USA’s new nuclear policies: first strike OK, “usable”weapons, nukes for Europe, for any purpose USA likes, and against non-nuclear nations.

Brandon’s “Usable Nukes” Are the Fast-Track to Jopocalypse MIKE WHITNEY • OCTOBER 31, 2022
“The Biden administration’s Nuclear Posture Review is, at heart, a terrifying document. It not only keeps the world on a path of increasing nuclear risk, in many ways it increases that risk. Citing rising threats from Russia and China, it argues that the only viable U.S. response is to rebuild the entire U.S. nuclear arsenal, maintain an array of dangerous Cold War-era nuclear policies, and threaten the first use of nuclear weapons in a variety of scenarios.” Stephen Young, Union of Concerned Scientists
Maybe you’re one of the millions of people who think the US would never use its nuclear weapons unless the threat of a nuclear attack was imminent.
Well, you’d be wrong, because according to the recently-released Nuclear Posture Review, the bar for using nukes has been significantly lowered. The new standard reads like this: (nukes can be used) “in extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States or its allies and partners.”
“Defend the vital interests of the United States or its allies”??
That’s a pretty broad net, isn’t it? That could include anything from a serious threat to national security to an ordinary economic competitor. And that loosy-goosy definition appears to be just what the authors were looking for. The hardliners wanted to fundamentally change US nuclear doctrine so the conditions under which nukes could be used was greatly expanded. The obvious objective of this dramatic policy-shift is to eliminate any obstacle to the free and unfettered use of nuclear weapons. Which is precisely what the neocons have always wanted; a green light to Armageddon. Now they got what they wanted. Here are a few of the changes in policy that suggest that a full-blown nuclear war is no longer a remote possibility, but an increasingly likely prospect.
1– First-Strike Use: Biden refuses to rule out first-strike use of US nuclear weapons …in reversal of his campaign promise. This is from The Daily Mail:
“… on the campaign trail, Biden had vowed to switch to a ‘sole purpose’ doctrine, which maintains that the US would only use nuclear weapons to respond to another nation’s nuclear attack….
President Joe Biden is abandoning a campaign vow to alter longstanding US nuclear doctrine, and will instead embrace existing policy that reserves America’s right to use nukes in a first-strike scenario, according to multiple reports.” (Daily Mail)
2– Nuclear Escalation: The Biden team has accelerated the deployment of modernized U.S. B61 tactical nuclear weapons to NATO bases in Europe. (The B61-12 carries a lower yield nuclear warhead than earlier versions but is more accurate and can penetrate below ground.) This is from Reuters:
Russia said on Saturday that the accelerated deployment of modernised U.S. B61 tactical nuclear weapons at NATO bases in Europe would lower the “nuclear threshold” and that Russia would take the move into account in its military planning.
Amid the Ukraine crisis, Politico reported on Oct. 26 that the United States told a closed NATO meeting this month that it would accelerate the deployment of a modernised version of the B61, the B61-12, with the new weapons arriving at European bases in December, several months earlier than planned.
“We cannot ignore the plans to modernize nuclear weapons, those free-fall bombs that are in Europe,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko told state RIA news agency. (Reuters)
3– ‘Tactical’ means ‘Usable’: Biden’s new regime of low-yield nukes (which can still blow up a city the size of New York.) are called “tactical” weapons because they are designed for use on the battlefield, which is to say, Biden no longer limits the use of nukes for national defense but also supports their use in conventional wars. (like Ukraine?) This is from Aljazeera:
“Tactical nuclear warheads were created to give military commanders more flexibility on the battlefield. In the mid-1950s, as more powerful thermonuclear bombs were being built and tested, military planners thought smaller weapons with a shorter range would be more useful in ‘tactical’ situations,” according to Al Jazeera’s defence analyst Alex Gatopoulos. (Aljazeera)
4– Fasttrack to Nuclear War: Biden’s New Euro-Nukes have lowered the threshold for nuclear war. This is from MSN:
Russia said on Saturday that the accelerated deployment of modernized US B61 tactical nuclear weapons at NATO bases in Europe would lower the “nuclear threshold” and that Russia would take the move into account in its military planning…
“The United States is modernizing them, increasing their accuracy and reducing the power of the nuclear charge, that is, they turn these weapons into ‘battlefield weapons’, thereby reducing the nuclear threshold,” Grushko said….
Russia’s ambassador to Washington, Anatoly Antonov, said on Saturday on Telegram that the new B61 bombs had a “strategic significance” as Russia’s tactical nuclear weapons were in storage, yet these U.S. bombs would be just a short flight from Russia’s borders.
“We cannot ignore the plans to modernize nuclear weapons, those free-fall bombs that are in Europe,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko told state RIA news agency. (MSM)
5– Increasing the Reasons for using Nukes: The Nuclear Posture Review abandons Biden’s promise to ensure that US nuclear weapons would be used for the “sole purpose” of deterring or responding to a nuclear attack. Instead, the NPR states that the US will consider the use of nuclear weapons “in extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States or its allies and partners.”
Sole purpose could significantly reduce the risk of unintended escalation and increase the credibility of more flexible and realistic nonnuclear response options in a range of importance contingencies.” (Federation of American Scientists)
6– More Escalation: The US now reserves the right to use its nukes against non-nuclear weapon countries. This is from an article at Bloomberg News:
The Pentagon’s new National Defense Strategy rejected limits on using nuclear weapons long championed by arms control advocates and in the past by President Joe Biden.
Citing burgeoning threats from China and Russia, the Defense Department said in the document released Thursday that “by the 2030s the United States will, for the first time in its history face two major nuclear powers as strategic competitors and potential adversaries.” In response, the US will “maintain a very high bar for nuclear employment” without ruling out using the weapons in retaliation to a non-nuclear strategic threat to the homeland, US forces abroad or allies.” (“Pentagon’s Strategy Won’t Rule Out Nuclear Use Against Non-Nuclear Threats”, Bloomberg)………………………………………………………………………….
The White House, the Pentagon and the entire US foreign policy establishment now march in lockstep behind the most fanatically-lethal defense policy in the nation’s 246-year history. The National Defense Strategy, the Nuclear Posture Review and the National Security Strategy all embrace the same reckless warmongering policy that will inevitably lead to mass annihilation and civilizational collapse. The doves and critical thinkers have all been removed from the foreign policy apparatus while the madmen and warhawks drag the world inexorably towards catastrophe. God help us. https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/brandons-usable-nukes-are-the-fast-track-to-jopocalypse/
French nuclear corporation EDF – facing huge debts, but cosily enmeshed with UK government

But what about the future? EDF is predicted to stack up 100 billion Euros (£87.8 billion) in debt this year and the French government already pumped €3 billion (£2.6 billion) into the company in Spring.
But as you’ll see below, no matter how bad things are there’s always room to give the CEO a pay rise.
In 2020, CEO Lévy was listed as the 9th highest-paid CEO in the utility sector worldwide taking home a salary of €450,000 (£389,500) and €3,660 (£3,150) in benefits.

EDF has been getting cosier and cosier with the government.
And the cosiness isn’t set to end anytime soon, EDF stands in good stead under Liz Truss. The new PM nominated former EDF lobbyist Michael Stott as Downing Street’s new business liaison. Stott, who is also an ex-Tory press officer, is expected to lead the government’s new-build nuclear programme.
EDF: WHEN THE STATE GOES FULL CAPITALIST. https://newint.org/features/2022/10/31/edf-when-state-goes-full-capitalist 31 October 2022
What happens when a state energy company goes multinational? In the second installment of its Heat the Rich series on Britain’s big six energy giants, Corporate Watch puts the spotlight on EDF Energy.
EDF is the fifth biggest energy supplier in the UK currently controlling over 10% of the market. The French multinational is best known for “leading the UK’s nuclear renaissance” operating all eight of the UK’s nuclear power stations.
It’s owned by Electricity of France S.A. (Électricité de France, EDF). A multinational energy producer and supplier primarily (and soon to be solely) owned by the French government. It is one of the world’s top five utility companies.
