Western nutjobs have made Turkey a de facto nuclear power. That´ll end well.

[galdur]

MILITARY

Reports: US nuclear 'upgrades' in Europe
Upgrades of six US air bases set to stock modernized B61 nuclear bombs are continuing in Turkey and Europe, according to US and German researchers. They claim Turkey's Incirlik base stocks at least 50 such US weapons.

Modernizations of security perimeters around nuclear bomb vaults and infrastructure at the six US air bases were continuing apace, reported the Frankfurter Rundschau (FR) newspaper on Wednesday.
Moscow reacted on Wednesday saying it would take countermeasures if the US placed new nuclear weapons in Germany.

"Unfortunately, if this step is implemented it may disrupt the strategic balance in Europe," said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.
The US provided the bulk of the funding but extras such as runway refurbishments came out of the national budgets of the five 'guest' NATO partners - Germany, Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey.

Congress boosted spending in 2011 after an air force review concluded that "most" US storage sites in Europe did not meet US defense department standards.
The FR cited the non-governmental Berlin Institute for Transatlantic Security (BITS) and findings of the nuclear-critical Federation of American Scientists (FAS) compiled from budgetary data given to the US Congress.

Turkey gives US F-16s only temporary access at Incirlik
Nuclear vaults reinforced

FAS researcher Hans M. Kristensen said commercially available aerial photos showed new perimeter construction works around 12 aircraft shelter-vault complexes at the US Aviano air base in Italy and 21 such aircraft shelters at Incirlik, where the perimeter had double fencing and intrusion detection equipment.
Special weapons maintenance trucks were also being replaced and upgraded, he said.

Incirlik, close to war-torn Syria, has been used in recent months for US-led airstrikes on jihadist IS militants in Syria.
Those activities have coincided with a Russian military buildup via Tartus, a Soviet-era naval base in Syria's coastal Mediterranean region of Latakia.

50 estimated at Incirlik
Kristensen estimated that Incirlik's vaults currently held 50 B61 nuclear weapons.
For the anti-IS operation, US F-16 jets had been relocated from Aviano, Italy to the Turkish NATO base under a "unique" arrangement.
"The Turks have declined US requests to permanently base a fighting wing at the [Incirlik] base," he wrote.
Range depends on aircraft
The FR said the B61 nuclear bomb - first devised in the 1960s - had been "modernized" so it could be set to explode at various strengths of up to ten-times the devastation inflicted at Hiroshima, Japan, in 1945.
It also has the capability to be steered toward a target placed it between short-range "tactical" and long-range "strategic" atomic weapons, the FR said.
Fliegerhorst Büchel Atomwaffenstationierung USA Eifel Flash-Galerie
US believed to store 20 B61s at Germany's Büchel base
"It now comes down to the range of the carrier aircraft," it said.adding that congressional papers pointed to the development of a so-called B61-13 from 2038.

Refurbished runway at Büchel
BITS author Orfried Nassauer said investments by Gemany's Bundeswehr were scheduled at Büchel, widely believed to be the sole US nuclear-equipped air base in Germany.
The base's runway - located in Germany 's hilly, western Eiffel region - was to be fully refurbished and fitted with a modern instrument-landing system next year, he said.
A member of German federal parliament's defense committee, Social Democrat (SPD) Thomas Hitschler recently told the Rhein-Zeitung newspaper that the German government planned to invest 120 million euros at Büchel.
German public ZDF broadcasting's investigative magazine "Frontal 21" reported on Monday that the US planned to stationed new atomic bombs at Büchel.

Removal long demanded
In 2009 and again in 2011, Germany's then foreign minister Guido Westerwelle demanded the removal of all US nuclear weapons presumed to be at Büchel. The demand, made for decades by peace activists, was backed in a 2010 Bundestag resolution.
A "Wikileaks" paper showed later that Chancellor Angela Merkel's foreign policy advisor Christoph Heusgen distanced Berlin from such calls in talks with Washington.
The FR said Germany had never been allowed by the US to have access to the B21s. During the Cold War, German Tornado jets located at Büchel had trained with mock metal devices.
Upgrades also in Belgium and Italy
The FAS's Kristensen said security upgrades were also under way or planned at the US' Operations Center-Command at Kleine Brogel Air Base in Belgium and a nuclear weapons vault support facility at another air base in Ghedi., Italy.
In July, Italian prosecutors said two arrested IS adherents, a Pakistani and a Tunisian, were suspected of listing Ghedi among their potential targets.
The prosecutors said, however, that the site was "never in danger" because the pair, based in Brescia in northern Italy, had not set their plans in motion.
ipj/rg ( AP,EPD, ZDF)

http://www.dw.com/en/reports-us-nuclear-upgrades-in-europe/a-18731756

http://www.basicint.org/sites/default/files/basicfinalb61_fact_sheetfeb2014.pdf

[1714147858]

1714147858

[galdur]

America's new, more 'usable', nuclear bomb in Europe
The B61 bomb, 180 of which are stockpiled in Europe, is getting an upgrade which will make it more “usable” in the eyes of some in the American military


Julian Borger
Tuesday 10 November 2015 17.48 GMT Last modified on Tuesday 10 November 2015 19.11 GMT

The $8 billion upgrade to the US B61 nuclear bomb has been widely condemned as an awful lot of money to spend on an obsolete weapon. As an old fashioned ‘dumb’ bomb it has no role in US or NATO nuclear doctrine, but the upgrade has gone ahead anyway, in large part as a result of lobbying by the nuclear weapons laboratories.

In non-proliferation terms however the only thing worse than a useless bomb is a ‘usable’ bomb. Apart from the stratospheric price, the most controversial element of the B61 upgrade is the replacement of the existing rigid tail with one that has moving fins that will make the bomb smarter and allow it to be guided more accurately to a target. Furthermore, the yield can be adjusted before launch, according to the target.

The modifications are at the centre of a row between anti-proliferation advocates and the government over whether the new improved B61-12 bomb is in fact a new weapon, and therefore a violation of President Obama’s undertaking not to make new nuclear weapons. His administration’s 2010 Nuclear Posture Review said life extension upgrades to the US arsenal would “not support new military missions or provide for new military capabilities.”

The issue has a particular significance for Europe where a stockpile of 180 B61’s is held in six bases in five countries. If there is no change in that deployment by the time the upgraded B61-12’s enter the stockpile in 2024, many of them will be flown out to the bases in Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Turkey.

The row has had a semantic tone, revolving on what the definition of ‘new’ is, but arguably the only definition that counts is whether the generals and officials responsible for dropping bombs, view its role in a different light as a result of its refurbishment.

Referring to the B61-12’s enhanced accuracy on a recent PBS Newshour television programme, the former head of US Strategic Command, General James Cartwright, made this striking remark:

If I can drive down the yield, drive down, therefore, the likelihood of fallout, etc, does that make it more usable in the eyes of some — some president or national security decision-making process? And the answer is, it likely could be more usable.

In general, it is not a good thing to see the words ‘nuclear bomb’ and ‘usable’ anywhere near each other. Yet they seem to share space in the minds of some of America’s military leaders, as Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists, points out.

Cartwright’s confirmation follows General Norton Schwartz, the former U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff, who in 2014 assessed that the increased accuracy would have implications for how the military thinks about using the B61. “Without a doubt. Improved accuracy and lower yield is a desired military capability. Without a question,” he said.

The great thing about nuclear weapons was that their use was supposed to be unthinkable and they were therefore a deterrent to contemplation of a new world war. Once they become ‘thinkable’ we are in a different, and much more dangerous, universe.

It is a universe in which former vice president Dick Cheney has apparently lived for some time. The new biography of George H W Bush has served as a reminder that in the run-up to the first Gulf War, Cheney commissioned a Pentagon study to find out how many tactical nuclear weapons it would take to kill a division of Saddam Hussein’s Republican Guard. The answer was apparently 17.

In his own memoir, Colin Powell, then chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recalled being ordered by Cheney to carry out the assessment against Powell’s own better judgment. As related in Atomic Audit: The Costs and Consequences of US Nuclear Weapons since 1940, edited by Stephen Schwartz:

While planning strategy prior to the Gulf, Powell told Secretary of Defence Dick Cheney, “ Let’s not even think about nukes. You know we’re not going to let that genie loose.” Replied Cheney, “ of course not. But take a look to be thorough.” Powell did and discovered that to “do serious damage to just one armoured division dispersed in the desert would require a considerable number of small tactical nuclear weapons. I showed this analysis to Cheney and then had it destroyed.”

That assessment may have been trashed, but the spirit behind it clearly lives on in the US military mindset and on the right of the US political spectrum - a disturbing and volatile mix.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/julian-borger-global-security-blog/2015/nov/10/americas-new-more-usable-nuclear-bomb-in-europe

[bryant.coleman]

In return, the Russians should arm Cuba and Iran with nuclear weapons. If the Americans can arm genocide perpetrators such as Turkey and Israel with nukes, then why not Iran? At least these nations are less reckless, when compared with Turkey. Providing nuclear weapons to DPRK can be considered as a distant probability, but I am not 100% in favor of it.

[galdur]

In return, the Russians should arm Cuba and Iran with nuclear weapons. If the Americans can arm genocide perpetrators such as Turkey and Israel with nukes, then why not Iran? At least these nations are less reckless, when compared with Turkey. Providing nuclear weapons to DPRK can be considered as a distant probability, but I am not 100% in favor of it.

Impossible. This would mean a level playing field, the absolutely last thing that criminals want. They´re not interested in following laws and regulations and playing fair. They´re interested in their own interests, period.

[QuestionAuthority]

America is the worlds largest schoolyard bully armed with a machete. Best to just give him your lunch money and hope he doesn't ask for a blowjob.

[Balthazar]

http://pmo.iq/pme/press2015en/5-12-20151en.htm

This turkey becomes more and more aggressive.

[galdur]

Exactly Balthazar. NATO doesn´t give a rat´s butt about law and order except when it´s convenient for smearing the responsibility for their crimes on to others. It considers itself totally exempt from all accountability. It´s nothing new. A member state violating the territory of a sovereign country? Big deal, business as usual. The opposite? These criminals start talking big and threatening war.

And yes, I live in a NATO country. If it were up to me I´d hang a bunch and see if that had any positive behavior modification effect. It would be a small price to pay in the interests of public safety. In my humble opinion.

[bryant.coleman]

This turkey becomes more and more aggressive.

Let me see how aggressive he will become, when the tourist revenue is reduced to ZERO in 2016. None of the Russian tourists are going to visit Turkey anytime soon. And the German and British tourists are also concerned about the security issues. On top of that frequent bomb attacks are happening in major cities such as Ankara and Istanbul.

[Balthazar]

Let me see how aggressive he will become, when the tourist revenue is reduced to ZERO in 2016.

Commiting a suicide would be the best option for him. Much better than Gaddafi-style scenario.

[galdur]

I don´t know how many confirmations people need to get that NATO´s leadership is totally nuts. They have a "nuclear sharing" program where non-nuclear states can borrow nuclear weapons from the United States..
You can´t make this shit up. Aren´t there supposed to be treaties to prevent the spreading of these weapons around? I guess nutcases don´t give a hoot about such details. And the danger is something that they´d never give the slightest thought.

[bryant.coleman]

Let me see how aggressive he will become, when the tourist revenue is reduced to ZERO in 2016.

Commiting a suicide would be the best option for him. Much better than Gaddafi-style scenario.

The case with Gaddafi was different. The NATO used Islamists to topple him. But Erdogan himself is an Islamist, and the opposition is very divided. The Kurds don't trust the left-wing Turks and vice versa. And Erdogan has played his "divide and rule" tactic quite well, leading to disorganization and infighting in the opposition ranks.

[galdur]

[Balthazar]

Exactly Balthazar. NATO doesn´t give a rat´s butt about law and order except when it´s convenient for smearing the responsibility for their crimes on to others. It considers itself totally exempt from all accountability. It´s nothing new. A member state violating the territory of a sovereign country? Big deal, business as usual. The opposite? These criminals start talking big and threatening war.

And yes, I live in a NATO country. If it were up to me I´d hang a bunch and see if that had any positive behavior modification effect. It would be a small price to pay in the interests of public safety. In my humble opinion.

http://news.yahoo.com/iraq-gives-turkish-forces-48-hours-leave-country-203701386.html

[vero]

Exactly Balthazar. NATO doesn´t give a rat´s butt about law and order except when it´s convenient for smearing the responsibility for their crimes on to others. It considers itself totally exempt from all accountability. It´s nothing new. A member state violating the territory of a sovereign country? Big deal, business as usual. The opposite? These criminals start talking big and threatening war.

And yes, I live in a NATO country. If it were up to me I´d hang a bunch and see if that had any positive behavior modification effect. It would be a small price to pay in the interests of public safety. In my humble opinion.

http://news.yahoo.com/iraq-gives-turkish-forces-48-hours-leave-country-203701386.html

Iraq tells Turkey they have 48 hours to leave or they will give them another 48 hours to leave. If your army can not stand up to IS, how can it expect to stand up to a well Trained Turkish army? Yes, the Turks should have asked and I am suspicious of the Turkish President but Iraq needs all the help it can get on the ground.

[galdur]

It´s an escalation in the war, no doubt about that. Iraq will probably take this to the United Nations- a United States tool and therefore also a tool for Turkey in this case. Nothing to do but watch how this develops.

[Balthazar]

Exactly Balthazar. NATO doesn´t give a rat´s butt about law and order except when it´s convenient for smearing the responsibility for their crimes on to others. It considers itself totally exempt from all accountability. It´s nothing new. A member state violating the territory of a sovereign country? Big deal, business as usual. The opposite? These criminals start talking big and threatening war.

And yes, I live in a NATO country. If it were up to me I´d hang a bunch and see if that had any positive behavior modification effect. It would be a small price to pay in the interests of public safety. In my humble opinion.

http://news.yahoo.com/iraq-gives-turkish-forces-48-hours-leave-country-203701386.html

Iraq tells Turkey they have 48 hours to leave or they will give them another 48 hours to leave. If your army can not stand up to IS, how can it expect to stand up to a well Trained Turkish army? Yes, the Turks should have asked and I am suspicious of the Turkish President but Iraq needs all the help it can get on the ground.

Iraq's army isn't the only issue here. Significant part of this area is controlled by kurdish militants, who have claimed that they're ready to attack turkish troops in case if turks won't leave Iraq. Turks will respond of course, this will provoke another batch of explosions in Ankara and Istanbul. I have a doubt that Erdogan wants to see 100-200 corpses in the capital once again.

[galdur]

Erdogan lets whatshisname the Prime Minister do the talking about this affair which probably means that it´s a losing game, otherwise he would be running around bragging, the great caliph that he isis at least in his own mind.

The PM said they were there to train Iraqi troops. That´s a new one in international relations. Invade to train the troops of the invaded? Has NATO leadership had anything to say about this behavior yet? I guess war threats would be flying around if the shoe was on the other foot and the Iraqis had dared to invade Turkey...

[bryant.coleman]

Iraq's army isn't the only issue here. Significant part of this area is controlled by kurdish militants, who have claimed that they're ready to attack turkish troops in case if turks won't leave Iraq. Turks will respond of course, this will provoke another batch of explosions in Ankara and Istanbul. I have a doubt that Erdogan wants to see 100-200 corpses in the capital once again.

The Kurdish groups in Iraq are divided along the political fault-lines. The Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), which is headed by Masoud Barzani is much more tolerant of the Turks, when compared to the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) headed by Jalal Talabani. The KDP is also getting closer to Saudi Arabia and the other GCC nations.

[Balthazar]

[Balthazar]