Quote; "A little more than 60 miles from Brussels Airport, Kleine Brogel Air Base stands as one of six overseas repositories in the world where the United States still stores nuclear weapons. The existence of the bombs is officially neither confirmed nor denied, but it has been well-known for decades.
Yet the presence of these weapons — an estimated 20 American B61 nuclear bombs to be carried and delivered by the Belgian Air Force's dwindling inventory of F-16 fighter jets — did not come up in the news coverage following the Islamic State (IS) bombings last week in Brussels, or in the run-up to President Barack Obama's fourth and last Nuclear Security Summit, being held this week.
Nor was Kleine Brogel mentioned in reports about the shooting death, days after the bombings, of a security guard who worked at a Belgian nuclear facility, or in stories about vulnerabilities at Belgiam's nuclear facilities and power plants. In a prominent editorial entitled "Keeping Nuclear Weapons From Terrorists," the New York Times didn't mention that US nuclear weapons are stored in Belgium while arguing that "even if the chances are small that terrorists will acquire a nuclear weapon," the potential consequences are so devastating, we should plug any "possible security gaps."
To ensure those gaps are plugged, hundreds of millions of dollars has been spent by the US on security in the two decades since the breakup of the Soviet Union. Belgium's bombs are stored inside specially constructed armored vaults underneath protective aircraft shelters that are inside a secured storage site exclusively used for nuclear weapons that is inside a military base.
According to Hans Kristensen, the director of the nuclear information project of the Federation of American Scientists, nuclear weapons have been in Belgium since November 1963, when they arrived under a Top Secret agreement codenamed Pine Cone that was never seen or approved by the Belgian Parliament. A special American unit, the 130-person strong 701st Munitions Support Squadron, the majority of whom are Air Force security police, maintains 11 vaults at Kleine Brogel, along with specialized assets, aircraft, and bombs valued at more than $6.6 billion dollars, according to the resume of one veteran of the base.
For full article.
Quote; "Amply documented, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Turkey are in possession of nuclear weapons which are deployed under national command against Russia, Iran and the Middle.
In recent developments, following the failed July 2016 military coup, the media has reported on Turkey’s nuclear weapons stored and deployed at the Incirlik base.
The stockpiling and deployment of tactical B61 in these five “non-nuclear states” are intended for targets in the Middle East. Moreover, in accordance with “NATO strike plans”, these thermonuclear B61 bunker buster bombs (stockpiled by the “non-nuclear States”) could be launched “against targets in Russia or countries in the Middle East such as Syria and Iran” ( quoted in National Resources Defense Council, Nuclear Weapons in Europe , February 2005, emphasis added)
In recent developments, press reports including Deutsche Welle have confirmed the deployment of Turkey’s 50 B61 nuclear weapons out it Incirlik air force base. But this has been known for years. It took the media ten years to acknowledge that Turkey (a non-nuclear State) possesses a sizeable nuclear arsenal.The accuracy of the numbers of bombs quoted in the media reports remains to be acertained. Some of the bombs were decommissioned. Some of them may have been replaced with a more recent version including the B61-11.
There is however some confusion in the media reports as to the nature of the nuclear bombs stored and deployed at Incirlik. They are B61 gravity bombs [of the bunker buster type] with nuclear warheads, with an explosive capability up to 170 kilotons.
It should be emphasized that in the last few years, the Pentagon has developed a more advanced version of the B61, namely the B61-12, which is slated to replace the older versions currently stored and deployed in Western Europe including Turkey. Moreover, a trillion dollar nuclear weapons is now being contemplated by the Pentagon.
The notion of deterrence has been scrapped These so-called mini-nukes are intended to be used. Under The Pentagon’s so-called Life Extension Program, the the B61 nuclear weapons are intended to “remain operational until at least 2025.”
Does this make Turkey an undeclared nuclear power?
The answer is Yes, but this also applies to four other countries, namely Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany and Italy which also possess B61 nuclear bombs, deployed under national command and targeted at Russia, Iran and the Middle East.
“Far from making Europe safer, and far from producing a less nuclear dependent Europe, [the policy] may well end up bringing more nuclear weapons into the European continent, and frustrating some of the attempts that are being made to get multilateral nuclear disarmament,” (Former NATO Secretary-General George Robertson quoted in Global Security, February 10, 2010)
“‘Is Italy capable of delivering a thermonuclear strike?… Could the Belgians and the Dutch drop hydrogen bombs on enemy targets?… Germany’s air force couldn’t possibly be training to deliver bombs 13 times more powerful than the one that destroyed Hiroshima, could it?… Nuclear bombs are stored on air-force bases in Italy, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands — and planes from each of those countries are capable of delivering them.” (“What to Do About Europe’s Secret Nukes.”Time Magazine, December 2, 2009)Go to: http://truepublica.org.uk/eu/europes-five-undeclared-nuclear-weapons-states/
For full article.
Quote; "A thermonuclear weapon weighing little more than 2,400 pounds (1,100 kg) can produce an explosive force comparable to the detonation of more than 1.2 million tons of TNT. A nuclear device no larger than traditional bombs can devastate an entire city by blast, fire, and radiation. Nuclear weapons are considered weapons of mass destruction, and their use and control has been a major focus of international relations policy since their debut.
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, commonly known as the Non-Proliferation Treaty or NPT, is an international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament.
Five states have signed up to NPT, the US, UK, Russia, France and China. Between them they have declared 22,000 nuclear weapons in stock. These five Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) have made undertakings not to use their nuclear weapons against a non-NWS party except in response to a nuclear attack. India, Pakistan and N.Korea have also declared stocks of nuclear weapons. Israel is widely known to have nuclear weapons but does not declare it.
In his book Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War Michel Chossudovsky tells us about the interconnection between the Pentagon and US corporations. The book says the US Congress okay’d the use of tactical nuclear weapons in non-conventional wars in 2003. According to congressmen it was quite “safe for civilians”.
In intensive warfare conditions, up-to-date tactical nuclear weapons can create an illusion of their absence on the battlefield when used together with conventional weapons. For instance, according to Russian military experts nuclear munitions of a new generation were used in Lebanon in 2006 during the operation against the Hezbollah. The soil samples taken from craters had traces of enriched uranium. At the same time there was no gamma radiation and isotope of cesium 137 resulting from radioactive decay. The radiation level was high inside the craters but went down approximately by half at the distance of just a few meters away.
According to U.S. military sources, the first detonation of a nuclear weapon against another country since 1945 took place approximately 11 miles east of Basra, Iraq sometime between February 2 and February 5, 1991.*
By then, Iraq’s former capitol had been declared a “free fire on zone” – open to carpet-bombing by high-flying formations of eight-engine B-52s. “Basra is a military town in the true sense,” military spokesman General Richard Neal told the press. “The infrastructure, military infrastructure, is closely interwoven within the city of Basra itself.” Go to: http://truepublica.org.uk/global/nuclear-war-didnt-know/
For full article.
*Bold italics mine.
Quote; "The main actors in the Iran pre-emptive nuclear warfare
Thermo-nuclear weapons are deployed by the three "official" Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) of the Atlantic Alliance, namely the US, the UK and France. The official NWS status is established under the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Five other NATO member countries (categorized under the NPT as"non-nuclear states"), namely Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and Turkey, possess an arsenal of B61 tactical nuclear warheads or "mini-nukes" (Made in America) which are deployed under national military command and are targeted at Iran. The B61 can be delivered by a variety of different aircraft.
Are these five countries in violation of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty of which they are signatories?
In relation to ongoing war plans, the US-NATO-Israel military alliance includes a total of nine countries which possess a nuclear weapons arsenal:
The three official NWS (US, UK, France) plus the five "Undeclared Nuclear States" (Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, Italy and Turkey) plus the State of Israel (Undeclared Nuclear State). With the exception of Israel, these countries are signatories of the NPT.
Pre-emptive Nuclear WarfareWhile reports tend to depict the tactical B61 bombs as a relic of the Cold war, the mini nukes are the preferred weapons system for pre-emptive nuclear war. Were an attack directed against Iran to be launched involving the deployment of B61 bunker buster nuclear bombs, these five countries, with Turkey and Italy in the forefront, would play a major strategic role. https://www.rt.com/op-edge/nuclear-war-iran-nato-629/
For full article.
Quote; "News reports about the United States withdrawing its nuclear weapons from Turkey raise a number of questions. First of all, one has to admit that this is a very serious matter, if it is true, of course, as it changes the balance of forces not only in the region - the Middle East, the Black Sea, the Caucasus - but also in the region where these weapons will be relocated.
Let us assume that the Americans have indeed decided to redeploy nuclear weapons from Turkey. The first question is where to? It was reported that the recipient was Romania, but the authorities of the country refuted the information.
If not Romania, who is ready to accept US nuclear weapons both technically and politically?
In principle, any NATO country is. I do not think that there are considerable technical problems at this point. After all, it goes about tactical, rather than strategic weapons: aviation bombs, warheads for short-range missiles, artillery shells. Of course, all this requires special storage conditions, security and so on, but one does not have to build state-of-the-art constructions for the purpose.
In general, US weapons may find themselves anywhere in Europe - from Portugal to Bulgaria, Poland and the Baltic states.
Another question is: who in Europe would agree to this? After all, the Europeans understand that the deployment of such weapons in Europe, especially in the vicinity of Russian borders, will lead to a reciprocal reaction from Moscow. Most likely, Russia will put the above-mentioned weapons on the list of targets for Russian missiles.
Some European politicians, especially from Eastern Europe, follow the principle "the worse - the better," when it comes to their relations with Russia. Yet, even most reckless European officials would not like to make their countries become targets for Russian missiles." http://www.pravdareport.com/world/asia/turkey/19-08-2016/135385-usa_nuclear_weapons-0/
http://gkhales.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/saudi-war-on-yemen-worse-than-israels.htmlhttp://gkhales.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/leaked-israels-plans-to-strike-iran.html http://gkhales.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/israeli-army-blocked-netanyahus-plans.html http://gkhales.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/israel-only-impediment-to-nuclear-free.html http://gkhales.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/desert-storm-saddam-bomb-and-almagordo.html
The #EMPBomb: ..and with special regard to questions of proliferation (also largely ignored at the moment even by the Anti-Nuclear campaigning organisations), the Electro-Magnetic Pulse Bomb is a "must have" for all modern militaries as it represents the only weapon available for the less technologically advanced nations and is of-course essential for the established powers as it is impossible to take anyone "seriously" these days if they don't have one. Nuclear weapons require nuclear power (one hesitates to ask but have the Japanese learned nothing?), and until we've given up competing in the technological arms race how On Earth are we going to get rid of them (that means all technological arms races including that of large hadron colliders and particle beam experimentation in general!*)? See; "Do "Electro-Magnetic Pulse" Weapons Make Nuclear Weapons "Indispensable" for the Old Empires?" Go to: https://gkhales.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/do-electro-magnetic-pulse-weapons-make.html, "Electro-Magnetic Pulse Weapons Update (The GHE-O "Rescue")" Go to: http://gkhales.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/electro-magnetic-pulse-weapons-update.html & "Faslane Investment Announcement "Pre-#EMP s" Discussion on Trident: "Are there #WMDs -as well as unexploded #IDS-, in the House?"" Go to: http://gkhales.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/faslane-investment-announcement-pre-emp.html
*See; "The #Epidemiology of Khaos or "The Problem with #CERN"" Go to: http://gkhales.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/the-epidemiology-of-khaos-or-problem.html
& "Forbidden History and "The Reich of the Black Sun"" Go to: http://gkhales.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/forbidden-history-and-reich-of-black-sun.html