Created in 1946 by the French government, EDF was set up with the intention of rebuilding France’s power grid following World War Two. Now, 70 years on, EDF has branched out a lot further than France, cashing in on energy users from the USA to India. The group is now made up of 144 subsidiaries.
Despite its name, EDF isn’t just in the energy business. EDF is also involved in the data software, vehicle traceability, investment, and real estate sectors, to name just a few.
EDF uses strategic partnership deals to build its brand, for example, the company is a ‘premium partner’ (and official energy supplier) for the Olympic and Paralympic Games in Paris in 2024.
HOW MANY UK ENERGY CUSTOMERS DOES EDF HAVE?
Electricity (excluding pre-payment): 3 million
Gas (excluding pre-payment): 2.1 million
WHO OWNS IT?
EDF Energy (UK) Ltd is ultimately owned by EDF SA, a French company which is majority owned (84%) by the French government and listed on Euronext, the French stock exchange.
In July 2022, the French government announced it would buy out the outstanding 16% of EDF’s shares, reversing the partial privatization of the company in 2005. But it hit a brick wall when investors threatened to sue the government for losses. The French state started finalising their buyout of 100% shares in EDF in September. But at what price? The other shareholders are demanding a fortune, with the government set to pay a total of 9.7 billion euros (£8.7 billion) of French taxpayers’ money. It’s worth noting that the shareholders set to cash in from this nationalization are investment giants Blackrock and Vanguard Group.
IS EDF SUFFERING AS A RESULT OF THE COST OF LIVING CRISIS?
On the face of it, it does seem like EDF profits have nose-dived in recent years. According to EDF Energy (UK) Ltd’s 2021 accounts, EDF operated a €4.8 billion (£4.2 billion) loss compared to €268 million (£239 million) in 2020. No dividends were paid by EDF Energy (UK) Ltd. in 2021 nor in 2020. However, another UK subsidiary, EDF Energy Holdings Ltd did pay dividends of £1 million in 2021, and £60 million in 2020.
Despite these losses, at the end of 2021 EDF Energy (UK) Ltd still had net assets of €17.9 billion (£16 billion).
Regardless of the UK subsidiary’s accounts, the EDF Group achieved all its financial targets in 2021. Group sales for the year amounted to £8,720m, an increase of 8%. The Group reaped profits of €360 million (£324 million) in 2021, a total reverse in performance from 2020 when the Group made a loss of €2.6 billion (£2.3 billion).
But what about the future? EDF is predicted to stack up 100 billion Euros (£87.8 billion) in debt this year and the French government already pumped €3 billion (£2.6 billion) into the company in Spring. But as you’ll see below, no matter how bad things are there’s always room to give the CEO a pay rise.
WHO RUNS EDF?
Jean-Bernard Lévy, the current CEO of the Group, is due to leave six months early after a fallout at the top between Lévy and French president, Emmanuel Macron, over nuclear energy. Lévy is – however – unlikely to be out of a job after EDF. He was formerly CEO of weapons company Thales, and media company Vivendi, and even did a stint as a technical adviser to a government ministry. In 2020, Lévy was listed as the 9th highest-paid CEO in the utility sector worldwide taking home a salary of €450,000 (£389,500) and €3,660 (£3,150) in benefits.
Moreover, Lévy’s probable successor, Luc Remont, cherrypicked by Macron (whose appointment is just waiting for parliamentary approval), will start on on a lucrative footing after the French Government announced that it would like to increase the new EDF CEO’s salary to attract more candidates. The company CEO’s salary is currently capped at €450,000 (£389,500). Whilst no figure has been publicly stated, the EDF Group is known to pay high salaries. In 2013 it was revealed that former UK CEO, Vincent de Rivaz, received a pay package of £1 million annually in remuneration.
Simone Rossi has been at EDF since 2004, Rossi switched roles from Head of the International Division to UK CEO in 2017. But Rossi’s influence goes far beyond the British Isles. As a member of the Executive Committee, Rossi is at the very top of the EDF Group. At first it appears Rossi accepted a big pay cut, with a 2017 payment package capped at just over £100,000. A modest salary in comparison to his predecessor, de Rivaz, who was on £1 million a year. But it is highly probable that Rossi’s remuneration is now identical to de Rivaz at £1 million, as the highest-paid director in EDF Energy Holdings Ltd.
EDF
It’s not just customers at the receiving end of EDF’s profit-led strategy. Kashmir Singh, a Prospect trade union organizer, has been fighting against workplace racism and discrimination for half a century. Singh was presented with a 50-year long-service award in 2021 by Simone Rossi. But Singh’s union released a statement explaining how, during his career, he had been subject to two grievance and disciplinary proceedings for daring to raise EDF’s failure to hire and promote staff from Asian or Black Ethnic (ABLE) backgrounds.
SUBSIDIARIES IN TAX HAVENS
EDF Energy (UK) Ltd owns EDF Energy Holdings Ltd, the top holding company for EDF’s UK subsidiaries. Whilst EDF Energy (UK)’s accounts from 2021 detail tax payments of €905m (£780m) of corporation tax in 2021, some of its subsidiaries are registered in notorious tax havens including a holdings company registered in Hong Kong and an insurance company in Guernsey.
Over the last two decades, EDF has funded the Conservative party to the tune of £38,499.
Most recently, last October EDF Energy Renewables Ltd donated £4,999 to the Conservative Tees Valley Mayor, Ben Houchen. And like clockwork, by March 2022, EDF announced its plan to construct a new hydrogen production centre near the former Redcar steelworks in Teeside. The centre is called Tees Green Hydrogen.
EDF also made two £6,000 in donations to the Labour Party in October 2003 and September 2005. The timing of these donations coincided with Labour PM Tony Blair’s announcement in November 2005 that the government was looking into new nuclear for the UK’s future energy supplies. This set the ball rolling for EDF’s £18 billion government contract for the construction of Hinkley Point C power station.
Over the last decade, EDF has been getting cosier and cosier with the government. The company has had at least five independent opportunities to promote its agenda in meetings with UK prime ministers, once with David Cameron and four times with Boris Johnson. Company representatives even had an intimate one-to-one with Johnson in January 2022 to chat about the UK’s nuclear energy supply, which EDF holds the monopoly over.
Since 2012, company representatives have also attended at least 151 meetings with government ministers, including 24 solo meetings with the former Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Kwasi Kwarteng, who is now the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the person in charge of UK economic policy.
And the cosiness isn’t set to end anytime soon, EDF stands in good stead under Liz Truss. The new PM nominated former EDF lobbyist Michael Stott as Downing Street’s new business liaison. Stott, who is also an ex-Tory press officer, is expected to lead the government’s new-build nuclear programme.
Failure of the “nuclear renaissance” leaves Britain with super-costly closures of reactors, and electricity shortage

UK facing electricity supply woes after nuclear power stations shut, MPs told
Larger and smaller reactors carry risks, island nation failed to keep pace with nuclear fleet closure
Lindsay Clark, 1 Nov 2022 , Electricity shortages appear inevitable for the UK due to the decommissioning of the nation’s aging estate of nuclear power stations, according to evidence submitted by industry to politicians.
…….. Writing to the Commons Science and Technology Committee, Manchester University’s Dalton Nuclear Policy Group said: “Sadly, it is now much too late to avoid a negative impact on the UK’s electricity supply due to the closure of our nuclear fleet. All eleven of Britain’s Magnox plants have been shut down for many years – the last being the Wylfa plant on Anglesey which ceased operation on New Year’s Eve 2015.
It added: “The fleet of Advanced Gas-cooled Reactors (AGRs) operated by [French energy firm] EDF is also now seeing closures.”
In February, the UK government was warned taxpayers would have to make up a multibillion-pound shortfall to decommission nuclear power stations unless a history of overspending is reversed. EDF Energy runs seven AGR stations in the UK, part of eight second-generation reactors set to be decommissioned which provide 16 percent of the nation’s electricity. The AGR stations are scheduled to stop producing electricity by 2028.
