You are here

Peace & Nonviolence

Peace & Nonviolence Logo

How US nuclear force modernization is undermining strategic stability: The burst-height compensating super-fuze

http://thebulletin.org/sites/default/files/styles/scale_width_700px/public/Figure-1-Postol-new_0.jpg?itok=0EXm2Iwi

  • We cannot foresee a situation in which a competent and properly informed US president would order a surprise first strike against Russia or China. But our conclusion makes the increased sea-based offensive and defensive capabilities we have described seem all the more bizarre as a strategy for reducing the chances of nuclear war with either Russia or China.
  • Related: Trump’s Proposed Increase in U.S. Defense Spending Would Be 80 Percent of Russia’s Entire Military Budget

Hans M. Kristensen, Matthew McKinzie, Theodore A. Postol, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

1 March 2017 | The US nuclear forces modernization program has been portrayed to the public as an effort to ensure the reliability and safety of warheads in the US nuclear arsenal, rather than to enhance their military capabilities. In reality, however, that program has implemented revolutionary new technologies that will vastly increase the targeting capability of the US ballistic missile arsenal. This increase in capability is astonishing—boosting the overall killing power of existing US ballistic missile forces by a factor of roughly three—and it creates exactly what one would expect to see, if a nuclear-armed state were planning to have the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war by disarming enemies with a surprise first strike.

Because of improvements in the killing power of US submarine-launched ballistic missiles, those submarines now patrol with more than three times the number of warheads needed to destroy the entire fleet of Russian land-based missiles in their silos. US submarine-based missiles can carry multiple warheads, so hundreds of others, now in storage, could be added to the submarine-based missile force, making it all the more lethal.

Hans M. Kristensen is the director of the Nuclear Information Project with the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) in Washington, DC. His work focuses on researching and writing about the status of...

Matthew McKinzie is the director of the Nuclear Program of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in Washington, DC. He and Kristensen recently co-authored...

A physicist, Theodore A. Postol, is professor of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. His expertise is in ballistic...

Full story … 

http://evergreenedigest.org/sites/default/files/Soldiers%20Marching%20in%20Parade.jpg

Related:

Trump’s Proposed Increase in U.S. Defense Spending Would Be 80 Percent of Russia’s Entire Military Budget, Alex Emmons, the Intercept

At a meeting of U.S. governors on Monday, Trump described his forthcoming budget proposal as “a public safety and national security budget.”

  http://everydayfeminism.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/PlsShareArrow5.png

The Tears We Don’t Spill

 http://uziiw38pmyg1ai60732c4011.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/dropzone/2016/08/shutterstock_768877.jpg

  • On that night when America watched spellbound as a woman cried for her dead husband, no tears fell for the children who were murdered in Yemen.  Don’t think of a fucking dead kid.  Don’t think of a murdered child with his face split open by American bullets.  And do not ever fucking think about any elephants, especially fucking dead ones.
  • Related: Liberal War Addiction

Michael LandisCounterpunch.org

http://voiceseducation.org/sites/default/files/images/peacegallupcolorsmall_1.jpg  March 10, 2017 | During our current President’s speech to the joint session of paid-for lackeys, idiots and low dollar whores for Wall Street there was a particularly horrible, predictable American moment.  A fresh widow created by our intrusion into another country in the mid-East to ferret out, that is, murder, some evil-doers was trotted out for all the nation to see.  It was epic television; a hearty round of applause drowning out her deep throated gasps of mourning.  She was trying her best to stand tall with the very people who decided her husband must go on another raid for the good of our country.  It was a typically cathartic moment.

One that America embraces, with proper amounts of solemnity, to bolster our national pride and the righteous sense of ourselves and our sacrificial military combatants.  As the fictitious Colonel Jessup said, “You need brave men on that wall.”  You could almost sense those faded yellow ribbons on America’s cars brightening themselves in the moonlight.  Poignant, powerful, sad, and serious, it was a spectacle we’ve long become too accustomed to, reenacting on a massive platform.  In short, it was a very high and sinister level of war porn.  To say this is to violate one of our biggest taboos.  And it certainly remains one of the biggest problems with us, the American people.

Michael Landis is a retired Sergeant in the US Army and veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom-3.

Full story … 

Related:

http://evergreenedigest.org/sites/default/files/Pine%20Tree%20Logo200%20with%2011%20Yr%20Banner.jpg  Of the many hundreds of readers that will visit Evergreene Digest today, we want you to be one of them that makes a donation.

Thank you sincerely in advance.

Dave & the Crew

 



 

Liberal War Addiction, Peter Levelle, RT

Today it’s liberalism that shows itself to be intolerant and decidedly pro-war. 

Series | A Living Earth Economy, Part 9: Want National Security? Dismantle the War Machine

  http://evergreenedigest.org/sites/default/files/Gaza%20Up%20in%20US%20%26%20Israeli%20Smoke.jpg

  • A military response to violence creates more violence. For real security, we need to stop climate change and work toward shared prosperity.
  • 9th in a Series
  • Related: Trump’s Proposed Increase in U.S. Defense Spending Would Be 80 Percent of Russia’s Entire Military Budget

David Korten, Yes! Magazine

http://www.yesmagazine.org/peace-justice/a-security-strategy-for-the-21st-century-20160921/peaceday.jpg/imageSep 21, 2016 | The recent 15th anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade towers was a reminder of the terrible consequences when a nation ignores the lessons of history—including its own recent history. The U.S. military budget is a tragic example.

We currently spend roughly $598 billion on defense, which is more than the next seven biggest military spenders combined: China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, the United Kingdom, India, France, and Japan. This represents 54 percent of federal discretionary spending. In return, we get an ability to rapidly deploy conventional military power anywhere in the world.

  http://www.yesmagazine.org/new-economy/the-thing-sanders-trump-and-clinton-agree-on-its-that-bad-20160323/Korteninset.jpgDavid Korten wrote this article for YES! Magazine as part of his new series of biweekly columns on “A Living Earth Economy.” David is co-founder and board chair of YES! Magazine, president of the Living Economies Forum, co-chair of the New Economy Working Group, a member of the Club of Rome, and the author of influential books, including When Corporations Rule the World and Change the Story, Change the Future: A Living Economy for a Living Earth. His work builds on lessons from the 21 years he and his wife, Fran, lived and worked in Africa, Asia, and Latin America on a quest to end global poverty

Full story … 

Previously in this series

Related:

http://www.evergreenedigest.org/sites/default/files/twitter-4-512.png Now you can follow Evergreene Digest on Twitter.

 

 



Trump’s Proposed Increase in U.S. Defense Spending Would Be 80 Percent of Russia’s Entire Military Budget, Alex Emmons, the Intercept

At a meeting of U.S. governors on Monday, Trump described his forthcoming budget proposal as “a public safety and national security budget.”

 

 

http://everydayfeminism.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/PlsShareArrow5.png

 

Trump’s Proposed Increase in U.S. Defense Spending Would Be 80 Percent of Russia’s Entire Military Budget

http://evergreenedigest.org/sites/default/files/Soldiers%20Marching%20in%20Parade.jpg

At a meeting of U.S. governors on Monday, Trump described his forthcoming budget proposal as “a public safety and national security budget.”

Alex Emmons, the Intercept

http://evergreenedigest.org/sites/default/files/Subscribe%20logo.jpg To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up here to receive the latest updates from all reader supported Evergreene Digest.

 


https://riseuptimes.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/if-war-is-the-answer.jpg?w=540  February 27 2017 | The U.S. Government already spends $600 billion dollars a year on its military — more money than the next seven biggest spenders combined, including China and Russia.

On Monday, the White House said it would request $54 billion more in military spending for next year. That increase alone is roughly the size of the entire annual military budget of the United Kingdom, the fifth-largest spending country, and it’s more than 80 percent of Russia’s entire military budget in 2015.

If Congress were to follow Trump’s blueprint, the U.S. military budget could account for nearly 40 percent of global military spending next year. The U.S. would be outspending Russia by a margin of greater than 9 to 1.

 

 

 

Alex Emmons is a reporter covering national security, foreign affairs, human rights, and politics. Prior to joining The Intercept, he worked for Amnesty International and the ACLU on their campaigns against targeted killing, mass surveillance, and Guantánamo Bay.

 
 

Full story … 

http://everydayfeminism.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/PlsShareArrow5.png

Pages