11 July 2019 — WSWS
Strategic analyst Hugh White has reignited a debate in media and security circles about building nuclear weapons to defend the country against the alleged threat posed by nuclear-armed powers, particularly China. His recently published book, How to Defend Australia, argues that nuclear weapons need to be considered because the United States is in relative decline and can no longer be relied upon to defend Australia in a “more contested and more dangerous” region.
17 June 2019 — Mint Press
Israel is one of only five nations in the world that refuse to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, an international treaty aimed at ending the proliferation of nuclear weapons and achieving global nuclear disarmament.
2 May 2019 — National Security Archive
20 February 2019 — Land Destroyer
(Tony Cartalucci – NEO) – The United States and its NATO partners are attempting to make the case for Washington’s decision to abandon the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty.
Claims that the Russian Federation has been violating the treaty have yet to be substantiated with anything resembling credible evidence. Also missing is any rational explanation as to why Russia would develop or deploy nuclear weapons capable of launching a nuclear strike on Europe without warning – a scenario the INF Treaty was created to deter.
12 February 2019 — TomDispatch
Last month, the National Nuclear Security Administration (formerly the Atomic Energy Commission) announced that the first of a new generation of strategic nuclear weapons had rolled off the assembly line at its Pantex nuclear weapons plant in the panhandle of Texas. That warhead, the W76-2, is designed to be fitted to a submarine-launched Trident missile, a weapon with a range of more than 7,500 miles. By September, an undisclosed number of warheads will be delivered to the Navy for deployment.
8 February 2019 — The Indian Punchline – Oriental Review
The US president’s annual State of the Union address traditionally focuses on domestic issues but it also throws some light on the foreign policy priorities. President Trump’s speech on Tuesday adhered to the pattern and if anything, the portions on foreign policy received scant attention, restricted to his “agenda to protect America’s National Security.” Trump’s re-election bid for a second term in 2020 provided the backdrop.
19 January 2019 — New Eastern Outlook
Alleged discussions between US President Donald Trump and his aides about a US withdrawal from NATO have been making headlines recently.
15 January 2019 — TRNN
Larry Wilkerson says the US government is raising the danger of nuclear war by spending more than a trillion dollars to upgrade the American nuclear arsenal, with no real objective other than money making – with host Paul Jay (inc. transcript)
Continue reading
4 December 2018 — Oriental Review
There is a rather embarrassing negative perspective for maintaining rational military strategic parity between Russia and USA and Russia and NATO as a whole in the coming decades due to future tremendous expenditures of the USA for modernizing strategic and tactical nuclear forces that will require $ U.S. 1,2-1,7 trillion during next three decades for hammering out a qualitatively new strategic nuclear triad only. Substantial amount of money will be allocated for procurement of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS), space-based strike assets and conventional arms as well. No other nation in the world can afford to spend such enormous amount of money.
30 November 2018 — Global Research
On November 10, a 5,290-ton Norwegian warship sank into one of the country’s inner fiords after colliding with a 62,557-ton tanker carrying almost 100 million liters of oil. CNN reported, “Now all that remains above the waterline is the frigate’s top, antennas and radar, leading local media to speculate how a ship designed for war failed to avoid a slow-moving, 62,557-ton tanker.”
13 November 2018 — Dispatches from the Edge
The decision by the Trump administration to withdraw from the Intermediate Nuclear Force Agreement (INF) appears to be part of a broader strategy aimed at unwinding over 50 years of agreements to control and limit nuclear weapons, returning to an era characterized by the unbridled development weapons of mass destruction.
12 November 2018 — TRNN
Every President since Truman has used a nuclear first strike threat as leverage in U.S. foreign policy; it’s institutional insanity says Daniel Ellsberg on Reality Asserts Itself with Paul Jay