Last year the government injected £5.1 billion ($5.8 billion) into the Nuclear Liabilities Fund – now valued at £14.8 billion ($17 billion) – which it set up in 1996 to meet the costs of decommissioning AGR and Pressurized Water Reactor stations. But EDF’s latest cost estimate to decommission the stations in March last year was £23.5bn ($27 billion). Public spending watchdog the National Audit Office has warned more money will be needed unless the government and EDF avoid overspending.
But as well as overspending, decommissioning also presents a problem for electricity supply.
“It is unlikely that there will be any significant extension to these projected dates, although there may be scope for some slight delays in closure. Once the AGRs are all closed, the UK will only have one reactor from the current nuclear fleet still operational – the pressurised water reactor at Sizewell B,” Dalton Nuclear Policy Group said.
……. “it is due to the failure since 2008 – with the exception of the long-delayed Hinkley Point C – of all proposals for a nuclear renaissance in the UK to move from plans to reality,” the group said.
In May, EDF admitted to another year’s delay and £3 billion ($3.5 billion) extra cost in Hinkely Point C – the UK’s first nuclear power station to be built in 20 years. The revised operating date for the site in Somerset is now June 2027 and total costs are estimated to be in the range of £25 billion to £26 billion ($29 billion).
EDF said it would have no cost impact on British consumers or taxpayers. The power station had been due online by 2017 at a cost of around £20 billion ($22 billion)………………….. The Science and Technology Committee is set to hear oral evidence for its inquiry on Delivering Nuclear Power during hearings this week.
The Register 1st Nov 2022
https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/01/electricity_shortages_uk/
Loosening the Nuclear Knot – ARMS CONTROL TODAY
Arms Control Association
November 2022 By Daryl G. Kimball
Over the long, dangerous course of the nuclear age, the easing of tensions and resolution of crises between the nuclear-armed states have relied not only on good luck and self-restraint, but on effective, leader-to-leader dialogue.
For example, a key turning point in the 1962 Cuban missile crisis was the decision by President John F. Kennedy to listen to advisers recommending a diplomatic course of action and back-channel talks. This allowed the two sides, as Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev described it, to “take measures to untie that knot” and thus avoid “the catastrophe of thermonuclear war.”
…….. the risk of nuclear war is probably higher than at any point since 1962. The invasion has also led to the suspension of the U.S.-Russian strategic stability dialogue and talks designed to maintain limits on their strategic nuclear arsenals.
…………………. senior U.S. officials say that, despite intensified military competition with China, it is vital to engage in talks with leaders in Beijing on improved crisis communication, forms of mutual restraint, and arms limitations. Unfortunately, Chinese officials have rebuffed U.S. overtures for bilateral strategic risk reduction talks.
To loosen the knot of war, the Biden administration needs to explore other pathways for dialogue. One option surely under consideration but not yet deployed in this crisis is the multilateral P5 process, which involves all five nations recognized as nuclear-weapon states under the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States).
The group has met annually since 2009 to explore confidence-building measures in relation to their nuclear forces. The United States holds the rotating chair, but has not yet convened a meeting. To date, the P5 process has been underutilized and has underperformed. But in this time of heightened nuclear danger, the Biden administration must try to use it to ease nuclear tensions with China and Russia.
Leaders in Beijing continue to tout the process. Last month, Li Song, Chinese ambassador for disarmament affairs, told a UN meeting that the five NPT nuclear-weapon states “should further enhance communication on such issues as strategic stability and reduction of nuclear risks.” With Russia continuing to issue veiled nuclear threats, it is in the vital interest of all five states to pursue joint steps and joint statements designed to lower the temperature.
For instance, the group might consider updating and implementing the 1973 U.S.-Soviet Agreement on the Prevention of Nuclear War, which pledges the two states “to refrain from the threat or use of force against the other party” and “avoid military confrontations, and as to exclude the outbreak of nuclear war.” The agreement requires that “if at any time there is the risk of a nuclear conflict,” each side “shall immediately enter into urgent consultations with each other and make every effort to avert this risk.”
The United States might also propose that the P5 process be augmented to allow for sustained discussions on specific arms control proposals relevant to all five states. Since the recent collapse of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, Russia and the United States have expressed interest in negotiating a new arrangement to limit or ban certain types of these weapons. At their February 2022 summit, Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping called for talks with the United States to curtail possible deployments of missiles that had been limited by the treaty. The Biden administration should test their seriousness by advancing proposals for mutual restraints on these types of ballistic and cruise missile systems by all three states through the P5 process.
As they stared into the nuclear abyss 60 years ago, Kennedy and Khrushchev turned to diplomacy to reach the compromises necessary to preserve their nations’ survival. Today’s leaders must be even more creative and persistent in the pursuit of risk reduction and disarmament if we are to avoid arms racing and the possibility of nuclear catastrophe. https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2022-11/focus/loosening-nuclear-knot
Israeli finance minister added to Kiev’s ‘kill list’
Rt.com 31 Oct 22,
The Mirotvorets website labeled Avigdor Lieberman a “Russian agent of influence,” who took part in acts of “humanitarian aggression” against Ukraine
Israeli finance minister, Avigdor Lieberman has been added to the controversial Mirotvorets website “enemies of Ukraine” database on Sunday.
The authors of the site, which is believed to have links to the Ukrainian security services, described Lieberman as an “agent of influence” for Russia, who had been manipulating publicly significant information in favor of Moscow. They also blamed him for taking part in acts of “humanitarian aggression” against Ukraine.
Among the actions that led to Lieberman being placed on the list, were his refusal to finance an Israeli field hospital in Ukraine in March and his neutral stance on who is to blame for the massacre in the Kiev suburb of Bucha in April. The website also shared a link to an article, claiming that he had ties with Russian gas giant Gazprom.
Ukrainian authorities have frequently expressed their disappointment with the level of support they’ve been getting from Israel during the conflict with Russia. The country has only provided Kiev with humanitarian aid and life-saving defense equipment, but not weapons and munitions. Israel also refrained from joining international sanctions on Moscow. Last week, Liberman said that Israeli assistance to Ukraine since the outbreak of the fighting between Russia and Ukraine in late February amounted to some $40 million……………………………..
The Mirotvorets website, translated as ‘peacemaker’, was launched in 2014, positioning itself as an independent database run by anonymous moderators to help Ukrainian authorities and “special services” apprehend pro-Russian terrorists, separatists, and war criminals, among others.
However, some have branded the database a ‘kill list,’ which is backed by the government, after several individuals, including writer Oles Buzina, politician Oleg Kalashnikov, and Russian journalist Darya Dugina were assassinated shortly after their profiles appeared on the website.
The most recent high-profile additions to Mirotvorets included Kazakhstan’s president, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, Pink Floyd co-founder Roger Waters. There were claims that the world’s richest man, Elon Musk, was put on the database in mid-October, but swiftly removed from it. The alleged addition happened after Musk offered a peace plan, which envisaged Kiev giving up territories to Moscow. https://www.rt.com/russia/565651-lieberman-israel-ukraine-mirotvorets/
US troops on the ground in Ukraine – media
https://www.rt.com/russia/565747-us-troops-in-ukraine/ 2 Nov 22, The military personnel are reportedly inspecting Western weapons deliveries.
American troops are on the ground in Ukraine, where they are monitoring NATO arms deliveries to the country, an anonymous Pentagon official told several US media outlets on Monday. It is unclear how many personnel are involved, or where they are located.
Speaking to the Associated Press, NBC News, and other members of the Pentagon press pool, the official said that the contingent of troops is led by Brigadier General Garrick Harmon, the US defense attache to Kiev.
“There have been several of these inspections,” the official told reporters, without revealing where the examinations have taken place. He added that the checks are not happening “close to the front lines,” but where security conditions allow.
The US inspected its arms shipments to Ukraine before Russia launched its military operation in February, but pulled its personnel out of the country days before it began. It is unclear how many troops have returned or when the checks restarted.
The Pentagon official would only say that a “small” number of troops are involved.
The US State Department announced last week that it would allocate “personnel to assist the government of Ukraine with handling…of US security assistance,” although it did not mention that these personnel would be drawn from the ranks of the military. The plan was announced after media reports, citing US intelligence agencies, claimed that Washington could not trace the weapons it sends to Ukraine.
One intelligence source told CNN in April that these weapons disappear “into a big black hole” once they enter the country. The anonymous Pentagon official told journalists that Kiev has been “transparent,” and has cooperated with inspectors thus far.
While Americans have fought and died in Ukraine of their own accord, Monday’s announcement marks the first time since February that Washington has acknowledged the presence of uniformed troops in Ukraine.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has cautioned the US and its NATO allies against getting involved in the conflict, and even before the announcement, he stated that the Kremlin views itself as fighting the “entire Western military machine” in Ukraine.
Finland hints at allowing NATO to station nuclear weapons (?targets) on its soil

https://euroweeklynews.com/2022/10/31/finland-hints-at-allowing-nato-to-station-nuclear-weapons-on-its-soil/ By Chris King • 31 October 2022 ,
The Prime Minister of Finland, Sanna Marin, hinted that nuclear weapons could be deployed on Finnish soil should the country’s application to join NATO be approved.
It was recently reported by a newspaper in Helsinki that nuclear weapons could soon be stationed on Finland’s border with Russia if the country’s bid to join NATO is approved. Should it come to that, it is bound to anger Moscow.
Nuclear missiles launched from the Finnish border would take far less than a minute to reach Moscow. That is a very short warning period. It is certain that the Kremlin will not like this at all, but it could soon become reality.
The reason: Finland – together with Sweden – submitted an application to join NATO in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. According to the Helsinki newspaper Iltalehti, the draft accession law, as submitted by the Finnish government to Parliament, does not include an exemption for nuclear weapons
Finnish Foreign and Defence Ministers Pekka Haavisto and Antti Kaikkonen both pledged to NATO in July that they would not seek ‘restrictions or national reservations’ if Helsinki’s proposal goes through. This was reported by various defence sources to exxpress.at.
Foreign policy insiders said that NATO nuclear weapons could be moved through Finnish territory or stationed there. In addition, there are no restrictions on establishing NATO bases in the country.
Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin told Finnish broadcaster Yle on Saturday 29: “I think it’s very important that we don’t set any preconditions or limit our own room for manoeuvre when it comes to permanent bases or nuclear weapons”. It is thought highly unlikely though that nuclear weapons would be stationed on Finnish soil.
According to the Federation of American Scientists, the US already has around 100 nuclear weapons in Europe. They are located in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey. Britain and France, both NATO members, also maintain their own independent nuclear arsenals.
Earlier this month, the Polish government said it had held talks with Washington about hosting US nuclear weapons, but the Americans have not confirmed this. Polish President Andrzej Duda said there was a ‘potential opportunity’ for his country to engage in ‘nuclear sharing’.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg welcomed Finland and Sweden’s applications for membership in May, calling the move a ‘historic moment’ for the alliance.
The nuclear threats that hang over the world
Even a limited strike in Ukraine would have catastrophic global effects
Ft.com GIDEON RACHMAN, 31 Oct 22,
“A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.” That joint statement was issued at the beginning of this year by China, France, Russia, the UK and the US — the five official nuclear weapons states. The following month, Russia invaded Ukraine. Ever since, world leaders have been grappling with the threat that a nuclear war might indeed be fought — quite soon.
From the outset, Vladimir Putin has described the conflict as existential for Russia and hinted that he might use nuclear weapons to prevail………………………………….
Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.comT&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found here.
https://www.ft.com/content/f3dce448-a7e4-4fbe-80a4-d317af4b8317
The US and its allies are focused on preventing Russia from making that fatal step across the nuclear threshold — through a mixture of deterrence and diplomacy. But they are also already thinking hard about the global aftermath of the use of a Russian nuclear weapon. This is unknown territory and the pressure is intense…….
Broadly speaking, there are four main scenarios to consider: nuclear normalisation, nuclear blackmail, avoidance of war, and Armageddon.
It is not hard to see how the use of a Russian nuclear weapon could spiral into an all-out nuclear war — leading to what President Biden himself has termed “Armageddon”. Washington has warned that if Moscow were to use a nuclear weapon, there would be a response with “catastrophic” consequences for Russia.
The Americans have not spelt out in public what that response would be. Many commentators think that it would be military, but non-nuclear. General David Petraeus, a former CIA head, has talked of Nato forces attacking Russian troops on the ground in Ukraine with conventional weapons and sinking the Russian Black Sea fleet……………
But direct western military involvement would probably trigger a further Russian response. The west and Russia might then rapidly move up the “escalation ladder”, making the nightmare of all-out nuclear war distinctly possible. As one US official puts it: “I don’t think anyone should be confident that we can control the escalation risks.”
Because the prospect of escalation to Armageddon is so horrific, there is also a real possibility that even the use of a Russian nuclear weapon would not trigger a direct western military response — with the US instead trying to organise the complete economic and diplomatic isolation of Russia. But that would open the door to another disturbing future: “nuclear normalisation”.
Nuclear weapons would have been shown to be tools that can be used in a war of aggression — not just for deterrence. Russia, and even China, might be tempted to cross the nuclear threshold again. And non-nuclear states — such as Japan, South Korea, Germany and a host of others — would rush to acquire nuclear weapons to protect themselves.
Global turmoil would follow the use of a nuclear weapon. Markets would crash and publics might panic across the world, with the possibility of large-scale population movements out of cities………………………………..
The three darkest scenarios — Armageddon, normalisation and successful nuclear blackmail — are all far more possible than they should be. But, collectively, they remain less likely than the fourth possibility — that nuclear war is avoided. In all previous nuclear crises since 1945, the leaders of great powers have drawn back from the brink. The knowledge that a false move could cause millions of deaths — or even destroy the planet — is enormously sobering. It has kept the world from sliding into nuclear conflict since 1945. It should work again. Probably. https://www.ft.com/content/f3dce448-a7e4-4fbe-80a4-d317af4b8317—
World Nuclear Industry Status Report delivers all the empirical data we need to know about nuclear power’s decline

The Annual Goldmine https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2022/10/31/the-annual-goldmine/ By Linda Pentz Gunter 31 Oct 22
The annual goldmine of empirical data on nuclear power that is the World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR) was duly rolled out on October 5th, this year in Berlin. The 2022 edition is available for download here and is an indispensable reference source, updated each year.
While delivering an in-depth overview, as its title suggests, of the status of nuclear power worldwide, the report also provides sections focused on particular areas of the technology or on certain countries or regions of the world.
As its principal author, Mycle Schneider, pointed out during the rollout, the report’s authors are big fans of empirical data. Indeed, many of the findings in the report are taken from the nuclear industry itself. Facts and physics are pretty much immutable when it comes to nuclear power, and neither favor the industry very well. No amount of nuclear industry aspirational rhetoric can hide the truth about a waning and outdated technology.
The over-riding finding of the 2022 edition of the report is that nuclear power’s share of global commercial gross electricity generation in 2021 dropped to below 10 percent for the first time ever, sinking to its lowest in four decades.
As in past years, if you take China out of the picture — a country with 21 new reactors under construction as of mid-2022 — the decline of nuclear power worldwide is even more dramatic.
At close to 400 pages, the WNISR is a tome, but it is packed full of essential detail on every important topic related to nuclear power and its declining place in the world. Whether you are interested in new builds or closure, decommissioning or small modular reactors, or a specific country, there is something in the report that will flesh out the details.
And this year, there is an important chapter late in the report — Nuclear Power and War — dealing with the fate of nuclear power plants caught up in the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the warfare that is exploding around them.
