Update: 2018-12: Russia has successfully tested AVANGARD HYPERSONIC GLIDE VEHICLE (HGV) Rendering US Missile defense useless

… the new costly weapons race predicted by Gorbachev has already begun.

I really wonder if Trump considered the consequences, i guess not, maybe he should have sat down with Gorbachev and not Goldman-Sachs before quitting the INF-treaty with Russia – starting a new cold war.

Now USA and Israel can go back to the drawing board…for another round of cat and mouse. 

More money for military buildup – more powder that could accidentally explode.

“Trump reassured allies and partners that the United States remains committed to NATO, noting that the missile defense review directs the Pentagon “to prioritize the $ALE of American mi$$ile defen$e and technologie$ to our allie$ and to our partner$.” (src: thehill.com)

….and who ever wants to build up massive state deficits in $debt to the U$.

“But he also criticized allies, saying they need to do a better job of sharing costs.”

… with “sharing costs” Trump means the world should buy more U$ weapons to stay safe.

It translates into Trump wants Poland and NATO to pay Lockheed Martin for the arms race, after all it’s for THEIR security, isn’t it?

It will be billion$ and billion$ into private US-pockets that avoid taxes even in U$A.

This is what happens if not brains but money rules the world.

2018-02: US has spent more than $40 billion on missile defense projects over the last 15 years, and has no real credible capability to show for it.

(src: businessinsider.com)

2019.03: France wants to share Aircraft carrier costs with Germany


US retreat from INF (anti-missiles treaty) could be more about China (anti-access) than Russia

“American hard-liners feel constrained by the treaty” (nytimes.com)

IMHO China has worked on an anti-access strategy against access of US-aircraft-carriers (THE weapon of US powerproject) to it’s waters and thus USA wants to step back from the INF treaty to develop missiles that can hit China anti-access-missiles before those missiles hit US-aircraft carriers (it’s all war games in the head of military planners).

But i have never seen any statement saying: “We the US step back from the anti-missile-treaty because the Chinese build so many land based anti-foreign-ship-access-to-our-waters missiles” (but we will blame it on the “badass” the Russians)

this claim is backed up by this article:

China rejects German appeal to join endangered cold war-era nuclear treaty

  • Politburo member Yang Jiechi says Chinese weapons are defensive and don’t pose a threat
  • German Chancellor Angela Merkel (WOW SHE IS FINALLY DOING SOMETHING GOOD) is calling for a global medium-range treaty to take account of China’s growing missile power

( Liu Zhen 2019-02-17 src)

“It would allow Washington to finally compete with Beijing in building similar weapons previously banned under the treaty.” (src: nationalinterest.org)

as a start: US please stop lying in public and state your real reasons and the world community COULD find a solution to this mess. THANK YOU 🙂

let’s get this straight: it is NOT COOL to build many many boxes full of explosives – it just needs one terrorist/saboteur to drop some passports and a matchstick and the whole situation could explode – as it was during ww1. (militarization for maybe economic reasons, a lot of alliances were forged, and then a matchstick was dropped… and Germany maybe should have not sided with Austria and Russia not with Hungary)

Also China is working on 4x Air-Craft carriers – (3x secondhand, 1x selfmade) one – even bought from AUSTRALIA! (there are a lot of Chinese people in Australia, but also from India, yes they try to expand economically, yes they try to expand their influence, but, the Chinese there might be ARROGANT (not all of them) AND SPEAK NO ENGLISH (some raised there speak very well), BUT THEY ARE NOT VIOLENT OR AGGRESSIVE!!!)


“During the Cold War, George Kennan and his ilk essentially argued that the Russians were, as a result of a long history of foreign invasion and occupation, paranoid and fearful of enemies on their borders.

Their classic response was to push their borders and spheres outwards to provide a buffer against hostile forces.

See the Warsaw Pact nations.

In this context the wars in Ukraine and Georgia could be seen as a defensive reaction against the forward advance of NATO countries after the Cold War.” (Russia/Moscow fearful of possible US/NATO-Pershing-missile-decapitation strike, src)

“if the U.S. deploys intermediate range missiles in Europe after opting out of the treaty banning their use, it will allow Washington to reach targets deep inside Russia” (Russian Defense Ministry Press Service via AP/File, src: DefenseNews)

Lockheed Martin (biggest high tech weapons company on this planet) slogan: “The Pershing Missile: Peace Through Strength” (src)

“We would very much want not to get to the point of new missile crises.

No one will benefit from those developments.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin

Such weapons were seen as particularly dangerous since they take only a few minutes to reach their targets, leaving little time for political leaders to ponder a response and raising the threat of a nuclear war in case of a false attack warning. (src: DefenseNews)

“Russia doesn’t plan to deploy missiles banned by the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty that the US has said it plans to abandon, Putin said.

But if the US does, “Russia will be forced to produce and deploy weapons that can be used not only against the territories from which we face this direct threat but also those where the decision is made to use these missiles,” he said.

