Tagged with "Nuclear"
U.S. Military 'Doomsday Planes' Are Being Upgraded Tags: Nuclear Globalist Agenda World at war

A Doomsday Plane Reminder: Nuclear Weapons Haven't Gone Away

Loren Thompson, Contributor FORBES, January 13 2015 ShortURL

Here’s a news item you may have missed over the holidays.  The “doomsday planes” are being upgraded.  Four E-4B flying command posts that would be used by U.S. leaders to manage military operations in a nuclear war will receive communications upgrades to enhance their “connectivity” during a conflict that could spell the end of civilization as we know it.

The reason you may have missed the story is that almost nobody besides InsideDefense.com reported it.  National media were too busy covering more weighty matters like the efforts of North Korean agents to suppress a Sony film farce that insults the Dear Leader, and the attack on a French satirical magazine by a motley crew of extremists.  How could nuclear Armageddon compete with that?

In fairness, the proposed upgrades to the “national airborne operations center” are just part of a routine reprogramming request that the Pentagon has submitted to Congress.  But how often does any facet of the nation’s nuclear complex see the light of day in national media?  Other than cheating scandals and an occasional misplaced weapon, the media have ceased paying attention to the most likely way in which America might one day disappear forever.

America’s military hasn’t.  One of the four doomsday planes is kept on continuous alert and manned at all times.  The planes are designed to stay airborne as long as a week with aerial refueling.  All of the on-board equipment is hardened against nuclear effects, including the cockpit windows which are covered with mesh similar to that on your microwave oven.  If called into service because of a nuclear crisis, the heavily modified Boeing 747s could each carry a crew of over a hundred specialists for managing the conflict, with communications transmitted through satellite uplinks and a wire antenna trailing five miles behind the plane.  If the president and defense secretary have been killed, there are plans in place for devolving command to the most senior official still available.

U.S. military planners take this threat so seriously that when the president goes overseas, one of the doomsday planes always follows.  It needs to be nearby at all times, as does the military aide within a few yards of the president carrying nuclear launch codes and communications gear.  Similar provisions have been made in Russia, which maintains most of its intercontinental ballistic missiles on a high state of alert for fear of losing them in an American first strike.

The Russians are improving the survivability of their long-range missiles by deploying more of them on mobile launchers that can’t be targeted as easily as fixed silos.  But you probably haven’t heard about that either, so let me tell you a bit about them.  Most of the missiles will likely be equipped with four warheads that can be independently targeted.  We don’t know what the explosive force of each warhead is, however a typical yield for the Russian strategic force is around 500 kilotons — equivalent to half a million tons of conventional high explosives.

There’s nothing conventional about nuclear weapons, though. When a conventional munition is exploded, it heats the immediate vicinity by a few thousand degrees.  The heat of a nuclear blast at its center is more akin to tens of millions of degrees.  So if one of those 500-kiloton warheads is exploded a mile above Boston or Dallas, everything within a one-mile radius is destroyed, heavy damage extends to three miles, and fires will be widespread out to five miles.  Not that it will matter to most of the people near ground zero — they will be killed immediately by blast effects or a wind-spread firestorm that expands faster than they can escape (initial wind speed: 700 miles per hour).  People further away will linger longer before succumbing to the effects of prompt and delayed radiation.  Electronic devices will be shut down for a hundred miles in every direction due to the electromagnetic pulse generated by the blast.

And that’s just the effects from one nuclear warhead.  Russia has over 2,000 nuclear warheads capable of reaching America, a fact that will not change materially if pending arms-control agreements are implemented.  That’s actually a big improvement from where things stood at the end of the Cold War, when Russia had over 40,000 strategic and tactical nuclear weapons in its arsenal; the number has shrunk by 90% today if you don’t count the weapons awaiting disassembly.

However, there things are likely to sit for the foreseeable future, because as you undoubtedly have heard, Washington and Moscow aren’t getting along these days.  In fact, the relationship is going so poorly that many in the Russian capital fear an attack from the West, which is one reason why strategic rocket forces are kept on a high state of alert.  The likelihood of new arms agreements in such circumstances is not high.  Besides, U.S. arms-control strategy is grounded in a series of assumptions about how to stabilize the strategic balance that requires giving Russia an “assured destruction” capability against America, so arms agreements aren’t going to eliminate the specter of nuclear war.  U.S. military experts figure that if the arsenals on each side fall much below a thousand “deliverable” warheads, cheating would be encouraged by the prospect of achieving military advantage in a future nuclear exchange.

Thus the main protection Americans have against Russian nuclear aggression today is Moscow’s awareness that the U.S. force could ride out a surprise attack and then retaliate by laying waste to the Motherland.  That strategy appears likely to work well as long as Russian leaders are rational and don’t make miscalculations in a crisis.  If they are crazy, or prone to mistakes, or lose control of their arsenal during a period of instability — well, then all bets are off.  You see, a corollary assumption of the way the U.S. currently practices nuclear deterrence is that America’s own homeland can’t be well-defended.  That might make Russians worry about the credibility of their deterrent, leading to a destabilizing arms race.

So here we are, apparently doomed to live with the possibility of nuclear war indefinitely.  Just ten of the warheads in the Russian arsenal, optimally targeted, could collapse the U.S. electric grid.  Fifty would be sufficient to render uninhabitable every U.S. city with a population of over half a million souls.  Two hundred would effectively wipe out the U.S. economy, destroying all major transportation, communications, medical and financial networks.  There is no guarantee that the nation could ever recover from such a catastrophe (maybe China could pick up the pieces).

Why doesn’t this story get more attention, since it’s the only manmade threat that really could wipe out our civilization?  One possible reason is that people think nuclear war is very improbable – a failure of imagination, as Thomas Friedman put it after the 9-11 attacks.  Another reason, perhaps, is that they’ve simply gotten used to the danger, and prefer not to think about the unthinkable.  But a third possibility, which would be worth testing, is that a majority of Americans believe they are defended against nuclear attack, even though in the common-sense definition of that term they are not.

 

Somehow, Americans have arrived at a time in their history when they spend hundreds of billions of dollars shoring up the security of countries on the other side of the world, but have almost no protection against the one danger that could obliterate everything they cherish.  This isn’t just a catastrophe waiting to happen, it is a political cause waiting to be embraced.

-----------

RELATED at the BOLE

Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Big Historical Lie

 

Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Big Historical Lie Tags: Alternative Knowledge Politics of War Nuclear depopulation mad scientist syndrome Orwellian world

NorthernTruthseeker

It is perceived wisdom throughout the Western world – particularly America – that the dropping of two nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was “necessary” to end the war with Japan. Printed throughout textbooks in the post-war world, the understanding is that, had these targets not been struck, the war would have waged on indefinitely, with potentially untold American soldier and Japanese civilian deaths.

As the world commemorates the 68th anniversary of the attacks, however, it is important to take a step back and view the catastrophic event not through the prism of propaganda and mythologizing, but instead through the lens of historical scrutiny. For, as if often the case, the disparity between “Official History” and reality is characterized by lies and deceptions bolstered by patriotism and American exceptionalism.

We are told repeatedly that, without the use of weapons which current Hiroshima Mayor Kazumi Matsui refers to as the “ultimate inhumane weapon and an absolute evil”, Japan would never have surrendered. We are told that President Truman was troubled by the mounting Allied casualties, and that the Joint Chiefs had told him to expect 1,000,000 dead Americans in the pending attack on the Japanese home islands. Yet this figure is a complete fabrication, invented by Secretary of War Stimson. No such claim was made by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Truman himself, in different statements, asserted “thousands of lives would be saved,” and “a quarter of a million of the flower of our young manhood was worth a couple of Japanese cities,” and also “I thought 200,000 of our young men would be saved by making that decision.” None of these statements were based on any evidence.

The alleged indefatigably of the Japanese military and their unwillingness to surrender is also a proven myth. By the summer of 1945 their position was hopeless and numerous attempts to surrender had already been made. Brigadier Gen. Carter W. Clarke stated: “We brought them down to an abject surrender through the accelerated sinking of their merchant marine and hunger alone, and when we didn’t need to do it, and we knew we didn’t need to do it, and they knew that we knew we didn’t need to do it, we used them as an experiment for two atomic bombs.”

Truman knew weeks before the Potsdam Conference, which began in July, 1945, that the Japanese were making overtures to surrender, the only condition being the retention of the Emperor. But Truman was determined to test the new bombs. In the words of General Douglas McArthur: ”The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor.” In the event, the US agreed to the terms of the Japanese surrender anyway – but not until they had tested their new weapons and caused the deaths of 100,000s of innocent civilians.

In reality, most of the military top brass were disgusted at the decision to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki and understood completely that it served no military purpose whatsoever. Admiral William D. Leahy, the President’s Chief of Staff said, “The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender.” This view was reiterated by Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, who said, “The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace… The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military standpoint, in the defeat of Japan.”

 

So what is the truth about the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Why, when intelligence agencies knew months in advance that contingency plans for a large-scale invasion were completely unnecessary and that Japan desperately sought peace, did they, as Admiral Leahy put it, adopt “an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages”?

There are two main reasons. Firstly, the Russians had entered the Japanese war and were making striking advances through Manchuria, decimating the already weakened Japanese army. Indeed, their role was pivotal – as Air Force General Claire Chennault stated: “Russia’s entry into the Japanese war was the decisive factor in speeding its end and would have been so even if no atomic bombs had been dropped.” The last thing the American leadership wanted was for Russia to receive equal spoils of war and emerge from the war as a superpower equal to the US.

In this sense, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are more accurately perceived as the opening salvos of the Cold War, rather than the final shots fired in the Second World War – the Cold War was, after all, defined essentially as a balance of nuclear powers; realpolitik and the primacy of power where the arms race and military insanity took supremacy over diplomacy.

The other, far more sinister reason, was one of scientific curiosity. After making such a huge investment in the Manhattan Project (2 billion in 1940) and with three bombs completed, there was little to no desire to shelve the weapons. The fissionable material in the Hiroshima bomb was uranium, while the Nagasaki bomb was plutonium, and subsequently there was intense scientific curiosity as to the different effects these bombs would produce. As the US Army director of the project, General Leslie Groves pondered: “what would happen if an entire city was leveled by a single uranium bomb?” “What about a plutonium bomb?” For the science experiment to go ahead, surrender was not an option.

Perhaps Stanley Kubrick in his movie Dr. Strangelove, Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb expressed his understanding more than most of the mentality of those who pushed for the use of atomic weapons on the Japanese at Hiroshima and Nagasaki – it was a decision based on a kind of hell-bent fanatical militarism combined with the worst kind of scientific endeavor devoid of any sense of humanity. Small wonder that this history books and the propaganda machine went into overdrive in the following years, endlessly justifying the use of what President Eisenhower described as “that awful thing”.

MORE>>

 

Postcards from Pripyat, Chernobyl
Category: VIDEOS
Tags: Accident Blast Ecology Energy Infrastructure Nuclear

http://vimeo.com/112681885

from Danny Cooke

Earlier this year I had the opportunity to visit Chernobyl whilst working for CBS News on a '60 Minutes' episode which aired on Nov. 23, 2014. Bob Simon is the correspondent. Michael Gavshon and David Levine, producers.

For the full story cbsnews.com/news/chernobyl-the-catastrophe-that-never-ended/

----> ***Soundtrack 'Promise land' by Hannah Miller - licensed on themusicbed.com

Chernobyl is one of the most interesting and dangerous places I've been. The nuclear disaster, which happened in 1986 (the year after I was born), had an effect on so many people, including my family when we lived in Italy. The nuclear dust clouds swept westward towards us. The Italian police went round and threw away all the local produce and my mother rushed out to purchase as much tinned milk as possible to feed me, her infant son.

It caused so much distress hundreds of miles away, so I can't imagine how terrifying it would have been for the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian citizens who were forced to evacuate.

During my stay, I met so many amazing people, one of whom was my guide Yevgen, also known as a 'Stalker'. We spent the week together exploring Chernobyl and the nearby abandoned city of Pripyat. There was something serene, yet highly disturbing about this place. Time has stood still and there are memories of past happenings floating around us.


Note by SiNeh~

We have had a very interesting Article posted here at the BOLE in December 2013 at following link. There was a Lady that explored the whole region of Chernobyl with her Bike and wrote an amazing Article about it with many pictures and also have a link to a Video there she made.

MC road trip into Chernobyl zone!

Ghost Town:

This is the amazing story from Filatova Elena Vladimirovna, she tells us from her road-trip on her motorcycle to Chernobyl.

You don't need to have a bike to follow her.

Just click  HERE and you are there.

 

Enjoy the trip into one of the dead zone created by humankind here on Earth.

SiNeh~

 

RSS
Search a Blog

February 2015 (1)
January 2015 (454)
December 2014 (457)
November 2014 (524)
October 2014 (543)
September 2014 (509)
August 2014 (462)
July 2014 (447)
June 2014 (405)
May 2014 (500)
April 2014 (560)
March 2014 (540)
February 2014 (502)
Blog Categories

WHO IS ONLINE
Support B.O.L.E.

Thank you for supporting the BOLE

Your support to have the B.O.L.E. (incl.all articles) open and free for everyone is much appreciated.

Products for your Wellness

Important: For all products chose at the top of the page the  language (English or German) and currency!

 click HERE to reach all products

TATWellness deliver worldwide.

In Your Service

B.O.L.E.

 

This website is powered by Spruz