We have of course been talking, writing and warning about the perils of reactors in a war zone since the time a Russian invasion was first intimated late in 2021. But the WNISR helpfully lays out all the possible causes and consequences of a nuclear disaster in Ukraine. It answers the many questions we have about the robustness, or not, of reactors, fuel pools and radioactive waste casks to withstand and survive a bombardment or even a prolonged power outage.
As former IAEA director of nuclear safety, Aybars Gurpinar, told Bloomberg when addressing the risks to reactors in Ukraine: “Even if structures are extremely well designed, you cannot expect them to withstand a military-style attack. They are not designed for this.”
The WNISR concludes, on page 259: “Nuclear power plants are immediately vulnerable in war situations. This is directly due to the constant and permanent need for cooling. Extensive failure of the necessary electrical power or destruction of the cooling systems would lead to overheating of the reactor core. It is relatively unimportant whether this damage is intentional, unintentional, or of indeterminate cause and motivation.
“On the other hand, with increasing duration, the specific stress on the personnel and poorer maintenance worsens the operating conditions which also increases the probability of triggering serious accidents.”
In addition to covering the most obviously disastrous impacts, such as loss of coolant leading to fires and meltdowns, the report also explores some of the other essentials that could be lost during war but that are less often discussed.
These include lack of access to the plant due to the destruction of roadways; absence of diesel fuel supplies for backup generators; the continued presence of a fire department with necessary equipment and access; the availability of a skilled operating personnel and the consequences of staff working under duress or takeover; and the necessity of continued maintenance, repairs and inspections.
These add to the already long list of technical things that could go wrong at a reactor under war conditions. This makes it particularly important to focus on the prevention of such a disaster, rather than speculating about who is at fault.
Speculation is not to be found in the WNISR. Accordingly, the authors chose to point out in conclusion that the reports coming in about who is firing on what and why are not necessarily reliable. All they, and we, can assess, is what the damage might be and what the consequences of that damage could lead to.
“In a war situation, it is particularly difficult to verify whether certain reports cover indisputable facts, are exaggerated, or false,” the WNISR authors write. “The warring parties, as well as organizations and individuals interacting with them, have an interest in a representation that is not necessarily objective.”
Wars will happen and the fog of war will mask and confuse what is actually going on. But the one abiding problem is the nuclear power plants being there in the first place. And that’s the one thing we do have the power to change.
Linda Pentz Gunter is the international specialist at Beyond Nuclear and writes for and curates Beyond Nuclear International.
Nuclear gravity bomb more powerful than Hiroshima blast to be added to NATO’s arsenal
it makes using nuclear weapons thinkable for the first time since the 1940s and deploying the B61-12 only encourages this trend further………………….. The new bombs will be able to be dropped from numerous aircraft including B-2 stealth bombers, and smaller warplanes like the F-15, F-35 and Tornado.
The new B61-12 gravity nuclear bomb which can carry a yield more powerful than the Hiroshima blast will be delivered by the US to Europe months earlier than planned
By Rachel Hagan, World News Reporter, 28 Oct 2022
The US is speeding up the delivery of highly accurate guided tactical nuclear weapons to Europe by around four months as tensions rise between Moscow and the West.
The B61-12 gravity bomb was due for Spring 2023 but they are now accelerating plans to have it ready for this December, US officials told NATO allies during a closed-door meeting in Brussels this month.
But what are these weapons and what are they capable of?
The new thermonuclear bombs are “dial-a-yield” devices and are one of the most versatile in the US’ arsenal because its explosive power can be ramped up or down depending on the target.
Specialist defence magazine, the National Interest, called the bomb the most devastating nuclear bomb in the arsenal of the US……………………………
They say it makes using nuclear weapons thinkable for the first time since the 1940s and deploying the B61-12 only encourages this trend further………………….. The new bombs will be able to be dropped from numerous aircraft including B-2 stealth bombers, and smaller warplanes like the F-15, F-35 and Tornado.
Biden lost temper with Zelenskyy in June phone call when Ukrainian leader asked for more aid
Biden had barely finished telling Zelenskyy he’d just greenlighted another $1 billion in military assistance when the Ukrainian president started listing all the additional help he needed.
NBC News, Oct. 31, 2022, By Carol E. Lee, Courtney Kube and Dan De Luce
It’s become routine since Russia invaded Ukraine: President Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy speak by phone whenever the U.S. announces a new package of military assistance for Kyiv.
But a phone call between the two leaders in June played out differently from previous ones, according to four people familiar with the call. Biden had barely finished telling Zelenskyy he’d just greenlighted another $1 billion in U.S. military assistance for Ukraine when Zelenskyy started listing all the additional help he needed and wasn’t getting. Biden lost his temper, the people familiar with the call said. The American people were being quite generous, and his administration and the U.S. military were working hard to help Ukraine, he said, raising his voice, and Zelenskyy could show a little more gratitude.
Administration officials said Biden and Zelenskyy’s relationship has only improved since the June phone call, after which Zelenskyy made a statement praising the U.S. for its generous assistance. But the clash reflects Biden’s early awareness that both congressional and public support for sending billions of dollars to Ukraine could begin to fade. That moment has arrived just as the president prepares to ask Congress to greenlight even more money for Ukraine.
Biden now faces resistance from some Republicans and Democrats that wasn’t present when Congress approved previous Ukraine funds. The White House has discussed asking Congress for billions of dollars during the lame-duck legislative session after the midterm elections.
The White House hasn’t specified an amount publicly. Lawmakers and Ukraine lobbyists hope for $40 billion to $60 billion, and some officials familiar with the discussions expect the number to be roughly $50 billion.
A source familiar with the conversation said that Biden was direct with Zelenskyy about handling the issues in the appropriate military channels but that the exchange wasn’t heated or angry.
A spokesperson for the National Security Council declined to comment on the story.
A spokesperson for Zelenskyy didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Top U.S. officials warn there are no signs the war is ending any time soon.
Before the June 15 phone call, the president’s frustrations with Zelenskyy had been building for weeks, three people familiar with the call said. Biden and some of his top aides felt that the administration was doing as much as it could as quickly as it could but that Zelenskyy continued to focus publicly on only what wasn’t being done.
From Zelenskyy’s perspective — as well as that of some Eastern European governments and U.S. lawmakers from both parties — there has been repeated frustration that the Biden White House moves too slowly on weapons requests, initially hesitating to approve certain capabilities Ukraine requested most urgently, only to relent weeks or months later under pressure, according to two sources familiar with the Ukraine government’s view, congressional aides and two European officials……………………………………..
The proportion of Americans who are extremely or very concerned about Ukraine’s losing the war has dropped by 17 percentage points since May, from 55% to 38%, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted last month. And the proportion of Americans who say they’re not too concerned or not at all concerned about Russia’s winning was up from 16% to 26%, according to the survey.
The potential change in political will in the U.S. for continuing to send aid to Ukraine could upend how both the White House and Zelenskyy have approached the issue so far.
Since Russia invaded Ukraine in February, the Biden administration has been criticized for moving too cautiously. Now the president faces potential pushback from some Republican lawmakers and progressive Democrats that he’s providing too much aid.
The shifting dynamics on Capitol Hill also could force Zelenskyy’s team to rethink how it engages with Washington, as it has often tried to leverage its support in Congress to get more out of the White House. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/biden-lost-temper-zelenskyy-phone-call-ukraine-aid-rcna54592
—
Poland, South Korea sign outline accords on nuclear power project
Aljazeera 31 Oct 22
South Korea and Poland to assess the viability of building four 1,400-megawatt nuclear reactors in Patnow.
Seoul and Warsaw have signed outline agreements to develop nuclear power in Poland, according to ministries from both countries, as Poland strives to phase out coal and lower its carbon emissions and South Korea seeks to revive its nuclear industry.
Poland’s ZE PAK and PGE and Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power (KHNP) will assess the viability of building four 1,400-megawatt nuclear reactors in Patnow, central Poland, using South Korean technology, the South Korean Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy said on Monday in a joint statement with the Polish Ministry of State Assets.
The companies, with government backing, intend to prepare a preliminary development plan for the plant by the end of this year, they said in a statement.
Since the election this year of President Yoon Suk-yeol, who pledged to revive the country’s nuclear power industry, South Korea has stepped up efforts to win nuclear power plant export orders……………………
Monday’s agreements follow an announcement on Friday when Warsaw said US firm Westinghouse Electric Co will build the country’s first nuclear power plant in northern Poland. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/10/31/poland-south-korea-sign-outline-accords-on-nuclear-power-project
Pentagon Scraps Submarine Nuclear Cruise Missile Program
The United States’ newly declassified Nuclear Posture Review and its National Defense Strategy show that the U.S. government is intent on modernizing and updating its nuclear arsenal.
National Interest, by Caleb Larson, 31 Oct 22, The U.S. Department of Defense has decided to ax the sea-launched nuclear cruise missile, known as the SLCM-N, instead opting to refurbish current stockpiles of nuclear weapons and rely on the Trident, a submarine-launched nuclear ballistic missile.
A fact sheet for the recently-published nuclear posture review, which outlines the United States’ nuclear capabilities, described the future of the U.S. strategic deterrence arsenal…………………………………………………
For now, it seems the United States will not pursue a naval nuclear cruise missile but instead focus on modernizing and refurbishing the capabilities it already has. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/pentagon-scraps-submarine-nuclear-cruise-missile-program-205627
THE BIGGEST LIE – ADDICTED TO WAR – WHAT MOST AMERICAN PEOPLE DON’T KNOW and DON’T WANT TO KNOW

The mainstream media will never tell the truth about this, as they are owned by the very people and corporations who make huge profits from U.S. wars.

THE BIG LIE is so big and so complete in the United States. It’s like mass hypnosis. Like mass brainwashing. ……… Most Americans are taught to believe that we are The Good Guys. And once again, most people are not taught about the true nature of U.S. foreign policy
THE BIG LIE is so big and so complete in the United States. It’s like mass hypnosis. Like mass brainwashing. ……… Most Americans are taught to believe that we are The Good Guys. And once again, most people are not taught about the true nature of U.S. foreign policy
https://www.addictedtowar.com/the-big-lie, By Frank Dorrel – Publisher of ADDICTED To WAR: www.addictedtowar.com, 31 Oct 22,
What Is This BIG LIE – I Am Talking About? ………………..
Well, it’s not Donald Trump claiming that he won the 2020 election for President……….
I’m not talking about Climate Change/Global Warming.…. now heating faster than expected
I’m not talking about Systemic Racism in the United States.………. this terrible situation.
I’m not talking about The Prison Industrial Complex………… this sad story is not really a secret
I’m not talking about Poverty and Homelessness…………. very sad situation happening to millions of American people.
I’m not talking about COVID, the pandemic that has caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of American people in the last two years
THE BIG LIE
The BIG LIE I am talking about has to do with U.S. foreign policy and U.S. wars, both overt and covert. We are not told the truth about them or that the U.S. is a Global Empire that controls much of the World through force and power and threatens Third World countries, who are not willing to do as we say. Most American people do not know these things. Most do not believe these things are true. And most people are not willing to take a closer look at all of this.
I suggest you go to my website to see what I am talking about. Go to the Film Page: www.addictedtowar.com/films and watch as many of these important anti-war films as you can. They are all on YouTube and can be watched for free. Take as long as you need. I do not think you will find another list like this anywhere on the Internet. I have watched all of these films at least two or more times. Every one of them is very well done. Altogether, they reveal THE BIG LIE. These films are never aired on television. Not even on PBS.
Go to the Talks and Interviews Page: www.addictedtowar.com/talks-interviews – and watch and listen to as many of them as you can. The very first talk is by Martin Luther King Jr. It’s titled – BEYOND VIETNAM: A Time To Break Silence. Once again, take your time to watch these talks by these activists. They reveal the horrors our country has been committing all of these years with its many wars against innocent poor people around the World.
THE BIG LIE
I am talking about is what Martin Luther King Jr. said in his BEYOND VIETNAM Speech: “The Greatest Purveyor of Violence in The World Today, My Own Government.” The Military, the Oil Companies, the Corporations, the Weapon Makers, the Bankers, the Mainstream Media & the Politicians, also known as The Military-Industrial-Complex. They make war for profit and also to control the resources of the World. And WE, the PEOPLE are LIED to about this. One of their biggest weapons is propaganda. And they really know how to use it. It is a global battle of the rich versus the poor. And war is, for the most part, racist. We bomb, invade and kill mostly people of color.
Read this article by James Lucas titled: THE UNITED STATES HAS KILLED MORE THAN 20 MILLION PEOPLE IN 37 NATIONS SINCE WWII: https://popularresistance.org/us-has-killed-more-than-20-million-in-37-nations-since-wwii
Read this article by Professor Larry Mosqueda of Evergreen State College titled: SHOCKED and HORRIFIED, written on September 15th, 2001: www.globalissues.org/article/257/shocked-and-horrified
The mainstream media will never tell the truth about this, as they are owned by the very people and corporations who make huge profits from U.S. wars. Most people in the government will not talk about or look at this. If they were to do so, they would become outcasts and pariahs, shunned by others in the government. And for the most part, people in the military will not look at or talk about these things. However, some have spoken out. And many of them are listed on my site. The one group that does look at this issue is the Anti-War Movement. We are part of the alternative media in this country. You can see who some of these organizations are by going to: www.addictedtowar.com/sources-and-websites . CovertAction DEMOCRACY NOW, is on this list.
There is an anti-war movement in this country. But it’s just not big enough to make much of a difference. Most people are not taught about these things in their schools, in their churches, or by their parents. And they won’t learn about THE BIG LIE by watching the mainstream news on television or by reading the mainstream newspapers.
HOW DID I LEARN ABOUT THE TRUE NATURE OF U.S. FOREIGN POLICY?
I first started learning about all of this when I discovered KPFK 90.7 FM Radio in 1980. KPFK is part of the Pacifica Network: https://pacificanetwork.org – consisting of five radio stations in this country. They are KPFA in Berkeley, KPFK in Los Angeles, WBAI in New York, WPFW in Washington DC and KPFT in Houston. The first Pacifica station was KPFA in Berkeley. It was started in 1949 by Lou Hill, a man who refused to go to World War II. He wanted to have a station that was against war, dealt with social injustice and had no commercial sponsors so that the truth could be told. I discovered KPFK by chance. No one told me about it.
Read more: THE BIGGEST LIE – ADDICTED TO WAR – WHAT MOST AMERICAN PEOPLE DON’T KNOW and DON’T WANT TO KNOWI had a job as a driver for the University of Southern California. I drove about 200 miles a day. One day in 1980, I was turning the FM channels and heard Alan Watts talking on KPFK. He was an amazing storyteller, a philosopher of sorts, and very interesting to listen to. He was already dead when I started listening to him. So every Monday at 2:00 PM, I put on KPFK. Then one Monday, I left the station on and heard Noam Chomsky talking about U.S.-supported death squads in El Salvador.
That was the beginning for me. From that time on, I listened to KPFK as much as possible. I discovered many other truth-tellers on KPFK, talking about U.S. foreign policy, who you would never hear on the mainstream media. People like Howard Zinn, Ramsey Clark, Michael Parenti, Daniel Ellsberg, John Stockwell, Philip Agee, S. Brian Willson, Roy Bourgeois, Medea Benjamin, Kathy Kelly & many others. Then I discovered Blase Bonpane, who had his own weekly program on KPFK called WORLD FOCUS.
I began listening to Blase every week. Soon he became my mentor. The more I learned about what the U.S. had been doing with its foreign policy, the more upset I got. During the listener-sponsored fund-drives, I would order books and talks by these truth-tellers. Whenever they came to Los Angeles to speak, I would go to listen to them in person. I joined the Veterans For Peace group in Los Angeles and would go to their meetings. It was there that I met Tony Russo and learned so much about what he called THE U.S. WAR IN VIETNAM. Tony had been partners with Daniel Ellsberg in revealing The Pentagon Papers.
At that time, I was learning about what was happening in Nicaragua, with the U.S. supporting the Contra’s and the history of U.S. interventions there. The more I learned, the worse it got. I had no idea that my country, the United States, had been doing so many terrible things to innocent poor people all over the World. I went to hear John Stockwell at least three times. He had been a marine and was the CIA Station Chief in Angola. The stories he told about the atrocities the CIA had been committing around the World were absolutely chilling. You can hear him giving an amazing talk in 1989 here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmYZ_kWHk3Q .
It was on KPFK that I first heard about S. Brian Willson, as he and three other veterans began their VETERANS FAST FOR LIFE on the Capitol Steps in Washington DC in 1986. They were protesting U.S. foreign policy in Central America; in Nicaragua,
El Salvador and Guatemala. They fasted for something like 40 days and got a lot of attention all over the country through the Pacifica Network and the anti-war movement. I sent them a $100 donation and a letter of support. And I went on a march supporting these four veterans, S. Brian Willson, Charlie Liteky, Duncan Murphy and George Mizo – in Downtown Los Angeles and marched with a big crowd, right behind Jackson Browne and Kris Kristofferson.
On September 1st, 1987, I heard Blase Bonpane say on KPFK that Brian Willson had been run over at The Concord Naval Weapons Station in Northern California by a train that was carrying weapons to be shipped to Central America and used to kill innocent people there. Brian lost both legs but survived the attack. One year later, he came to Los Angeles to give a talk, which I heard about on KPFK. I went to hear him and my life was changed forever. To this day, I have never heard anyone speak quite like Brian did that night. He was so clear with his message against the U.S. war in Vietnam. I’ll never forget one thing he said: “How could I have gone 10,000 miles across the ocean to take part in killing people I did not know anything about”. Brian had been a believer in that war. He was a conservative republican, an anti-communist and an All-American young man. But he had his epiphany when he witnessed a fishing village in Vietnam that we had bombed & napalmed. He was sent to inspect the success of this mission. He saw maybe 100 people, all of them dead or dying. No soldiers. No weapons. Only women, children and a few older men. He went to four other villages that week and observed the same thing. We were killing villagers and reporting that they were V.C. or Viet Cong. Brian started to speak out against what he had witnessed and soon he was sent back to the States. Some years later, he became a full-time anti-war activist. Brian’s mantra is: We Are Not Worth More. They Are Not Worth Less.
Everything that Brian writes about on his website is well worth reading: www.brianwillson.com . You can watch Brian at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZ_cO1wC0yI – An excellent film about Brian titled: “PAYING THE PRICE FOR PEACE: The Story of S. Brian Willson” – can be rented or bought at: www.addictedtowar.com/about-paying-the-price . I was the associate producer on this amazing film. Brian is the last segment in my film: “What I’ve Learned About U.S. Foreign Policy: The War Against The 3rd World.” If you have never seen my film, please take the time to watch it: www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gMGhrkoncA . And once again, watch the films on The Film Page and the talks on The Talks & Interviews Page. In doing so, you could earn what would be like the equivalent of a PH.D in: The True History of U.S. Foreign Policy.
There is also the Book Page, which lists over 90 excellent books you can read, most on the topic of U.S. Foreign Policy: www.addictedtowar.com/books .
HOW DO THEY GET AWAY WITH ALL OF THIS? WHY MOST PEOPLE CAN’T SEE THESE TRUTHS?
Here is why I believe that most Americans cannot and will not see these truths that I have been talking about. THE BIG LIE is so big and so complete in the United States. It’s like mass hypnosis. Like mass brainwashing. Like something out of Orwell’s book 1984. I believe the biggest tool for brainwashing is the television set that we watch. Most Americans are taught to believe that we are The Good Guys. And once again, most people are not taught about the true nature of U.S. foreign policy in their schools, in their churches or by their parents. And they won’t learn about THE BIG LIE by watching the mainstream news on television or by reading the mainstream newspapers.
I Think The Following Is A Very Important Point In All of This!
Many people have lived a pretty good life here in the United States. They have had a lot of freedom and have been given a lot of opportunity to do what they want, to go for their own special dreams. Not everyone gets there, but at least, many have had that chance. This doesn’t necessarily happen if you are Black or Latinx or Native American or poor. And many people have had various problems fitting in our society and end up unhappy and discontented. But this is America. The Land of The Free and The Home of The Brave. There are so many things here that people appreciate. This is certainly true in my case. And many people have come here from other countries in order to have a better life. And ironically, many of these people have come from some of the very countries we have attacked and invaded. We have had it good here compared to them.
But do these facts make it OK to have a foreign policy that has literally killed millions of innocent people and ruined the lives of many millions more, all for lies?
We are told that our military goes into other countries to help the people and bring freedom and democracy. But of course, that is not what has been happening with our foreign policy. How do you help people when you invade them, drop bombs on them, send in drones to kill them, place sanctions on them and support dictators who oppress them. Most Americans do not want to believe or accept that our country has been doing these horrendous things and still is. And the policies of the U.S. also has ruined the lives of millions more people all over the World. This is not what most American’s believe. It’s much easier being ignorant than it is to realize that this is happening and has been happening all along.
For those of us who have come to understand these things, it is not easy, as we learn that others do not want us to tell them about this or to try to educate them about this. And since the vast majority of Americans do not know or believe these things, it’s very easy to dismiss those of us who do, calling us crazy or conspiracy theorists, without ever looking at the evidence we have to show them. I cannot tell you how many friends I have had in my life who are no longer my friends. Many will not call me back or respond to emails I have sent them about this. It is an amazing thing to experience. After over 40 years of being an activist, I do understand why people do not want to know. It’s just too painful to know. It’s simply easier not to know. Life can be hard. Life can be difficult. And it certainly is now with all that we are dealing with. But life is so much easier not having to deal with the information I have been talking about. However, by denying these truths, we unknowingly support the deaths and destruction of millions.
I do want to say that most of the people who have been involved, in one way or another, in carrying out these barbarous acts committed by the U.S. are not necessarily lying. For the most part, they are simply following orders. The soldiers follow orders. The politicians go along with what they are told. And the reporters in the mainstream media don’t really do true journalism. They get their stories from the State Department, the CIA or other government sources. They don’t investigate on their own to see if these stories are really true or not. The victims of U.S. foreign policy are in other countries, out of sight, out of mind. And the people I have just mentioned will not look at the information we in the anti-war movement try to give them. So the terrible, horrible and unbelievable things our country does happens because we live THE BIG LIE here in the United States.
I want to close with something important that Blase Bonpane said back in 2009. He said:
“The reason he did his anti-war work was because he wanted to stop his country (United States) from killing millions of innocent people all over the world”.
What Blase said is the very same reason why I have been doing my anti-war work all of these years. Blase was loved and respected by so many people. He died in 2019.
And I also want to thank all of the Truth-Tellers and Anti-War Activists I have mentioned in this article and who are on my website – for being my teachers, and for continuing to do this important work. The question is how can we reach enough people to change from being a war-like country to a Peace-Like country? Peace means that we help people in other countries and in our own country. We do not invade them, we do not bomb them, we do not starve them and we do not kill them.
You can read the 2004 edition of ADDICTED To WAR: www.addictedtowar.com/read-book . The 2015 edition can be purchased here: www.addictedtowar.com/store . ADDICTED To WAR is a book that most everyone (12 years and older) can read and understand. Hundreds of high school teachers and college professors have used it in their classrooms. We need to have more teachers and professors using it. When I was in high school, a book like ADDICTED To WAR could never have been used in class at all. I have read it every year since we first published it in 2002. I always think what a fantastic, one-of-a-kind book ADDICTED To WAR is.
In 2000, I put together my film compilation titled: “WHAT I’VE LEARNED ABOUT U.S. FOREIGN POLICY: The War Against The Third World.” I updated it in 2015, adding three new segments.