The US and its allies are laying the groundwork to deploy new intermediate-range missiles in Europe for the first time since they were banned by the treaty. With a second pact covering nuclear weapons likely to expire in two years, the risks of confrontation are growing.” (src: economictimes.indiatimes.com)


Who is it good for? Will the Pharma-Mafia sell more drugs? I don’t get it. For Trump – it’s all about Dollars – weapons sales and profit – but maybe there is a hidden agenda at work here…

Mikhail Gorbachev: A New Nuclear Arms Race Has Begun

Mikhail Gorbachev (7th and last leader of the Soviet Union): Oct. 25, 2018

President Trump says he plans to withdraw from a nonproliferation treaty that I signed with Ronald Reagan.

It’s just the latest victim in the militarization of world affairs.”

“This was a first step. It was followed in 1991 by the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which the Soviet Union signed with President George H.W. Bush, our agreement on radical cuts in tactical nuclear arms, and the New Start Treaty, signed by the presidents of Russia and the United States in 2010.”

“There are still too many nuclear weapons in the world, but the American and Russian arsenals are now a fraction of what they were during the Cold War. At the Nuclear Nonproliferation Review Conference in 2015, Russia and the United States reported to the international community that 85 percent of those arsenals had been decommissioned and, for the most part, destroyed.

Brain Jogger: What is this political cartoon trying to say?: That USDollars can eat brains – especially those of Donald the Trumpet.

Today, this tremendous accomplishment, of which our two nations can be rightfully proud, is in jeopardy. President Trump announced last week the United States’ plan to withdraw from the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty and his country’s intention to build up nuclear arms.”

“The I.N.F. Treaty is not the first victim of the militarization of world affairs.

In 2002, the United States withdrew from the Antiballistic Missile Treaty; this year, from the Iran nuclear deal.

Military expenditures have soared to astronomical levels and keep rising.

As a pretext for the withdrawal from the I.N.F. Treaty, the United States invoked Russia’s alleged violations of some of the treaty’s provisions.

Russia has raised similar concerns regarding American compliance, at the same time proposing to discuss the issues at the negotiating table to find a mutually acceptable solution.

But over the past few years, the United States has been avoiding such discussion. I think it is now clear why.

With enough political will, any problems of compliance with the existing treaties could be resolved. But as we have seen during the past two years, the president of the United States has a very different purpose in mind. It is to release the United States from any obligations, any constraints, and not just regarding nuclear missiles.

The United States has in effect taken the initiative in destroying the entire system of international treaties and accords that served as the underlying foundation for peace and security following World War II.

Yet I am convinced that those who hope to benefit from a global free-for-all are deeply mistaken.

There will be no winner in a “war of all against all” — particularly if it ends in a nuclear war.

And that is a possibility that cannot be ruled out.

An unrelenting arms race, international tensions, hostility and universal mistrust will only increase the risk.

Is it too late to return to dialogue and negotiations? I don’t want to lose hope.

I hope that Russia will take a firm but balanced stand.

I hope that America’s allies will, upon sober reflection, refuse to be launchpads for new American missiles.

I hope the United Nations, and particularly members of its Security Council, vested by the United Nations Charter with primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, will take responsible action.

Faced with this dire threat to peace, we are not helpless.

We must not resign, we must not surrender.

Mikhail Gorbachev is the former president of the Soviet Union.

This article was translated by Pavel Palazhchenko from the Russian.”


“President Vladimir Putin said Russia would target the U.S. with new advanced weapons if Washington deploys intermediate-range missiles in Europe, a threat that appeared aimed at holding the line but leaving open the possibility of negotiations after the breakdown of a nuclear treaty, writes Ann M. Simmons (Los Angeles Times)

Mr. Putin said Russia wasn’t seeking a confrontation with the U.S. and wouldn’t make the first move to deploy the missiles. But if Washington has such plans once it abandons the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, this “will be a serious threat to us” and Russia will be “forced to provide for mirror and symmetrical actions,” he said.

The Russian leader also announced imminent plans to launch Russia’s first unmanned nuclear submarine. Still, he indicated that he remained open to nuclear-arms-control talks if the U.S. were to initiate them and many of Wednesday’s statements echoed past rhetoric by Russian officials.”

“[Mr. Putin] seems to be fully aware that Russia can ill-afford to ramp up the arms race, but that there are enormous economic, infrastructure, and social challenges facing Russia.”

Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists


“He is critical of the development and deployment of nuclear weaponry by the US, the UK, and France.[4]

In 2005 he discovered a draft document on a Pentagon website that proposed a change in U.S. nuclear doctrine to include the possibility of a preemptive nuclear strike.

Even though Secretary Rumsfeld had not approved the change, its publication provoked a reaction from some members of Congress.[5]” (src)

Cui Bono? Who profits?

Lockheed Martin – largest high tech weapons company on the planet – but nobody else.


“The U.S. Justice Department is accusing Lockheed Martin Corp. of using false records and making false statements to bill the Energy Department for tens of millions of dollars in unauthorized profits and fees at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington.”

Revenue Increase US$51.048 billion (2017)
Increase US$5.921 billion (2017)
Decrease US$2.002 billion (2017)
Total assets Decrease US$46.521 billion (2017)
Total equity Decrease −US$609 million (2017)
Number of employees
~100,000 (2017)

Fraud at Lockheed Martin:

search for more Fraud cases: https://www.startpage.com/do/dsearch?query=Lockheed Martin fraud

“in the United States, the president is the only person or entity who can order a nuclear strike and has the option to use nuclear weapons first for any reason”


well… not exactly:

For 20 Years the Nuclear Launch Code at US Minuteman Silos Was 00000000

Today I found out that during the height of the Cold War, the US military put such an emphasis on a rapid response to an attack on American soil, that to minimize any foreseeable delay in launching a nuclear missile, for nearly two decades they intentionally set the launch codes at every silo in the US to 8 zeroes.

We guess the first thing we need to address is how this even came to be in the first place. Well, in 1962 JFK signed the National Security Action Memorandum 160, which was supposed to ensure that every nuclear weapon the US had be fitted with a Permissive Action Link (PAL), basically a small device that ensured that the missile could only be launched with the right code and with the right authority.

There was particularly a concern that the nuclear missiles the United States had stationed in other countries, some of which with somewhat unstable leadership, could potentially be seized by those governments and launched. With the PAL system, this became much less of a problem.

Beyond foreign seizure, there was also simply the problem that many U.S. commanders had the ability to launch nukes under their control at any time. Just one commanding officer who wasn’t quite right in the head and World War III begins. As U.S. General Horace M. Wade stated about General Thomas Power:

I used to worry about General Power. I used to worry that General Power was not stable. I used to worry about the fact that he had control over so many weapons and weapon systems and could, under certain conditions, launch the force. Back in the days before we had real positive control [i.e., PAL locks], SAC had the power to do a lot of things, and it was in his hands, and he knew it.

To give you an idea of how secure the PAL system was at this time, bypassing one was once described as being “about as complex as performing a tonsillectomy while entering the patient from the wrong end.” This system was supposed to be essentially hot-wire proof, making sure only people with the correct codes could activate the nuclear weapons and launch the missiles.

However, though the devices were supposed to be fitted on every nuclear missile after JFK issued his memorandum, the military continually dragged its heels on the matter. In fact, it was noted that a full 20 years after JFK had order PALs be fitted to every nuclear device, half of the missiles in Europe were still protected by simple mechanical locks. Most that did have the new system in place weren’t even activated until 1977.

Those in the U.S. that had been fitted with the devices, such as ones in the Minuteman Silos, were installed under the close scrutiny of Robert McNamara, JFK’s Secretary of Defence. However, The Strategic Air Command greatly resented McNamara’s presence and almost as soon as he left, the code to launch the missile’s, all 50 of them, was set to 00000000.

Oh, and in case you actually did forget the code, it was handily written down on a checklist handed out to the soldiers. As Dr. Bruce G. Blair, who was once a Minuteman launch officer, stated:

Our launch checklist in fact instructed us, the firing crew, to double-check the locking panel in our underground launch bunker to ensure that no digits other than zero had been inadvertently dialed into the panel.

This ensured that there was no need to wait for Presidential confirmation that would have just wasted valuable Russian nuking time. To be fair, there was also the possibility that command centers or communication lines could be wiped out, so having a bunch of nuclear missiles sitting around un-launchable because nobody had the code was seen as a greater risk by the military brass than a few soldiers simply deciding to launch the missiles without proper authorization.

Dr. Blair, whose resume to date is far to long to write out here, is the one who broke this “8 zeros” news to the world in his 2004 article “Keeping Presidents in the Nuclear Dark.” He also outlined the significant disconnect between the nation’s elected leaders and the military when it came to nuclear weapons during the Cold War.

Dr. Blair had previously made waves in 1977 when he wrote another article entitled “The Terrorist Threat to World Nuclear Programs“. He had first attempted to communicate the serious security problems at the nuclear silos to congressmen starting around 1973. When that information fell on mostly deaf ears, he decided to outline it for the public in this 1977 article where he described how just four people acting in tandem could easily activate a nuclear launch in the silos he had worked in. Further, amongst other things, the PAL system McNamara had touted was barely in operation and thus launches could be authorised by anyone without Presidential authority. He also noted how virtually anyone who asked for permission to tour the launch facility was granted it with little to no background checks performed. It is, perhaps, not coincidence that the PAL systems were all activated and the codes changed the same year this article was published.

So to recap, for around 20 years, the Strategic Air Command went out of there way to make launching a nuclear missile as easy, and quick, as possible. To be fair, they had their reasons, such as the fact that the soldiers in the silos in the case of a real nuclear war may have needed to be able to launch the missiles without being able to contact anyone on the outside. That said, their actions were in direct violation of the orders of the Commander-in-Chief, the President of the United States, during a time of extreme nuclear tension. Further, not activating this safeguard and lax security ensured that with very little planning, someone with three friends who had a mind to, could have started World War III.



Vasili Arkhipov: The Man Who Literally Saved the World

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *