources familiar with the matter, ABC reported that the Aussie high-roller in question allegedly shared the information about US nuclear-powered submarines with “scores” of other people not authorised to have it, including “more than a dozen foreign officials” and journalists of unknown nationality.
Department of Justice investigators working under the supervision of Special Counsel Jack Smith learned of the potential breach as they were investigating Mr Trump’s alleged unlawful retention of national defence information.
Both prosecutors and special agents with the Federal Bureau of Investigation have reportedly spoken to the Mar-a-Lago member, packaging magnate Anthony Pratt, on at least two occasions this year.
Mr Pratt reportedly told investigators that the ex-president told him two pieces of information about the submarines: How many nuclear warheads are carried by American Ohio class ballistic missile submarines, and how close to such vessels a Russian submarine must get to detect them.
Both of those figures are among the US Navy’s most closely guarded secrets. But sources reportedly told ABC that Mr Pratt described what Mr Trump had said to at least 45 other people, including 10 Australian officials and a trio of former prime ministers.
GPB, October 6, 2023 Associated Press #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclear-free #NoNukes
Georgia Power Co. will pay $413 million to settle a lawsuit accusing the utility of reneging on financial promises to one of its nuclear reactor partners.
The payments to Oglethorpe Power Corp., announced Friday, could hold down future bills for millions of electric cooperative customers in Georgia.
Oglethorpe sued Georgia Power in June 2022 in a contract dispute over who should pay for cost overruns for a third and fourth reactor at Plant Vogtle, southeast of Augusta.
Atlanta-based Southern Co., which owns Georgia Power, said it would write off a $152 million loss on the settlement.
Georgia Power also announced Friday that it must replace one of the four massive pumps that cools the Unit 4 reactor after operators found a problem with the pump’s motor during testing. Georgia Power said it believes the problem is an “isolated event” and has a spare pump on site, but said the replacement ends the company’s hope of placing Unit 4 in commercial operation this year. The utility said the reactor is still on schedule to begin operating by March.
That was already the company’s fallback date……………………………………………………………………………………………..
Currently, all the owners are projected to pay more than $31 billion in capital and financing costs, Associated Press calculations show. Add in $3.7 billion that original contractor Westinghouse paid to the Vogtle owners to quit building the reactors, and the total nears $35 billion.
Besides Oglethorpe and Georgia Power, Vogtle’s owners include the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia and the city of Dalton. MEAG and Dalton also sued. Georgia Power agreed last year to pay up to $76 million to settle the lawsuit by MEAG, which provides power to 49 municipal utilities. The Dalton lawsuit is still pending, and Georgia Power said Friday that it could owe the city up to $17 million…………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://www.gpb.org/news/2023/10/06/georgia-power-will-pay-413-million-settle-lawsuit-over-nuclear-reactor-cost
But you can count on one thing: the new approach is likely to be a gold mine for weapons contractors, even if the resulting weaponry doesn’t faintly perform as advertised.
When such advanced weapons systems can be made to work, at enormous cost in time and money, they almost invariably prove of limited value, even against relatively poorly armed adversaries
Will the Pentagon’s Techno-Fantasies Pave the Way for War with China?
By William D. Hartung / TomDispatch, 4 Oct 23 #ArtificialIntelligence
On August 28th, Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks chose the occasion of a three-day conference organized by the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA), the arms industry’s biggest trade group, to announce the “Replicator Initiative.” Among other things, it would involve producing “swarms of drones” that could hit thousands of targets in China on short notice. Call it the full-scale launching of techno-war.
Her speech to the assembled arms makers was yet another sign that the military-industrial complex (MIC) President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us about more than 60 years ago is still alive, all too well, and taking a new turn. Call it the MIC for the digital age.
Hicks described the goal of the Replicator Initiative this way:
“To stay ahead [of China], we’re going to create a new state of the art… leveraging attritable, autonomous systems in all domains which are less expensive, put fewer people at risk, and can be changed, upgraded, or improved with substantially shorter lead times… We’ll counter the PLA’s [People’s Liberation Army’s] with mass of our own, but ours will be harder to plan for, harder to hit, and harder to beat.”
Think of it as artificial intelligence (AI) goes to war — and oh, that word “attritable,” a term that doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue or mean much of anything to the average taxpayer, is pure Pentagonese for the ready and rapid replaceability of systems lost in combat. Let’s explore later whether the Pentagon and the arms industry are even capable of producing the kinds of cheap, effective, easily replicable techno-war systems Hicks touted in her speech. First, though, let me focus on the goal of such an effort: confronting China.
Target: China
However one gauges China’s appetite for military conflict — as opposed to relying more heavily on its increasingly powerful political and economic tools of influence — the Pentagon is clearly proposing a military-industrial fix for the challenge posed by Beijing. As Hicks’s speech to those arms makers suggests, that new strategy is going to be grounded in a crucial premise: that any future technological arms race will rely heavily on the dream of building ever cheaper, ever more capable weapons systems based on the rapid development of near-instant communications, artificial intelligence, and the ability to deploy such systems on short notice.
The vision Hicks put forward to the NDIA is, you might already have noticed, untethered from the slightest urge to respond diplomatically or politically to the challenge of Beijing as a rising great power. It matters little that those would undoubtedly be the most effective ways to head off a future conflict with China.
Such a non-military approach would be grounded in a clearly articulated return to this country’s longstanding “One China” policy. Under it, the U.S. would forgo any hint of the formal political recognition of the island of Taiwan as a separate state, while Beijing would commit itself to limiting to peaceful means its efforts to absorb that island.
There are numerous other issues where collaboration between the two nations could move the U.S. and China from a policy of confrontation to one of cooperation, as noted in a new paper by my colleague Jake Werner of the Quincy Institute: “1) development in the Global South; 2) addressing climate change; 3) renegotiating global trade and economic rules; and 4) reforming international institutions to create a more open and inclusive world order.” Achieving such goals on this planet now might seem like a tall order, but the alternative — bellicose rhetoric and aggressive forms of competition that increase the risk of war — should be considered both dangerous and unacceptable.
On the other side of the equation, proponents of increasing Pentagon spending to address the purported dangers of the rise of China are masters of threat inflation. They find it easy and satisfying to exaggerate both Beijing’s military capabilities and its global intentions in order to justify keeping the military-industrial complex amply funded into the distant future……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
The notion that advanced military technology could be the magic solution to complex security challenges runs directly against the actual record of the Pentagon and the arms industry over the past five decades. In those years, supposedly “revolutionary” new systems like the F-35 combat aircraft, the Army’s Future Combat System (FCS), and the Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship have been notoriously plagued by cost overruns, schedule delays, performance problems, and maintenance challenges that have, at best, severely limited their combat capabilities. In fact, the Navy is already planning to retire a number of those Littoral Combat Ships early, while the whole FCS program was canceled outright.
In short, the Pentagon is now betting on a complete transformation of how it and the industry do business in the age of AI — a long shot, to put it mildly.
But you can count on one thing: the new approach is likely to be a gold mine for weapons contractors, even if the resulting weaponry doesn’t faintly perform as advertised. This quest will not be without political challenges, most notably finding the many billions of dollars needed to pursue the goals of the Replicator Initiative, while staving off lobbying by producers of existing big-ticket items like aircraft carriers, bombers, and fighter jets…………………………………………………………………….
The Pentagon has long built its strategy around supposed technological marvels like the “electronic battlefield” in the Vietnam era; the “revolution in military affairs,” first touted in the early 1990s; and the precision-guided munitions praised since at least the 1991 Persian Gulf war. It matters little that such wonder weapons have never performed as advertised. For example, a detailed Government Accountability Office report on the bombing campaign in the Gulf War found that “the claim by DOD [Department of Defense] and contractors of a one-target, one-bomb capability for laser-guided munitions was not demonstrated in the air campaign where, on average, 11 tons of guided and 44 tons of unguided munitions were delivered on each successfully destroyed target.”
When such advanced weapons systems can be made to work, at enormous cost in time and money, they almost invariably prove of limited value, even against relatively poorly armed adversaries . (as in Iraq and Afghanistan in this century). China, a great power rival with a modern industrial base and a growing arsenal of sophisticated weaponry, is another matter. The quest for decisive military superiority over Beijing and the ability to win a war against a nuclear-armed power should be (but isn’t) considered a fool’s errand, more likely to spur a war than deter it, with potentially disastrous consequences for all concerned.
Perhaps most dangerous of all, a drive for the full-scale production of AI-based weaponry will only increase the likelihood that future wars could be fought all too disastrously without human intervention. As Michael Klare pointed out in a report for the Arms Control Association, relying on such systems will also magnify the chances of technical failures, as well as misguided AI-driven targeting decisions that could spur unintended slaughter and decision-making without human intervention. The potentially disastrous malfunctioning of such autonomous systems might, in turn, only increase the possibility of nuclear conflict.
It would still be possible to rein in the Pentagon’s techno-enthusiasm by slowing the development of the kinds of systems highlighted in Hicks’s speech, while creating international rules of the road regarding their future development and deployment. But the time to start pushing back against yet another misguided “techno-revolution” is now, before automated warfare increases the risk of a global catastrophe. Emphasizing new weaponry over creative diplomacy and smart political decisions is a recipe for disaster in the decades to come. There has to be a better way. https://scheerpost.com/2023/10/04/ai-goes-to-war/
“We should seriously consider whether it is in U.S. interests to help Saudi Arabia develop a domestic nuclear program,” 19 Democratic senators and independent Bernie Sanders wrote.
Common Dreams, BRETT WILKINS, Oct 04, 2023 #nuclear #anti-nuclear #nuclear-free #NoNukes
Amid reports that Saudi Arabia is seeking United States support for its nuclear energy program—whose capacities critics fear could be utilized to develop nuclear weapons—a group of 20 U.S. senators on Wednesday urged President Joe Biden to “seriously consider” whether such a move is in the national interest as the administration brokers a possible normalization deal between the kingdom and Israel.
In addition to concerns over the fundamentalist monarchy’s desire for a U.S. security guarantee as a condition for normalizing relations with apartheid Israel, as well as the future of a two-state solution in illegally occupied Palestine, the senators note in a letter to Biden that “the Saudi government is also reportedly seeking U.S. support to develop a civilian nuclear program, and to purchase more advanced U.S. weaponry.”
“While we should seriously consider whether it is in U.S. interests to help Saudi Arabia develop a domestic nuclear program, we should always maintain the high bar of the ‘gold standard’ 123 Agreement and insist on adherence to the Additional Protocol,” the senators wrote, referring to a provision of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 requiring a country seeking a nuclear cooperation deal with the United States to commit to a set of nine nonproliferation criteria and expanded International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections. The U.S. has entered into such agreements with more than two dozen countries, Taiwan, and the IAEA…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………more https://www.commondreams.org/news/saudi-arabia-nuclear
By Robert C. KoehlerWednesday, October 4th, 2023 #Ukraine #nuclear #nuclear-free #anti-nuclear #NoNukes
“………………………………What would shut down if Congress choked off funding? The Department of Defense informed the nation: “During a government shutdown, DOD still must continue to defend and protect the United States and conduct on-going military operations.”
The superficial certainty of these words jolted me. This was cliché writ large: “continue to defend and protect the United States.” The words took American vulnerability for granted, summoning a basic national lie. Nations are always in conflict. The need for armed defense — “ongoing military operations” — is a basic truth and must not be questioned.
A Pentagon spokesman assured us that “the U.S. military is going to continue to do its job and protect our national security interests.”
What “interests” are being referenced? The untouched cliché is the fact of an ever-hostile world. National interests are things like, you know: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The larger world hates this! The Defense Department’s assurances have the depth of a third-grade coloring book.
And an NPR story noted that a shutdown would strategically “play into the hands of U.S. competitors” — China, Russia, etc. — and, uh oh, we can’t let that happen, right?
In my unprotected emotional state, the shallowness of such “warnings” was almost too much to bear. Global warming, the threat of nuclear war — that’s stuff for another story. This story is about national defense, which requires a seriously limited understanding of our enemies and competitors. This is about winning and losing — abstractly, of course. Don’t think about the corpses that are piling up.
Why, oh why, I found myself quietly screaming, does militarism and national “defense” always get a free pass or a quick shrug? Why is killing for peace so easily taken for granted? As we approach the sixtieth anniversary of the JFK assassination, I found myself reaching out to the words he spoke in his inaugural address: “So let us begin anew — remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof. Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.”
Kennedy, in the wake of the Cuban Missile Crisis, also said, in defiance of the defense establishment: “So, let us not be blind to our differences — but let us also direct attention to our common interests and to the means by which those differences can be resolved. And if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity. For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal.”
I quoted these words recently in a column but they are too valuable to let go, especially in this criminally simplified world of “global competition.” We know the world is far more complex than that — unless we’re talking about U.S. militarism. Then our awareness returns to the third grade, or earlier. ………………………..
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Federal regulators Wednesday rejected a request from two environmental groups to immediately shut down one of two reactors at California’s last nuclear power plant.
Friends of the Earth and Mothers for Peace said in a petition filed last month with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that long-postponed tests needed to be conducted on critical machinery at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, located midway between Los Angeles and San Francisco. They argued the equipment could fail and cause a catastrophe.
In an order dated Tuesday, the NRC took no action on the request to immediately shut down the Unit 1 reactor and instead asked agency staff to review it.
The NRC also rejected a request to convene a hearing to reconsider a 2003 decision by staff to extend the testing schedule for the Unit 1 pressure vessel until 2025. The vessels are thick steel containers that hold nuclear fuel and cooling water in the reactors.
According to the groups, the last inspections on the vessel took place between 2003 and 2005. The utility postponed further testing in favor of using results from similar reactors to justify continued operations, they said.
The commission found there was no justification for a hearing.
The groups said in a statement that the decision showed “a complete lack of concern for the safety and security of the people living near” the plant, which started operating in the mid-1980s.
Operator Pacific Gas & Electric had said the plant was in “full compliance” with industry guidance and regulatory standards for monitoring and evaluating the safety of the reactor vessels.
The petition marked the latest development in a long fight over the operation and safety of the seaside plant, which sits on a bluff above the Pacific Ocean. In August, a state judge rejected a lawsuit filed by Friends of the Earth that sought to block PG&E from seeking to extend the operating life of the plant.
PG&E agreed in 2016 to shutter the plant by 2025, but at the direction of the state changed course and now intends to seek a longer operating run for the twin reactors. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who once was a leading voice to close the plant, said last year that Diablo Canyon’s power is needed beyond 2025 to ward off possible blackouts as California transitions to solar and other renewable energy sources.
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL 4 Oct 23
Though little noted on mainstream news, America’s disastrous proxy war against Russia was a factor in the MAGA Republicans mutiny against House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.
Their only good spending cut, which fueled their removal bid, was ending all military aid to Ukraine. All their Republican colleagues and the entire Democratic House support endless war in Ukraine killing hundreds of thousands to protect US hegemony in Europe.
To placate the MAGA’s, McCarthy inserted an end to Ukraine aid that would be sure to doom Democratic support, forcing a shutdown. Yet all but one of 210 Democrats voted for the Ukraine weaponless bill. The MAGA’s, led by Rep. Matt Gaetz, cried ‘FOUL’, claiming McCarthy made a secret deal with the Democrats to support more Ukraine aid once the shutdown crisis cooled. When called out on his likely subterfuge, McCarthy dared Gaetz to ‘Bring it on.’ Gaetz replied “I just did”, and quickly sent McCarthy packing with 100% Democratic support.
Mike Quigley of Illinois, sole Democrat voting against the bill, apparently didn’t get the leadership memo to support the bill without Ukraine aid. In a scurrilous insult to peace loving folks, Quigley blasted the bill as is a “Victory for Putin and Putin-sympathizers everywhere. We now have 45 days to correct this grave mistake before Russia friendly Republicans dig in their heels or claim victory in the next funding agreement.”
Whatever their motives, at least those ‘Russia friendly Republicans’ aren’t virulent war supporters like Quigley, cheering on America’s newest forever war, causing massive Ukraine death and destruction to maintain US dominance abroad.
The next shutdown fight looms November 17. Time for both parties to fully embrace negotiations over weapons in Ukraine to simplify the spending impasse. No more weapons may help keep the government afloat into next year while saving hundreds of billions in wasteful spending. More importantly, it may save the senseless loss of life and country in Ukraine.
Ben Henry KSTP, October 4, 2023 #nuclear #anti-nuclear #nuclear-free #NoNukes
Internal communication within state agencies highlights what appears to be a lack of coordination in responding to a radioactive leak at a nuclear power plant.
5 EYEWITNESS NEWS obtained hundreds of records in a public data request surrounding communication about Xcel Energy’s Monticello nuclear power plant leak from late last year.
According to Xcel, it detected the leak on Nov. 22, 2022. The 400,000-gallon spill was contaminated with tritium, which, according to the power company, is a compound that emits low levels of radiation.
From the start, Xcel says the leak posed no health or safety risk.
While the leak was detected in November, it wasn’t until mid-March this year that the public was informed. Now, after analyzing state data, we’re getting a better idea of how the months of communication, before informing the public, within state agencies went.
In an email between two Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) officials on Feb. 22 — three months after the leak was detected — one official wrote in part, “there’s a lot to say about this situation. It’s not helped by the fact that no state or federal agency has really stepped up to the plate and taken complete charge of the situation.”
That email goes on to say that in a meeting with Xcel, the MPCA official “told them we were concerned about Tritium getting into the Miss. River and that everything should be done to prevent that from happening,” eventually adding, “Xcel has not informed local Emergency Response authorities or legislators (something I told them to do).”
Then on March 2 — two weeks before Xcel publicly announced the leak — the same MPCA official informed colleagues that they would be the lead agency but that they’re still working out how other state agencies will respond – writing, “A “kickoff” meeting for involved staff is being scheduled. To be clear, there’s no new information prompting this action but rather a growing need for better coordination.”…………………… https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/state-records-highlight-lack-of-coordination-in-nuclear-leak-response/
The New York Times has published another CIA press release disguised as news, this time aimed at whipping up paranoia toward anyone who criticizes the US proxy war in Ukraine.
The article is titled “Putin’s Next Target: U.S. Support for Ukraine, Officials Say”. Its author, Julian E Barnes, has written so many New York Times articles with headlines ending in the words “Officials Say” that we can safely assume the primary reason for his continued employment in that paper is because empire managers within the US government have designated him someone who can be trusted to print what they want printed. This designation would make him a reliable supplier of “scoops” (read: regurgitations of unevidenced government claims) for The New York Times.
“American officials said they are convinced that Mr. Putin intends to try to end U.S. and European support for Ukraine by using his spy agencies to push propaganda supporting pro-Russian political parties and by stoking conspiracy theories with new technologies,” Barnes writes.
Of course the report never gets any more specific than that, and of course the “American officials” Barnes cites promote their unevidenced assertions under cover of complete anonymity.
“The American officials spoke on the condition their names not be reported so they could discuss sensitive intelligence,” Barnes writes.
The only named source cited in the article is a CIA veteran named Beth Sanner, who says that “Russia will not give up on disinformation campaigns,” but adds that “we don’t know what it is going to look like.”
And that’s really the whole article right there. Putin is going to be using his spy agencies to promote political parties and messages which support ending the practice of pouring billions of dollars of weapons into Ukraine, but nobody knows what that will look like exactly, so we all have to just be sort of generally distrustful toward anyone who doesn’t think it’s a swell idea to perpetuate a horrific war with potentially world-ending consequences, because they might be part of an unspecified Russian influence operation.
We saw a similar report from CNN a few weeks ago, in which the public was warned that Russia’s FSB is working to convert westerners into mouthpieces for Russian propaganda using methods so sneaky and subtle that those westerners wouldn’t even know it’s happening. Again, details were extremely vague and the only obvious response to the information provided is for everyone to just get really paranoid toward anyone saying anything that doesn’t support current US foreign policy toward Russia.
As a thought experiment, imagine what it would look like if the CIA or some other agency wanted to advance US information interests by making the public distrustful of any people or information which go against US strategic objectives. Try to imagine some of the things they might say or do.
Do you imagine it would look much different than what we’re seeing currently? Feeding trusted mainstream news reporters extremely vague stories about the Kremlin trying to deceive people into opposing the longstanding agendas of the US intelligence cartel, using online media and social subversion? Can you think of a more effective way to help shore up trust in your preferred narratives and sow distrust in narratives you do not prefer?
Here’s another one: imagine a state media outlet for a tyrannical dictatorship. Think about how its news stories are made, how it would often take orders from the government on what to report and what not to report, and how all its printing or broadcasting would always align with the information interests of that government.
Now ask yourself: in what material way is that reporting different from these CIA press releases we’re seeing from outlets like The New York Times and CNN? In both scenarios the government is feeding the media information it wants printed, and in both scenarios there will be consequences if the media don’t obey. In our hypothetical dictatorship those consequences might be more severe, but in our real life scenario the consequences are no less real.
If Mr Barnes had refused to work on this story, he would have lost his “scoop” and it would have been given to someone else, perhaps at a competing outlet. If Barnes ceased uncritically reporting unevidenced assertions from anonymous government officials, his prominence in the mainstream media would quickly fizzle, and his career would dry up. If The New York Times ceased functioning as a reliable outlet for the credulous printing of unevidenced government claims, then the government agencies who’ve been elevating the paper to prominence with their artificial “scoops” can take those hot stories to another competing outlet and let them get the subscriptions and the glory.
In both scenarios, the government is able to get its propaganda messaging printed as hard news reporting. In one scenario the reporter reports what the government wants because they work for the government, in the other scenario the reporter reports what the government wants because that’s the only way to have a career in media outlets that are owned and controlled by the plutocrats who benefit from the political status quo the government is premised upon. The only major difference is that in our hypothetical dictatorship, the public probably knows it’s being fed propaganda, and is therefore more likely to take what they’re being told with a grain of salt.
In a tyrannical dictatorship, the press is operated by employees of the government. In a Free Democracy™️, the press is operated by employees of the oligarchs who operate the government. In both cases you’re getting state propaganda, but in one of them the propaganda is disguised as objective news reporting.
There is considerable anti-war sentiment among voters worldwide — which explains why candidates run on peace promises (Obama, Zelensky, Trump). There is also considerable pro-war sentiment among corporations who build weapons of mass destruction, and the think-tanks they fundto support them.
This push-pull has nudged warmakers into branding wars as “D for Democrat” or “R for Republican” in order to whip up support and manage dissent. Thus Democrats support President Biden’s proxy war on Russia via Ukraine while Republicans and third parties (Greens, Libertarians, Communists) don’t.
But based on the congressional circus this week, maybe that is not such a good strategy?
Those of us opposed to ALL wars our government wages have experienced the partisan split in who will stand with us. When a Republican is in the White House, Democrats come out in droves. Then when an Obama or a Biden is elected, they go home.
Then, the parties wage information wars to support their team. These have ramped up considerably to insist that Putin = Hitler (just silly), that there are no Nazis in Ukraine (maybe they all went to Canada?), and that funding Ukraine’s government is a higher priority than funding our own. Even though as far back as July a CNN poll found a majority in the U.S. opposed sending any more money to Ukraine.
In order to avert a federal government shutdown over what to fund, we heard from Democrats that it was the bad Republicans’ fault.
The US president said on Sunday he was “sick and tired” of the political brinkmanship, and that US support for Ukraine could not be interrupted “under any circumstances”.
Even though Democrats never move left and always move right — or maybe because of that? — the Punch and Judy show where the two corporate parties bash each other constantly is having a long run.
Then we heard that the bad Republicans would only vote for averting a shutdown if it stripped out “aid” to Ukraine (currently at $180 billion and counting). And it worked! Worked, that is, after a fire drill shut Congress down when Democratic Congressman Jamaal Bowman pulled a fire alarm and delayed the vote a bit.
He swears this was an honest mistake. But I suspect the delay was so that some more back room deals on terms of the funding could be hammered out.
Received wisdom has it that Democrats want WW3 with Russia while Republicans want WW3 with China. But Greens like me see the corporate parties supporting all the wars and I think they’re all nuts.
I can see where the U.S. once believed it could beat Russia as it used the NATO alliance and CIA color revolutions to foment trouble like civil war for Ukraine. Looking at the situation today, it’s clear that few aside from delusional thinkers allied with the Biden administration believes this is still the case. Russia has objectively kicked Ukraine/NATO’s butt while the response in the West is best epitomized by the Canadian Parliament’s standing ovation for a literal Nazi “who fought the Russians in WW2.”
“Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recognize Yaroslav Hunka, who fought with the First Ukrainian Division in World War II, in the House of Commons in Ottawa on Sept. 22, 2023.” | Patrick Doyle/The Canadian Press
(If you’re unclear on WW2’s major players and alliances, the late Howard Zinn’s overview can be found here.)
Next up, preparations are already well underway for using Taiwan to create a situation where China feels it must respond to safeguard its own borders and sovereignty. What would lead to the delusion that AUKUS or NATO or U.S.-Japan-South Korea could defeat China in a hot war? Hot warriors falsely claim China is authoritarian, has lost the support of its people, and committed genocide against the Uyghurs.
Word to the U.S.: your government is increasingly authoritarian, has lost the confidence of its people, and has committed genocide in so many places it’s hard to list them all. Maybe just note the ongoing attempted genocide of the indigenous people of North America and leave it at that.
End of the American Dream. Life As You Have Known It Will Never Be The Same Again… by Michael
It would be difficult to overstate the importance of the Military Industrial Complex to our society. It employs millions of people, and it brings in hundreds of billions of dollars each year. The Military Industrial Complex has always been one of the central pillars of our economy, and these days business is booming thanks to the war in Ukraine and the possibility of a war with China. Needless to say, those that run the Military Industrial Complex want the gravy train to continue, and so politicians that are pro-war are showered with campaign contributions. In both major parties, politicians that are pro-war greatly outnumber those that are anti-war, and that is not likely to change any time soon.
Smedley D. Butler fought in four major conflicts, and in 1935 he astutely observed that “war is a racket”…
“WAR is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.”
If the Military Industrial Complex suddenly disappeared, it would leave a giant, gaping hole in our economy that would be extremely difficult to fill. In an excellent piece that he posted earlier this week, Richard C. Cook shared some numbers about the Military Industrial Complex that are absolutely astounding…
Today about 2.1 million people are employed by the defense industry. According to Acara Solutions, a major MIC recruiting firm, their average annual salary is $106,700, 40 percent higher than the national average. The companies they work for produced revenues in 2022 of $741 billion. How much of their production is high-priced junk, no one knows. The performance of U.S.-produced armaments in the Ukraine conflict does not seem impressive. No modern U.S. weapons have ever been tested in an industrial-type war against an equal adversary.
The MIC also includes active-duty uniformed personnel of 1.37 million and reserves of 849,000. There are 750 U.S. military bases in more than 80 countries outside of the U.S. More than 100,000 U.S. military personnel are stationed in Europe. Annual salary and benefits of the military are currently $146 billion per year, escalating with COLAs compounded at two to three percent annually, sometimes more. Some former U.S. military personnel are assumed to be fighting in Ukraine as mercenaries or helping direct the fighting from safe locations like Kiev or Lvov.
Then there are the civilian employees. According to the DoD, it employs more than 700,000 civilians “in an array of critical positions worldwide,” with compensation totaling about $70 billion. According to the Government Accountability Office, we may also add 560,000 contractor employees, whose compensation is typically higher than the career workforce.
We can also add hundreds of thousands of executives, managers, employees and contractors of the three-letter Deep State agencies, such as the CIA, NSA, DEA, FBI, and now DHS, etc., who interface with the MIC day in and day out and are part of the same fabric of state-sanctioned force and enemy identification and interdiction.
In the entire history of the world, we have never seen anything quite like this.
And the Military Industrial Complex absolutely loves Joe Biden, because he has promised to keep the war in Ukraine going “for as long as it takes”…
It is likely that billions of people around the world view the conflict in Ukraine as a proxy war being waged by the U.S. against Russia. US President Joe Biden has pledged to aid Ukraine’s pursuit of victory “for as long as it takes,” without defining what the end state might be. Russian President Vladimir Putin has interpreted U.S. intentions to mean a fight “to the last Ukrainian.”
Unfortunately, there is a problem.
The Ukrainians are running out of warm bodies.
They have literally been grabbing men off the streets and throwing them into vans, but we didn’t care because it wasn’t our sons that were being forced to go to war.
Many Americans cheered when the Ukrainians began their ill-fated “counter-offensive”, but it turned out to be a disaster.
A senior U.S. intel official recently admitted to journalist Seymour Hersh that Ukraine has suffered approximately 75,000 casualties during this counter-offensive…
“There is no discussion in his headquarters or in the Biden White House of a ceasefire and no interest in talks that could lead to an end to the slaughter,” Hersh said.
Speaking of the Ukrainian claims of slow progress in an offensive that has lost an estimated 75,000 casualties, the official told Hersh: “It’s all lies.”
On many battlefields in Ukraine, there are unburied dead bodies just laying around all over the place.
As the anniversary of the purported Biden Regime sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline approaches Sept. 26, veteran investigative reporter Seymour Hersh blamed a ”secret disinformation operation“ by CIA and MI-6 for misleading the public about the disastrous state of the US-led war effort.
“The war is over. Russia has won. There is no Ukrainian offensive anymore, but the White House and the American media have to keep the lie going,“ a senior US intel official told Hersh. “The truth is if the Ukrainian army is ordered to continue the offensive, the army would mutiny. The soldiers aren’t willing to die any more, but this doesn’t fit the B.S. that is being authored by the Biden White House.”
Where do we go from here?
The Military Industrial Complex certainly does not want this conflict to end, and Joe Biden has no intention of backing down.
So more warm bodies will be needed.
That is one of the reasons why there has been so much chatter about bringing back the draft here in the United States.
Recruitment has been way down in recent years, but our leaders desperately want to win this war with Russia and they also want to be ready to fight a war with China over Taiwan.
And so the stage is being set to draft young American boys and young American girls into military service…
The most recent edition of the US Army War College’s academic journal includes a highly disturbing essay on what lessons the US military should take away from the continuing war in Ukraine. By far the most concerning and most relevant section for the average American citizen is a subsection entitled “Casualties, Replacements, and Reconstitutions” which, to cut right to the chase, directly states, “Large-scale combat operations troop requirements may well require a reconceptualization of the 1970s and 1980s volunteer force and a move toward partial conscription.”
The context for this supposed need to reinstate conscription is the estimate that were the US to enter into a large-scale conflict, every day it would likely suffer thirty-six hundred casualties and require eight hundred replacements, again per day. The report notes that over the course of twenty years in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US suffered fifty thousand casualties, a number which would likely be reached in merely two weeks of large-scale intensive combat.
The military is already facing an enormous recruiting shortfall. Last year the army alone fell short of its goal by fifteen thousand soldiers and is on track to be short an additional twenty thousand this year. On top of that, the report notes that the Individual Ready Reserve, which is composed of former service personnel who do not actively train and drill but may be called back into active service in the event they are needed, has dropped from seven hundred thousand in 1973 to seventy-six thousand now.
Do you want your children to be fed into a meat grinder on the other side of the globe?
If not, it is time to stand up and say something………………………………………………………………………………………
We need to pull back from the brink before it is too late.
But our leaders won’t do that.
They don’t want to upset the Military Industrial Complex.
Unfortunately, we could also soon find ourselves in a war with China……………………………………………
The Military Industrial Complex wants to make even more money, and our politicians want to keep the campaign contributions rolling in.
So we will continue to speed toward a date with the unthinkable as the fate of our society hangs in the balance.
The U.S. government has embarked upon the first comprehensive modernization of its strategic nuclear arsenal since the Cold War ended three decades ago. The Department of Defense is simultaneously developing a new generation of ballistic-missile submarines, land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, and long-range bombers.
Collectively, these three systems are referred to as the strategic “triad.” Every nuclear posture review conducted by the government since the Soviet Union collapsed—there have been five counting Biden’s—has endorsed the triad as the best approach to assuring nuclear deterrence.
During the Cold War, each leg of the triad was periodically modernized. However, with the waning of the Soviet threat, improvement slowed. As a result, the nuclear arsenal has aged markedly. With great-power competition now restored to prominence in the nation’s defense strategy, the deterrent is overdue for revitalization.
The most recent authoritative estimate of nuclear-weapons costs, produced by the Congressional Budget Office in July, projects that the Department of Defense and Department of Energy will spend $247 billion during the ten years ending in 2032 to modernize the nuclear force.
An even larger amount will be allocated in subsequent years, delivering revenues to hundreds of companies. For instance, industrial conglomerate TextronTXT-1.1% will provide reentry-vehicle technology for carrying nuclear warheads, and BoeingBA-2% hopes to build a successor to the E-4B flying command post (popularly known as the Doomsday plane).
However, four companies are poised to dominate modernization of the nuclear arsenal, each of them ultimately realizing tens of billions of dollars in sales.
Northrop Grumman NOC+0.5%is the big winner in this generation’s round of competitions to rebuild the nuclear force. ……………… The company thus finds itself firmly ensconced as a key contractor on all three legs of the triad for decades to come—an unprecedented achievement in the history of the nuclear program.
General Dynamics, a Virginia-based defense and aerospace conglomerate, will build the 12 Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines destined to carry two-thirds of U.S. strategic warheads, just as it built the existing Ohio class of strategic subs……….. Today it is the world’s leading producer of undersea warships, supporting modernization of both the U.S. and United Kingdom nuclear deterrents.
Lockheed Martin LMT-0.3%is the world’s biggest military contractor, and will play a number of roles in nuclear modernization. The Maryland-based company has built every generation of submarine-launched ballistic missile from the early Polaris weapons to today’s Trident II D5……………………………………………………………………………………..
Like General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin contributes to my think tank.
At the Sept. 21 meeting of the Indian Point Decommissioning Oversight Board, a representative for Holtec, which is decommissioning the plant on the Hudson River near Peekskill, said he was not going to discuss what options it was considering. But he did say it expects the process will take longer.
“There will be a schedule impact; I don’t think you can avoid it,” said Rich Burroni, who was attending his last oversight meeting because he was recently promoted to become Holtec’s chief nuclear officer.
No remaining options are without their opponents. Boiling the water so that it evaporates would transfer its radiation to the air. Dumping it in the ocean would violate international law. Mixing it with concrete and shipping it to the western U.S. to be buried, which other decommissioned plants have done, has been criticized as an environmental justice violation, since it passes the risks to another community………………………………………………………………………………………
Dave Lochbaum, the oversight board’s nuclear expert, noted that in 2009 a tank at Indian Point failed, leaking 10,000 gallons a day “for a while” until the leak was discovered. “The result of that is the contamination gets into places it shouldn’t be, in higher levels of contamination,” he said.
When asked why the tanks fail so often, Lochbaum said that the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) policies don’t encourage the development of better tanks.
“If you’ve ever paid a nickel for an overdue library book, you’ve paid a nickel more than the NRC has ever fined anyone for spilling millions of gallons of contaminated water,” he said. “Because there’s no sanction for doing wrong, there’s no incentive for getting it right.”
Lochbaum also had harsh words for the NRC when making a presentation on how the dry casks that store the spent fuel itself are inspected. Almost all of Indian Point’s spent nuclear fuel has been loaded into metal canisters, which are lowered into concrete hulls to protect them until they can be shipped to a yet-to-be-built permanent facility. The casks are supposed to be inspected on a regular basis to make sure they aren’t leaking or in danger of cracking.
But an audit by the NRC released this year found that for the past 20 years, nuclear power plants in the Southeast weren’t being inspected nearly as often or as robustly as they should have been. And inspectors weren’t qualified. Lochbaum said that in some cases, the inspectors didn’t even enter the fenced areas where the dry casks were located.
“They walked around the outside of the fence,” Lochbaum said. “That’s probably not adequate inspections.”
He also took issue with the fact that the NRC only spot-checks casks, rather than inspecting them all. At the same time, inspecting all of the casks properly is impractical because the process exposes inspectors to a low dose of radiation.
Public records indicate that the casks at Indian Point have been inspected more often and more thoroughly than those in the Southeast, but Lochbaum said that it’s still not clear if the inspectors are qualified or how many hours were spent.
Just the other day CNN anchor Erin Burnett ………. pausing to explain to her audience that this funding is actually good for Americans, because it goes straight into the US arms industry.
There’s been an astonishingly brazen propaganda push to normalize war profiteering in Ukraine as Kyiv coordinates with the arms industry and western governments to convert the war-ravaged nation into a major domestic weapons manufacturer, thereby turning Ukrainians into proxies of the military industrial complex as well as the Pentagon.
At an event in Kyiv which hosted 250 “defense” industry corporations from 30 different countries on Friday, President Zelensky gave a speech urging war profiteers to open factories in Ukraine to cut out the middleman of securing and delivering so many weapons from abroad. This is an investment that the arms industry would ostensibly have plenty of time to set up, given that western officials are now going out of their way to communicate to the public that this war will stretch on for many more years to come.
Zelensky’s speech twice made use of the phrase “defense-industrial complex”, and used the phrase “arsenal of the free world” no fewer than three times.
“Ukraine is developing a special economic regime for the defense-industrial complex,” Zelensky said. “To give all the opportunities to realize their potential to every company that works for the sake of defense — in Ukraine and with Ukraine or that wants to come to Ukraine.”
“Right now, the most powerful military-industrial complexes are being determined, as are their priorities and the global standard of defense. All of this is being determined in Ukraine,” Zelensky tweeted with photos from the event.
This move has been accompanied in recent weeks by some of the most appalling mass media headlines that I have ever seen, all geared toward normalizing the military industrial complex in the eyes of the public.
In an amazingly awful Wall Street Journal op-ed titled titled “In Defense of the Defense Industry” and subtitled “Populists of the right and left attack U.S. companies that make weapons. Who do they think protects us?”, Future of Capitalism’s Ira Stoll argues that the military industrial complex is actually a wonderful thing we should all love and support.
“The weapons industry protects America and its allies, keeping us safe from ruthless enemies who would otherwise exterminate or enslave us,” Stoll writes. “Raytheon helps make weapons systems that defend Israeli civilians against attacks from Iran-backed terrorist groups. These include the Iron Dome, David’s Sling, SkyHunter interceptor systems and Tamir missiles. Raytheon also produces the Javelin antitank missile that Ukraine has used against Russian armor and the early-warning radars that would detect incoming missiles aimed at the U.S.”
Stoll does not name the alternate universe he is describing in which the US military is used to keep Americans safe rather than to advance imperial interests abroad.
Another recent Wall Street Journal article titled “The War in Ukraine Is Also a Giant Arms Fair” and subtitled “Arms makers are getting orders for weapons being put to the test on the battlefield” glorifies the way war machinery is being field tested on human bodies to the benefit of war profiteers.
“The Panzerhaubitze howitzer is part of an arsenal of weapons being put to the test in Ukraine in what has become the world’s largest arms fair,” writes WSJ’s Alistair MacDonald. “Companies that make the weapons being used in Ukraine have won orders and resurrected production lines. The deployment of billions of dollars worth of equipment in a major land war has also given manufacturers and militaries a unique opportunity to analyze the battlefield performance of weapons, and learn how best to use them.”
A Reuters article from two weeks ago titled “At London arms fair, global war fears are good for business” gushes over how much money is being raked in by arms manufacturers as a result of this war, with one unnamed arms industry executive telling Reuters, “War is good for business.”
Just the other day CNN anchor Erin Burnett followed up some clips of “far right lawmakers” voicing their opposition to funding for the Ukraine proxy war by pausing to explain to her audience that this funding is actually good for Americans, because it goes straight into the US arms industry.
“It’s worthwhile with all of this gaining some steam in public perception to be clear on some facts,” Burnett said. “First and foremost, the vast majority of this money is going to American companies and jobs, right, because those are the people that are making the Abrams tanks, the ammo and everything else. And you take Lockheed Martin, which makes the HIMARS, that have been core to Ukraine’s counteroffensive, the company announced it’s going to increase its workforce in Camden, Arkansas, by 20 percent, just because of this new demand.”
“That money is going to America,” Burnett added.
All this propaganda energy is going into normalizing the act of war profiteering because if you let the idea stand on its own, it would make people scream in horror. The fact that a deliberately-provoked war is being used as a giant field demo to show prospective buyers and investors how effective various weapons systems can be at ripping apart human bodies in order to profit from all this death and destruction is more nightmarish than anything any dystopian novelist has ever come up with.
Ukraine is a giant advertisement for weapons of mass slaughter, and the cost of that corporate ad is not money but human blood. If you look right at this thing it absolutely chills you to the bone. Which is why so much effort is being poured into making sure people don’t look at it.
nuclear-news 