It can be seen here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gMGhrkoncA – If you have not seen it, please do.
Publisher: ADDICTED To WAR
Associate Producer: PAYING THE PRICE FOR PEACE: The Story of S. Brian Willson
Producer: What I’ve Learned About U.S. Foreign Policy:
Member: Veterans For Peace
310-838-8131
New Study Finds The Rest Of The World Supports China And Russia

A puzzling observation in today’s world is that almost no Western leader has laid out a positive vision for the future.
Take Biden for instance. His big vision is “democracies vs autocracies”. Meaning his vision for the future of the world is conflict. How positive is that?
There’s simply nothing to join! Except conflict, I guess, but you join a conflict to fight for a vision – for a better world – the conflict itself cannot be the vision!
https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/new-study-finds-the-rest-of-the-world?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=81628548&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email Caitlin Johnstone, 31 Oct 22,
The US is preparing to station multiple nuclear-capable B-52 bombers in northern Australia in what the mass media are calling a “signal to China,” yet another example of Australia’s forced subservience as a US military/intelligence asset.
“Having bombers that could range and potentially attack mainland China could be very important in sending a signal to China that any of its actions over Taiwan could also expand further,” Becca Wasser from the Centre for New American Security think tank told the ABC.
“This is a dangerous escalation. It makes Australia an even bigger part of the global nuclear weapons threat to humanity’s very existence – and by rising military tensions it further destabilises our region,” tweeted Greens Senator David Shoebridge of the incendiary provocation.
A new Australian Financial Review article titled “Australia’s alliances in Asia are a tale of two regions” candidly discusses the Biden administration’s recent sanctions geared toward kneecapping the Chinese tech industry in what the author James Curran correctly says “is unambiguously a new cold war.” Curran describes the impossible task Australia has of straddling the ever-widening divide between its number one trading partner China and its number one “security” partner the US, while Washington continually pressures Canberra and ASEAN states toward greater and greater enmity with Beijing.
“ASEAN countries, as much as Australia, have much at stake in resisting the onset of a bifurcated world,” Curran writes.
But that bifurcation is being shoved through at breakneck pace, using both hard and soft power measures. Australians have been hammered with increasingly aggressive anti-China propaganda, and as a result nearly half of them now say they would be willing to go to war to defend Taiwan from an attack by the mainland, with a third saying they’d support a war against China over the Solomon Islands.
A recent Cambridge study found that this hostility toward China has been on the rise in recent years not just in Australia but throughout the “liberal democracies” of the US-centralized power alliance. But what’s interesting is that public opinion is exactly reversed in the much larger remainder of the Earth’s population, with people outside the US power cluster just as fond of China as those within that power cluster are hostile toward it. This relationship is largely mirrored with Russia as well.
“Among the 1.2bn people who inhabit the world’s liberal democracies, three-quarters (75%) now hold a negative view of China, and 87% a negative view of Russia,” the report reads. “However, for the 6.3bn people who live in the rest of the world, the picture is reversed. In these societies, 70% feel positively towards China, and 66% positively towards Russia.”
The report finds that in the “developing” world, approval of China is higher than approval of the US:
“For the first time ever, slightly more people in developing countries (62%) are favourable towards China than towards the United States (61%). This is especially so among the 4.6bn people living in countries supported by the Belt and Road Initiative, among whom almost two-thirds hold a positive view of China, compared to just a quarter (27%) in non-participating countries.”
The report finds that while Russia’s approval has plummeted in the west, it maintains broad support in the east despite the invasion of Ukraine:
“However, the real terrain of Russia’s international influence lies outside of the West. 75% of respondents in South Asia, 68% in Francophone Africa, 62% in Southeast Asia continue to view the country positively in spite of the events of this year.”
I first became aware of the Cambridge study via a Twitter thread by Arnaud Bertrand (who is a great follow if you happen to use that demonic app). Bertrand highlights data in the study showing that US-aligned nations’ opinion of China began plummeting not after the Covid outbreak in late 2019, but after 2017 when the US began ramping up its propaganda campaign against Beijing.
Apart from the fact that the USA’s immensely sophisticated propaganda machine naturally focuses primarily on where the world’s wealth and military firepower rests while pushing its global agendas, and apart from the fact that those in Belt and Road Initiative countries apparently believe they benefit from their economic relationships with China, the disparity between the “developed” and “developing” worlds in their perceptions of the US and its enemies may also be partly explained by another thought-provoking Arnaud Bertrand thread, which I will quote in its entirety here:
A puzzling observation in today’s world is that almost no Western leader has laid out a positive vision for the future.
Take Biden for instance. His big vision is “democracies vs autocracies”. Meaning his vision for the future of the world is conflict. How positive is that?
Contrast this with China: between “national rejuvenation” and “common prosperity” at home and the “global security initiative” as their vision for improved international relations; everyone is very clear on the journey they’re embarked on.
This is a key, if not the key reason why the “West” has no chance in hell to convince the “rest” to join them.
There’s simply nothing to join! Except conflict, I guess, but you join a conflict to fight for a vision – for a better world – the conflict itself cannot be the vision!
This reminds me of what George Kennan, the architect of the cold war, wrote: to win he said that America had to “create among the peoples of the world generally the impression of a country which knows what it wants, which is coping successfully with the problems of its internal life and with the responsibilities of a World Power, and which has a spiritual vitality capable of holding its own among the major ideological currents of the time”
Does America give this impression today?
Even in my own country, France. Ask any French person what Macron’s vision for the future of France and the world is, what the grand plan is, and you’ll get very puzzled looks. “Reform the pension system so we have to work longer?”
The truth is there’s nothing, nada, rien!
What we have essentially in the West are political operators. They think their jobs are to get reelected and to attempt to move whatever metrics the electorate cares about: GDP, unemployment, debt levels, CO2 emissions, etc. Actual leaders have gone extinct (or gone East).
It’s actually quite sad, really speaks to the levels of intellectual decrepitude in the West today. The time of the Enlightenment, the big revolutions is well and truly gone. We’re stuck with our mediocre operators.
It’s also why this is such a dangerous time. A positive vision brings confidence, it brings hope, it motivates, it makes people look forward to what’s to come. The West has none of that today.
The future is scary, the dominant feelings are fear and anger.
And when there’s a lot of fear and anger, these feelings need to be directed somewhere. And our operators certainly don’t want it to be them! So it’s China, Iran, all those “foreigners” who “hate our freedom”.
Perfect recipe for a very bad conflict…
Please, don’t get fooled!
Bertrand’s musings echo a recent quote by Professor Jeffrey Sachs at the Athens Democracy Forum: “The single biggest mistake of president Biden was to say ‘the greatest struggle of the world is between democracies and autocracies’. The real struggle of the world is to live together and overcome our common crises of environment and inequality.”
Indeed, we could be striving toward a positive vision for the future, one which seeks “common prosperity” and “improved international relations,” one which works to remedy inequality and address the looming environmental crisis. Instead the world is being bifurcated, split in two, which history tells us is probably an indication that something extremely terrible is on the horizon for our species unless we drastically change course.
It’s worth keeping all this in mind, as nuclear-capable bombers are deployed to Australia; as NATO weighs moving nuclear weapons to Russia’s border in Finland; as the Biden administration goes all in on economic warfare with China regardless of the consequences; as Russia accuses the US of “lowering the nuclear threshold” by modernizing the arsenal in Europe into “battlefield weapons”; as the Council on Foreign Relations president openly admits that the US is now working to halt China’s rise on the world stage; as China declares its willingness to deepen ties with Russia on all levels.
We could have such a wonderful, healthy, collaborative world, and it’s being flushed down the toilet because an empire is using its leverage over the wealthiest populations on our planet to work toward dominating all the other populations. This stupid, insane quest to shore up unipolar planetary domination is costing us everything while gaining us nothing, and it’s going to be the poorest and weakest among us who suffer the most as a result.
-
Archives
- November 2026 (12)
- October 2026 (302)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS




