Giáo sư Michel Chossudovsky của nhóm nghiên cứu toàn cầu Canada cho biết có chỉ dấu Mỹ đã dùng vũ khí nguyên tử chiến thuật (tactical nuke) hay nguyên tử loại nhỏ (mini -nuke) trong trận chiến tại Yemen.
Ngoài đoạn phim quay được từ xa, chưa có một nỗ lực điều tra nào từ phía chính qui về vụ nổ lớn này. Cũng không có thêm chi tiết gì khác để xác minh tác dụng và tác hại của nguyên tử.
Tuy nhiên, chủ trương dùng nguyên tử chiến thuật (mini nuke) đã trở thành chính sách công khai trong 20 năm qua với sự sản xuất hàng loạt do các công ty vũ khí lớn của Mỹ trách nhiệm.
Vấn đề còn lại là những bằng chứng mang tính hậu quả của chủ trương này của Mỹ và NATO tại Trung Đông.
Theo Nhân Chủ, việc Mỹ đã sử dụng nguyên tử chiến thuật tại Yemen có xác suất cao. Vỉ nó không chỉ là nhu cầu giải quyết quân sự mà trọng tâm chính là khủng bố tâm lý toàn diện nhân loại về một viễn cảnh chiến tranh nguyên tử . Bọn nhà nước quân sự đang rò rỉ để thăm dò dư luận trước khi mặc nhiên coi như đã dùng nguyên tử chiến thuật.
Cuộc "chạy đua vũ trang" được Nga Mỹ tái dấy động không chỉ đơn thuần là tài chính hay tương tranh như đang được loan tải, mà chính là KHẲNG ĐỊNH VAI TRÒ CHỦ THỂ BẠO LỰC của ĐỊNH CHẾ NHÀ NƯỚC CHÍNH PHỦ QUÂN ĐỘI AN NINH.
Sau cuộc chiến tranh "lạnh", chưa bao giờ dư luận quần chúng Âu Mỹ hãi sợ co cụm và núp sau lưng nhà nước quân đội an ninh như hôm nay. Họ tê liệt ngay cả với những tàn bạo ngang nhiên của quân đội an ninh xảy ra trong đời sống xã hội của chính họ.
Người dân Âu Mỹ và thế giới nói chung đã từng chính đáng hóa "quyền nhà nước cứu nhân loại" bằng nguyên tử tại Hiroshima, Nagazaki- Từng chính đáng hóa " "quyền nhà nước cứu nhân loại" bằng cách giết 500 ngàn trẻ em Iraq- Từng chính đáng hóa " "quyền nhà nước cứu nhân loại" bằng cuộc chiến phá hoại với lý cớ dối trá "Vũ Khí Toàn Diệt Sadam Husein" v.v Nhà nước Mỹ chẳng còn gì sợ hay e dè khi dùng nguyên tử chiến thuật.
Các lực lượng đối kháng Mỹ mới thật sự là điều mà Âu Mỹ e dè. Nếu Âu Mỹ chính đáng hóa việc dùng nguyên tử chiến thuật và được quần chúng dư luận thế giới cho qua... các nhóm phiến quân đối kháng thật sự (không phải "khủng bố" làm tại Langley USA) cũng chẳng còn ngần ngại e dè tìm cách sở hữu và tận dụng nó trong tương lai.
Vũ khi nguyên tử chiến thuật là một phương tiện hữu hiệu nhất của Âu Mỹ trong chiến lược khủng bố tâm lý quần chúng toàn cầu. Nó muốn nhắn nhủ các "con em nhà nước chính phủ lẹp tẹp "như Nam Dương, Việt Nam, Úc, Ba Lan, Tiệp, Ý v.v cứ mua các loại vũ khí máy bay mà bảo vệ tổ cò... nhưng đừng mơ mòng đối kháng "cường quốc" nếu không có "Mỹ chúng ông". Và phải coi chừng, bọn "khủng bố của chúng ông" cũng sẽ có những vũ khí này!
Tại sao nhân loại vẫn tôn thờ bọn băng hoại tâm thần tác giả của những trò tàn sát con người kinh khủng đến thế?
Mỗi cá nhân chúng ta phải tự truy vấn để có câu trả lời cho chính bản thân mình.
Nhân Chủ
=
The War on Yemen, America’s Plans to Use Nuclear Weapons against the Middle East
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, June 02, 2015
Url of this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-war-on-yemen-americas-plans-to-use-nuclear-weapons-against-the-middle-east/5453065
Unconfirmed reports based on a video release dated May 20, 2015 point to a massive and unprecedented bomb explosion in Yemen.
The reports suggest without corroborating evidence that the explosion could have been the result of a nuclear strike, using a tactical nuclear weapon. There is no evidence to that effect.
Whatever the nature of this explosion, it constitutes a crime against humanity.
While there is no concrete evidence that the US led alliance has used nukes against Yemen, the broader issue of nuclear war against the Middle East is, nonetheless, of utmost relevance.
Washington’s nuclear agenda as defined by the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review (2001) consists in developing its tactical nuclear arsenal for use against non-nuclear States.
Since 2002, US-NATO tactical nuclear weapons targeting the Middle East are fully deployed.
Tactical nuclear weapons or so-called “mini-nukes” are bunker buster bombs equipped with a nuclear warhead. Their explosive capacity (e.g. the B61-11) varies between one third and six times a Hiroshima bomb.
The image (right) is a B61-11 tactical nuclear bomb, which can be launched either from a B-2 bomber or an F-16.
The B61-11 is a bon fide thermonuclear bomb, a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD) in the real sense of the word.
Sofar the evidence is scanty. There are no reports on the aftermath of the alleged strike in Yemen which would provide further information.
The mainstream media has not covered the issue. The matter requires further investigation in the context of a longstanding US agenda to use nuclear weapons against targets in the Middle East.
Video: The Yemen Bomb Explosion
Nuclear Attacks against countries in the Middle East
The alleged yet unconfirmed use of mini-nukes against Yemen raises the broader issue of US nuclear doctrine:
Tactical nuclear weapons or mini-nukes are part of the US-NATO arsenal.
They were cleared for use in the conventional war theater by the US Senate in 2002.
They can be used without the approval of the Commander in Chief;
The US military contends that “mini-nukes” are “humanitarian bombs” which minimize “collateral damage”. According to scientific opinion on contract to the Pentagon, they are “harmless to the surrounding civilian population because the explosion is underground”.While the scanty “evidence” of a nuclear attack against Yemen remains unconfirmed, the use of mini-nukes against countries in the Middle East has been on the Pentagon’s drawing board for almost 20 years. In 1996 under the Clinton administration, the B61-11 tactical nuclear weapon was slated to be used by the US in an attack against Libya.
B61-11The man behind this diabolical project to nuke Libya was Assistant Secretary of Defense Harold Palmer Smith Junior. “Even before the B61 came on line, Libya was identified as a potential target”. (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists – September/ October 1997, p. 27, emphasis added)
Harold Palmer Smith had been appointed by President Bill Clinton to oversee nuclear, chemical, and biological defense programs with a focus on “the reduction and maintenance of the US arsenal of nuclear weapons”. From the outset, his actual mandate, was not to “reduce” but to “increase” the nuclear arsenal by promoting the development of a new generation of “harmless” mini-nukes for use in the Middle East war theater.
The Department of Defense’s objective under Harold Smith’s advice was to fast-track the “testing” of the B61-11 nuclear bomb on an actual country in the Middle East.
Five months after [Assistant Defense Secretary] Harold Smith called for an acceleration of the B61-11 production schedule, he went public with an assertion that the Air Force would use the B61-11 [nuclear weapon] against Libya… (http://www.nukestrat.com/us/afn/B61-11.htm,)While the Pentagon later denied its intention to bomb Libya’s Tarhunah plant, it nonetheless confirmed that “Washington would not rule out using nuclear weapons [against Libya]“. (Ibid., emphasis added.)
What is the relevance of the history of the B61-11 tactical nuclear bomb and the earlier threats directed by the Clinton administration against Libya?
Was the project to nuke Libya shelved?
Are countries in the Middle East potential targets for a nuclear attack? (For further details, see Michel Chossudovsky, Dangerous Crossroads: Is America Considering the Use of Nuclear Weapons against Libya? Global Research, April 2011).
The tactical nuclear weapons were specifically developed for use in post Cold War “conventional conflicts with third world nations”. In October 2001, in the immediate wake of 9/11, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld envisaged the use of the B61-11 in Afghanistan. The targets were Al Qaeda cave bunkers in the Tora Bora mountains.
Rumsfeld stated at the time that while the “conventional” bunker buster bombs “‘are going to be able to do the job’, … he did not rule out the eventual use of nuclear weapons.” (Quoted in the Houston Chronicle, 20 October 2001, emphasis added.)
The use of the B61-11 was also contemplated during the 2003 bombing and invasion of Iraq as well as in the 2011 NATO bombings of Libya.
In this regard, the B61-11 was described as “a precise, earth-penetrating low-yield nuclear weapon against high-value underground targets”, which included Saddam Hussein’s underground bunkers:
”If Saddam was arguably the highest value target in Iraq, then a good case could be made for using a nuclear weapon like the B61-11 to assure killing him and decapitating the regime” (.Defense News, December 8, 2003).There is no documentary evidence, however, that the B61-11 was used against Iraq.
The use of mini-nukes against non-nuclear states in the Middle East as defined by the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review remains on the Pentagon’s drawing board. Moreover, the B61-11 tactical nuclear weapon (Made in America) as well as the B61 12 upgrade have been deployed for use against targets in the Middle East including Iran, Syria and Libya by several European countries including five non-nuclear states (Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey). The new B61 12 is a 50 kiloton weapon, which would be delivered by the F-35 fighter jet.
According to reports, Israel also has an arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons.
Source: Federation of American Scientists
The Nature of The Yemen ExplosionWhile the Yemen explosion in the video (above) appears similar to that of a B61-11 tactical nuclear bomb with a mushroom cloud, it is worth noting that the conventional Mass Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bomb triggers a similar explosion.
The largest conventional bomb in the US arsenal is the so-called Mass Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) or the Mother of All Bombs (MOAB) (see images below). The explosion of a MOP (which is a conventional weapon) is (according to photographic evidence) similar to that recorded in the Yemen video. Moreover, according to unconfirmed reports, the MOP was used during the war on Iraq.
In other words, the nature of the explosion does not in itself prove that it was the result of a (tactical) nuclear strike. It could have been a MOP or a bunker buster bomb explosion. But even in this case, the evidence is scanty.
Both the MOP and the mini nukes are bunker buster earth penetrating bombs. The MOP however is a conventional weapon. It does not have a nuclear warhead.
It is worth noting that in mid January 2015, two months prior to the onslaught of the Saudi bombing campaign against Yemen, “the Pentagon was involved in the testing of the largest bomb in its arsenal”, an improved version of the bunker buster Mass Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), developed by Boeing.archive photo of MOAB explosion
According to reports, The Mass Ordnance Penetrator e.g. MOP GBU-57, would be delivered with either a B-52 or a B-2 bomber due to its weight. The decision to undertake a MOP strike would emanate from US “Global Strike Command”.
GBU-57A/B Mass Ordnance Penetrator (MOP)
There are indications, however, that a lighter MOP missile has been developed. According to Air Force Magazine, USAF Lt. Gen. Phillip Breedlove (currently Commander in Chief of NATO) stated in June 2010 that “the Next-generation Penetrator Munition should be about a third the size of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator so it could be carried by affordable aircraft”.In the image below a B52 bomber releases a MOP, escorted by a F-16. The MOP is a tele-guided missile.
B-52 dropping a MOP escorted by an F-16 during a test trail.
The B-2 bomber operates out of a US Air force base in Missouri. With refuelling it can be deployed Worldwide. The B2 can be used to deliver a Mass Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) missile or a tactical nuclear bomb.
“Mother of All Bombs” (MOAB)
Copyright © 2015 Global Research
Military Madness: US Officials Consider Nuclear Strikes against Russia
By Niles Williamson
Global Research, June 05, 2015
World Socialist Web Site
Region: Russia and FSU, USA
Theme: Militarization and WMD, US NATO War Agenda
In-depth Report: Nuclear War
260
38 0
409
US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter is meeting today at the headquarters of the US European Command in Stuttgart, Germany with two dozen US military commanders and European diplomats to discuss how to escalate their economic and military campaign against Russia. They will assess the impact of current economic sanctions, as well as NATO’s strategy of exploiting the crisis in eastern Ukraine to deploy ever-greater numbers of troops and military equipment to Eastern Europe, threatening Russia with war.
A US defense official told Reuters that the main purpose of the meeting was to “assess and strategize on how the United States and key allies should think about heightened tensions with Russia over the past year.” The official also said Carter was open to providing the Ukrainian regime with lethal weapons, a proposal which had been put forward earlier in the year.
Most provocatively, a report published by the Associated Press yesterday reports that the Pentagon has been actively considering the use of nuclear missiles against military targets inside Russia, in response to what it alleges are violations of the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty. Russia denies US claims that it has violated the INF by flight-testing ground-launched cruise missiles with a prohibited range.
Three options being considered by the Pentagon are the placement of anti-missile defenses in Europe aimed at shooting Russian missiles out of the sky; a “counterforce” option that would involve pre-emptive non-nuclear strikes on Russia military sites; and finally, “countervailing strike capabilities,” involving the pre-emptive deployment of nuclear missiles against targets inside Russia.
The AP states: “The options go so far as one implied—but not stated explicitly—that would improve the ability of US nuclear weapons to destroy military targets on Russian territory.” In other words, the US is actively preparing nuclear war against Russia.
Robert Scher, one of Carter’s nuclear policy aides, told Congress in April that the deployment of “counterforce” measures would mean “we could go about and actually attack that missile where it is in Russia.”
According to other Pentagon officials, this option would entail the deployment of ground-launched cruise missiles throughout Europe.
Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Joe Skewers told AP, “All the options under consideration are designed to ensure that Russia gains no significant military advantage from their violation.”
The criminality and recklessness of the foreign policy of Washington and its NATO allies is staggering. A pre-emptive nuclear strike against Russian forces, many of them near populated areas, could claim millions of lives in seconds and lead to a nuclear war that would obliterate humanity. Even assuming that the US officials threatening Russia do not actually want such an outcome, however, and that they are only trying to intimidate Moscow, there is a sinister objective logic to such threats.
Nuclear warmongering by US officials immensely heightens the danger of all-out war erupting accidentally, amid escalating military tensions and strategic uncertainty. NATO forces are deploying for military exercises all around Russia, from the Arctic and Baltic Seas to Eastern Europe and the Black and Mediterranean Seas. Regional militaries are all on hair-trigger alerts.
US officials threatening Russia cannot know how the Kremlin will react to such threats. With Moscow concerned about the danger of a sudden NATO strike, Russia is ever more likely to respond to perceived signs of NATO military action by launching its missiles, fearing that otherwise the missiles will be destroyed on the ground. The danger of miscalculations and miscommunications leading to all-out war is immensely heightened.
The statements of Scher and Carter confirm warnings made last year by the WSWS, that NATO’s decision to back a fascist-led putsch in Kiev in February, and to blame Russia without any evidence for shooting down flight MH17, posed the risk of war. “Are you ready for war—including possibly nuclear war—between the United States, Europe, and Russia? That is the question that everyone should be asking him- or herself in light of the developments since the destruction of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17,” the WSWS wrote .
In March, Putin stated that he had placed Russian forces, including its nuclear forces, on alert in the aftermath of the Kiev putsch, fearing a NATO attack on Russia. Now the threat of war arising from US policy has been confirmed directly by statements of the US military.
These threats have developed largely behind the backs of the world working class. Workers in the United States, Europe and worldwide have time and again shown their hostility to US wars in Iraq or in Afghanistan. Yet nearly 15 years after these wars began, the world stands on the brink of an even bloodier and more devastating conflict, and the media and ruling elites the world over are hiding the risk of nuclear war.
US President Barack Obama is expected to escalate pressure on Russia at the G7 summit this weekend, pressing European leaders to maintain economic sanctions put in place in response to Russia’s annexation of Crimea last year. The latest outbreak in violence in Ukraine this week, which the US blames on Russia, is to serve as a pretext for continuing the sanctions.
Speaking to Parliament on Thursday, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko warned of a “colossal threat of the resumption of large-scale hostilities by Russian and terrorist forces.” He claimed without proof that 9,000 Russian soldiers are deployed in rebel-held areas of Donetsk and Luhansk, in eastern Ukraine.
“Ukraine’s military should be ready for a new offensive by the enemy, as well as a full-scale invasion along the entire border with the Russian Federation,” Poroshenko said. “We must be really prepared for this.” He said the Ukrainian army had at least 50,000 soldiers stationed in the east, prepared to defend the country.
Poroshenko’s remarks came a day after renewed fighting in eastern Ukraine between Kiev forces and Russian-backed separatists resulted in dozens of casualties. This week’s fighting marked the largest breach to date of the cease-fire signed in February.
Kremlin spokesman Dimitry Peskov told reporters on Thursday that Russia believed the previous day’s hostilities had been provoked by Kiev to influence upcoming discussions at the G7 summit this weekend and the EU summit in Brussels at the end of the month. “These provocative actions are organized by Ukraine’s military forces, and we are concerned with that,” he stated.
Each side blamed the other for initiating fighting in Marinka, approximately nine miles west of the rebel stronghold of Donetsk. Yuriy Biryukov, an adviser to Poroshenko, reported on Thursday that five Ukrainian soldiers had been killed in the fighting, and another 39 wounded. Eduard Basurin, deputy defense minister and spokesman for the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), told Interfax that 16 rebel fighters and five civilians had been killed.
Ukrainian forces also fired artillery at the rebel-held city of Donetsk on Wednesday. Shells landed in the southwest districts of Kirovsky and Petrovsky, killing 6 people and wounding at least 90 others. The city’s Sokol market was severely damaged, with several rows of shops burned to the ground.
Responding to Wednesday’s developments, members of the fascistic Right Sector militia have been called to mobilize for battle. Andrey Stempitsky, commander of the militia’s paramilitary battalion, posted a message on Facebook calling on those who went home during the cease-fire to “return to their combat units.” He warned that the Right Sector would “wage war, ignoring the truce devotees.”- See more at: http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-officials-consider-nuclear-strikes-against-russia/5453655#sthash.0oKWAK6r.dpuf
Military Madness: US Officials Consider Nuclear Strikes against Russia
By Niles Williamson
Global Research, June 05, 2015
Url of this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-officials-consider-nuclear-strikes-against-russia/5453655
US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter is meeting today at the headquarters of the US European Command in Stuttgart, Germany with two dozen US military commanders and European diplomats to discuss how to escalate their economic and military campaign against Russia. They will assess the impact of current economic sanctions, as well as NATO’s strategy of exploiting the crisis in eastern Ukraine to deploy ever-greater numbers of troops and military equipment to Eastern Europe, threatening Russia with war.
A US defense official told Reuters that the main purpose of the meeting was to “assess and strategize on how the United States and key allies should think about heightened tensions with Russia over the past year.” The official also said Carter was open to providing the Ukrainian regime with lethal weapons, a proposal which had been put forward earlier in the year.
Most provocatively, a report published by the Associated Press yesterday reports that the Pentagon has been actively considering the use of nuclear missiles against military targets inside Russia, in response to what it alleges are violations of the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty. Russia denies US claims that it has violated the INF by flight-testing ground-launched cruise missiles with a prohibited range.
Three options being considered by the Pentagon are the placement of anti-missile defenses in Europe aimed at shooting Russian missiles out of the sky; a “counterforce” option that would involve pre-emptive non-nuclear strikes on Russia military sites; and finally, “countervailing strike capabilities,” involving the pre-emptive deployment of nuclear missiles against targets inside Russia.
The AP states: “The options go so far as one implied—but not stated explicitly—that would improve the ability of US nuclear weapons to destroy military targets on Russian territory.” In other words, the US is actively preparing nuclear war against Russia.
Robert Scher, one of Carter’s nuclear policy aides, told Congress in April that the deployment of “counterforce” measures would mean “we could go about and actually attack that missile where it is in Russia.”
According to other Pentagon officials, this option would entail the deployment of ground-launched cruise missiles throughout Europe.
Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Joe Skewers told AP, “All the options under consideration are designed to ensure that Russia gains no significant military advantage from their violation.”
The criminality and recklessness of the foreign policy of Washington and its NATO allies is staggering. A pre-emptive nuclear strike against Russian forces, many of them near populated areas, could claim millions of lives in seconds and lead to a nuclear war that would obliterate humanity. Even assuming that the US officials threatening Russia do not actually want such an outcome, however, and that they are only trying to intimidate Moscow, there is a sinister objective logic to such threats.
Nuclear warmongering by US officials immensely heightens the danger of all-out war erupting accidentally, amid escalating military tensions and strategic uncertainty. NATO forces are deploying for military exercises all around Russia, from the Arctic and Baltic Seas to Eastern Europe and the Black and Mediterranean Seas. Regional militaries are all on hair-trigger alerts.
US officials threatening Russia cannot know how the Kremlin will react to such threats. With Moscow concerned about the danger of a sudden NATO strike, Russia is ever more likely to respond to perceived signs of NATO military action by launching its missiles, fearing that otherwise the missiles will be destroyed on the ground. The danger of miscalculations and miscommunications leading to all-out war is immensely heightened.
The statements of Scher and Carter confirm warnings made last year by the WSWS, that NATO’s decision to back a fascist-led putsch in Kiev in February, and to blame Russia without any evidence for shooting down flight MH17, posed the risk of war. “Are you ready for war—including possibly nuclear war—between the United States, Europe, and Russia? That is the question that everyone should be asking him- or herself in light of the developments since the destruction of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17,” the WSWS wrote .
In March, Putin stated that he had placed Russian forces, including its nuclear forces, on alert in the aftermath of the Kiev putsch, fearing a NATO attack on Russia. Now the threat of war arising from US policy has been confirmed directly by statements of the US military.
These threats have developed largely behind the backs of the world working class. Workers in the United States, Europe and worldwide have time and again shown their hostility to US wars in Iraq or in Afghanistan. Yet nearly 15 years after these wars began, the world stands on the brink of an even bloodier and more devastating conflict, and the media and ruling elites the world over are hiding the risk of nuclear war.
US President Barack Obama is expected to escalate pressure on Russia at the G7 summit this weekend, pressing European leaders to maintain economic sanctions put in place in response to Russia’s annexation of Crimea last year. The latest outbreak in violence in Ukraine this week, which the US blames on Russia, is to serve as a pretext for continuing the sanctions.
Speaking to Parliament on Thursday, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko warned of a “colossal threat of the resumption of large-scale hostilities by Russian and terrorist forces.” He claimed without proof that 9,000 Russian soldiers are deployed in rebel-held areas of Donetsk and Luhansk, in eastern Ukraine.
“Ukraine’s military should be ready for a new offensive by the enemy, as well as a full-scale invasion along the entire border with the Russian Federation,” Poroshenko said. “We must be really prepared for this.” He said the Ukrainian army had at least 50,000 soldiers stationed in the east, prepared to defend the country.
Poroshenko’s remarks came a day after renewed fighting in eastern Ukraine between Kiev forces and Russian-backed separatists resulted in dozens of casualties. This week’s fighting marked the largest breach to date of the cease-fire signed in February.
Kremlin spokesman Dimitry Peskov told reporters on Thursday that Russia believed the previous day’s hostilities had been provoked by Kiev to influence upcoming discussions at the G7 summit this weekend and the EU summit in Brussels at the end of the month. “These provocative actions are organized by Ukraine’s military forces, and we are concerned with that,” he stated.
Each side blamed the other for initiating fighting in Marinka, approximately nine miles west of the rebel stronghold of Donetsk. Yuriy Biryukov, an adviser to Poroshenko, reported on Thursday that five Ukrainian soldiers had been killed in the fighting, and another 39 wounded. Eduard Basurin, deputy defense minister and spokesman for the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), told Interfax that 16 rebel fighters and five civilians had been killed.
Ukrainian forces also fired artillery at the rebel-held city of Donetsk on Wednesday. Shells landed in the southwest districts of Kirovsky and Petrovsky, killing 6 people and wounding at least 90 others. The city’s Sokol market was severely damaged, with several rows of shops burned to the ground.
Responding to Wednesday’s developments, members of the fascistic Right Sector militia have been called to mobilize for battle. Andrey Stempitsky, commander of the militia’s paramilitary battalion, posted a message on Facebook calling on those who went home during the cease-fire to “return to their combat units.” He warned that the Right Sector would “wage war, ignoring the truce devotees.”
Copyright © 2015 Global Research
Cuộc "chạy đua vũ trang" được Nga Mỹ tái dấy động không chỉ đơn thuần là tài chính hay tương tranh như đang được loan tải, mà chính là KHẲNG ĐỊNH VAI TRÒ CHỦ THỂ BẠO LỰC của ĐỊNH CHẾ NHÀ NƯỚC CHÍNH PHỦ QUÂN ĐỘI AN NINH.
Sau cuộc chiến tranh "lạnh", chưa bao giờ dư luận quần chúng Âu Mỹ hãi sợ co cụm và núp sau lưng nhà nước quân đội an ninh như hôm nay. Họ tê liệt ngay cả với những tàn bạo ngang nhiên của quân đội an ninh xảy ra trong đời sống xã hội của chính họ.
Người dân Âu Mỹ và thế giới nói chung đã từng chính đáng hóa "quyền nhà nước cứu nhân loại" bằng nguyên tử tại Hiroshima, Nagazaki- Từng chính đáng hóa " "quyền nhà nước cứu nhân loại" bằng cách giết 500 ngàn trẻ em Iraq- Từng chính đáng hóa " "quyền nhà nước cứu nhân loại" bằng cuộc chiến phá hoại với lý cớ dối trá "Vũ Khí Toàn Diệt Sadam Husein" v.v Nhà nước Mỹ chẳng còn gì sợ hay e dè khi dùng nguyên tử chiến thuật.
Các lực lượng đối kháng Mỹ mới thật sự là điều mà Âu Mỹ e dè. Nếu Âu Mỹ chính đáng hóa việc dùng nguyên tử chiến thuật và được quần chúng dư luận thế giới cho qua... các nhóm phiến quân đối kháng thật sự (không phải "khủng bố" làm tại Langley USA) cũng chẳng còn ngần ngại e dè tìm cách sở hữu và tận dụng nó trong tương lai.
Vũ khi nguyên tử chiến thuật là một phương tiện hữu hiệu nhất của Âu Mỹ trong chiến lược khủng bố tâm lý quần chúng toàn cầu. Nó muốn nhắn nhủ các "con em nhà nước chính phủ lẹp tẹp "như Nam Dương, Việt Nam, Úc, Ba Lan, Tiệp, Ý v.v cứ mua các loại vũ khí máy bay mà bảo vệ tổ cò... nhưng đừng mơ mòng đối kháng "cường quốc" nếu không có "Mỹ chúng ông". Và phải coi chừng, bọn "khủng bố của chúng ông" cũng sẽ có những vũ khí này!
Tại sao nhân loại vẫn tôn thờ bọn băng hoại tâm thần tác giả của những trò tàn sát con người kinh khủng đến thế?
Mỗi cá nhân chúng ta phải tự truy vấn để có câu trả lời cho chính bản thân mình.
Nhân Chủ
=
The War on Yemen, America’s Plans to Use Nuclear Weapons against the Middle East
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, June 02, 2015
Url of this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-war-on-yemen-americas-plans-to-use-nuclear-weapons-against-the-middle-east/5453065
Unconfirmed reports based on a video release dated May 20, 2015 point to a massive and unprecedented bomb explosion in Yemen. The reports suggest without corroborating evidence that the explosion could have been the result of a nuclear strike, using a tactical nuclear weapon. There is no evidence to that effect.
Whatever the nature of this explosion, it constitutes a crime against humanity.
While there is no concrete evidence that the US led alliance has used nukes against Yemen, the broader issue of nuclear war against the Middle East is, nonetheless, of utmost relevance.
Washington’s nuclear agenda as defined by the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review (2001) consists in developing its tactical nuclear arsenal for use against non-nuclear States.
Since 2002, US-NATO tactical nuclear weapons targeting the Middle East are fully deployed.
Tactical nuclear weapons or so-called “mini-nukes” are bunker buster bombs equipped with a nuclear warhead. Their explosive capacity (e.g. the B61-11) varies between one third and six times a Hiroshima bomb.
The image (right) is a B61-11 tactical nuclear bomb, which can be launched either from a B-2 bomber or an F-16.The B61-11 is a bon fide thermonuclear bomb, a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD) in the real sense of the word.
Sofar the evidence is scanty. There are no reports on the aftermath of the alleged strike in Yemen which would provide further information.
The mainstream media has not covered the issue. The matter requires further investigation in the context of a longstanding US agenda to use nuclear weapons against targets in the Middle East.
Video: The Yemen Bomb Explosion
Nuclear Attacks against countries in the Middle East
The alleged yet unconfirmed use of mini-nukes against Yemen raises the broader issue of US nuclear doctrine:
Tactical nuclear weapons or mini-nukes are part of the US-NATO arsenal.
They were cleared for use in the conventional war theater by the US Senate in 2002.
They can be used without the approval of the Commander in Chief;
The US military contends that “mini-nukes” are “humanitarian bombs” which minimize “collateral damage”. According to scientific opinion on contract to the Pentagon, they are “harmless to the surrounding civilian population because the explosion is underground”.While the scanty “evidence” of a nuclear attack against Yemen remains unconfirmed, the use of mini-nukes against countries in the Middle East has been on the Pentagon’s drawing board for almost 20 years. In 1996 under the Clinton administration, the B61-11 tactical nuclear weapon was slated to be used by the US in an attack against Libya.
B61-11The man behind this diabolical project to nuke Libya was Assistant Secretary of Defense Harold Palmer Smith Junior. “Even before the B61 came on line, Libya was identified as a potential target”. (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists – September/ October 1997, p. 27, emphasis added)
Harold Palmer Smith had been appointed by President Bill Clinton to oversee nuclear, chemical, and biological defense programs with a focus on “the reduction and maintenance of the US arsenal of nuclear weapons”. From the outset, his actual mandate, was not to “reduce” but to “increase” the nuclear arsenal by promoting the development of a new generation of “harmless” mini-nukes for use in the Middle East war theater.
The Department of Defense’s objective under Harold Smith’s advice was to fast-track the “testing” of the B61-11 nuclear bomb on an actual country in the Middle East.
Five months after [Assistant Defense Secretary] Harold Smith called for an acceleration of the B61-11 production schedule, he went public with an assertion that the Air Force would use the B61-11 [nuclear weapon] against Libya… (http://www.nukestrat.com/us/afn/B61-11.htm,)While the Pentagon later denied its intention to bomb Libya’s Tarhunah plant, it nonetheless confirmed that “Washington would not rule out using nuclear weapons [against Libya]“. (Ibid., emphasis added.)
What is the relevance of the history of the B61-11 tactical nuclear bomb and the earlier threats directed by the Clinton administration against Libya?
Was the project to nuke Libya shelved?
Are countries in the Middle East potential targets for a nuclear attack? (For further details, see Michel Chossudovsky, Dangerous Crossroads: Is America Considering the Use of Nuclear Weapons against Libya? Global Research, April 2011).
The tactical nuclear weapons were specifically developed for use in post Cold War “conventional conflicts with third world nations”. In October 2001, in the immediate wake of 9/11, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld envisaged the use of the B61-11 in Afghanistan. The targets were Al Qaeda cave bunkers in the Tora Bora mountains.Rumsfeld stated at the time that while the “conventional” bunker buster bombs “‘are going to be able to do the job’, … he did not rule out the eventual use of nuclear weapons.” (Quoted in the Houston Chronicle, 20 October 2001, emphasis added.)
The use of the B61-11 was also contemplated during the 2003 bombing and invasion of Iraq as well as in the 2011 NATO bombings of Libya.
In this regard, the B61-11 was described as “a precise, earth-penetrating low-yield nuclear weapon against high-value underground targets”, which included Saddam Hussein’s underground bunkers:
”If Saddam was arguably the highest value target in Iraq, then a good case could be made for using a nuclear weapon like the B61-11 to assure killing him and decapitating the regime” (.Defense News, December 8, 2003).There is no documentary evidence, however, that the B61-11 was used against Iraq.
The use of mini-nukes against non-nuclear states in the Middle East as defined by the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review remains on the Pentagon’s drawing board. Moreover, the B61-11 tactical nuclear weapon (Made in America) as well as the B61 12 upgrade have been deployed for use against targets in the Middle East including Iran, Syria and Libya by several European countries including five non-nuclear states (Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey). The new B61 12 is a 50 kiloton weapon, which would be delivered by the F-35 fighter jet.
According to reports, Israel also has an arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons.
Source: Federation of American Scientists
The Nature of The Yemen ExplosionWhile the Yemen explosion in the video (above) appears similar to that of a B61-11 tactical nuclear bomb with a mushroom cloud, it is worth noting that the conventional Mass Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bomb triggers a similar explosion.
The largest conventional bomb in the US arsenal is the so-called Mass Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) or the Mother of All Bombs (MOAB) (see images below). The explosion of a MOP (which is a conventional weapon) is (according to photographic evidence) similar to that recorded in the Yemen video. Moreover, according to unconfirmed reports, the MOP was used during the war on Iraq.
In other words, the nature of the explosion does not in itself prove that it was the result of a (tactical) nuclear strike. It could have been a MOP or a bunker buster bomb explosion. But even in this case, the evidence is scanty.Both the MOP and the mini nukes are bunker buster earth penetrating bombs. The MOP however is a conventional weapon. It does not have a nuclear warhead.
It is worth noting that in mid January 2015, two months prior to the onslaught of the Saudi bombing campaign against Yemen, “the Pentagon was involved in the testing of the largest bomb in its arsenal”, an improved version of the bunker buster Mass Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), developed by Boeing.archive photo of MOAB explosion
According to reports, The Mass Ordnance Penetrator e.g. MOP GBU-57, would be delivered with either a B-52 or a B-2 bomber due to its weight. The decision to undertake a MOP strike would emanate from US “Global Strike Command”.
GBU-57A/B Mass Ordnance Penetrator (MOP)
There are indications, however, that a lighter MOP missile has been developed. According to Air Force Magazine, USAF Lt. Gen. Phillip Breedlove (currently Commander in Chief of NATO) stated in June 2010 that “the Next-generation Penetrator Munition should be about a third the size of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator so it could be carried by affordable aircraft”.In the image below a B52 bomber releases a MOP, escorted by a F-16. The MOP is a tele-guided missile.
B-52 dropping a MOP escorted by an F-16 during a test trail.
The B-2 bomber operates out of a US Air force base in Missouri. With refuelling it can be deployed Worldwide. The B2 can be used to deliver a Mass Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) missile or a tactical nuclear bomb.
“Mother of All Bombs” (MOAB)
Copyright © 2015 Global Research
Military Madness: US Officials Consider Nuclear Strikes against Russia
By Niles Williamson
Global Research, June 05, 2015
World Socialist Web Site
Region: Russia and FSU, USA
Theme: Militarization and WMD, US NATO War Agenda
In-depth Report: Nuclear War
260
38 0
409
US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter is meeting today at the headquarters of the US European Command in Stuttgart, Germany with two dozen US military commanders and European diplomats to discuss how to escalate their economic and military campaign against Russia. They will assess the impact of current economic sanctions, as well as NATO’s strategy of exploiting the crisis in eastern Ukraine to deploy ever-greater numbers of troops and military equipment to Eastern Europe, threatening Russia with war.A US defense official told Reuters that the main purpose of the meeting was to “assess and strategize on how the United States and key allies should think about heightened tensions with Russia over the past year.” The official also said Carter was open to providing the Ukrainian regime with lethal weapons, a proposal which had been put forward earlier in the year.
Most provocatively, a report published by the Associated Press yesterday reports that the Pentagon has been actively considering the use of nuclear missiles against military targets inside Russia, in response to what it alleges are violations of the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty. Russia denies US claims that it has violated the INF by flight-testing ground-launched cruise missiles with a prohibited range.
Three options being considered by the Pentagon are the placement of anti-missile defenses in Europe aimed at shooting Russian missiles out of the sky; a “counterforce” option that would involve pre-emptive non-nuclear strikes on Russia military sites; and finally, “countervailing strike capabilities,” involving the pre-emptive deployment of nuclear missiles against targets inside Russia.
The AP states: “The options go so far as one implied—but not stated explicitly—that would improve the ability of US nuclear weapons to destroy military targets on Russian territory.” In other words, the US is actively preparing nuclear war against Russia.
Robert Scher, one of Carter’s nuclear policy aides, told Congress in April that the deployment of “counterforce” measures would mean “we could go about and actually attack that missile where it is in Russia.”
According to other Pentagon officials, this option would entail the deployment of ground-launched cruise missiles throughout Europe.
Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Joe Skewers told AP, “All the options under consideration are designed to ensure that Russia gains no significant military advantage from their violation.”
The criminality and recklessness of the foreign policy of Washington and its NATO allies is staggering. A pre-emptive nuclear strike against Russian forces, many of them near populated areas, could claim millions of lives in seconds and lead to a nuclear war that would obliterate humanity. Even assuming that the US officials threatening Russia do not actually want such an outcome, however, and that they are only trying to intimidate Moscow, there is a sinister objective logic to such threats.
Nuclear warmongering by US officials immensely heightens the danger of all-out war erupting accidentally, amid escalating military tensions and strategic uncertainty. NATO forces are deploying for military exercises all around Russia, from the Arctic and Baltic Seas to Eastern Europe and the Black and Mediterranean Seas. Regional militaries are all on hair-trigger alerts.
US officials threatening Russia cannot know how the Kremlin will react to such threats. With Moscow concerned about the danger of a sudden NATO strike, Russia is ever more likely to respond to perceived signs of NATO military action by launching its missiles, fearing that otherwise the missiles will be destroyed on the ground. The danger of miscalculations and miscommunications leading to all-out war is immensely heightened.
The statements of Scher and Carter confirm warnings made last year by the WSWS, that NATO’s decision to back a fascist-led putsch in Kiev in February, and to blame Russia without any evidence for shooting down flight MH17, posed the risk of war. “Are you ready for war—including possibly nuclear war—between the United States, Europe, and Russia? That is the question that everyone should be asking him- or herself in light of the developments since the destruction of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17,” the WSWS wrote .
In March, Putin stated that he had placed Russian forces, including its nuclear forces, on alert in the aftermath of the Kiev putsch, fearing a NATO attack on Russia. Now the threat of war arising from US policy has been confirmed directly by statements of the US military.
These threats have developed largely behind the backs of the world working class. Workers in the United States, Europe and worldwide have time and again shown their hostility to US wars in Iraq or in Afghanistan. Yet nearly 15 years after these wars began, the world stands on the brink of an even bloodier and more devastating conflict, and the media and ruling elites the world over are hiding the risk of nuclear war.
US President Barack Obama is expected to escalate pressure on Russia at the G7 summit this weekend, pressing European leaders to maintain economic sanctions put in place in response to Russia’s annexation of Crimea last year. The latest outbreak in violence in Ukraine this week, which the US blames on Russia, is to serve as a pretext for continuing the sanctions.
Speaking to Parliament on Thursday, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko warned of a “colossal threat of the resumption of large-scale hostilities by Russian and terrorist forces.” He claimed without proof that 9,000 Russian soldiers are deployed in rebel-held areas of Donetsk and Luhansk, in eastern Ukraine.
“Ukraine’s military should be ready for a new offensive by the enemy, as well as a full-scale invasion along the entire border with the Russian Federation,” Poroshenko said. “We must be really prepared for this.” He said the Ukrainian army had at least 50,000 soldiers stationed in the east, prepared to defend the country.
Poroshenko’s remarks came a day after renewed fighting in eastern Ukraine between Kiev forces and Russian-backed separatists resulted in dozens of casualties. This week’s fighting marked the largest breach to date of the cease-fire signed in February.
Kremlin spokesman Dimitry Peskov told reporters on Thursday that Russia believed the previous day’s hostilities had been provoked by Kiev to influence upcoming discussions at the G7 summit this weekend and the EU summit in Brussels at the end of the month. “These provocative actions are organized by Ukraine’s military forces, and we are concerned with that,” he stated.
Each side blamed the other for initiating fighting in Marinka, approximately nine miles west of the rebel stronghold of Donetsk. Yuriy Biryukov, an adviser to Poroshenko, reported on Thursday that five Ukrainian soldiers had been killed in the fighting, and another 39 wounded. Eduard Basurin, deputy defense minister and spokesman for the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), told Interfax that 16 rebel fighters and five civilians had been killed.
Ukrainian forces also fired artillery at the rebel-held city of Donetsk on Wednesday. Shells landed in the southwest districts of Kirovsky and Petrovsky, killing 6 people and wounding at least 90 others. The city’s Sokol market was severely damaged, with several rows of shops burned to the ground.
Responding to Wednesday’s developments, members of the fascistic Right Sector militia have been called to mobilize for battle. Andrey Stempitsky, commander of the militia’s paramilitary battalion, posted a message on Facebook calling on those who went home during the cease-fire to “return to their combat units.” He warned that the Right Sector would “wage war, ignoring the truce devotees.”- See more at: http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-officials-consider-nuclear-strikes-against-russia/5453655#sthash.0oKWAK6r.dpuf
Military Madness: US Officials Consider Nuclear Strikes against Russia
By Niles Williamson
Global Research, June 05, 2015
Url of this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-officials-consider-nuclear-strikes-against-russia/5453655
US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter is meeting today at the headquarters of the US European Command in Stuttgart, Germany with two dozen US military commanders and European diplomats to discuss how to escalate their economic and military campaign against Russia. They will assess the impact of current economic sanctions, as well as NATO’s strategy of exploiting the crisis in eastern Ukraine to deploy ever-greater numbers of troops and military equipment to Eastern Europe, threatening Russia with war.A US defense official told Reuters that the main purpose of the meeting was to “assess and strategize on how the United States and key allies should think about heightened tensions with Russia over the past year.” The official also said Carter was open to providing the Ukrainian regime with lethal weapons, a proposal which had been put forward earlier in the year.
Most provocatively, a report published by the Associated Press yesterday reports that the Pentagon has been actively considering the use of nuclear missiles against military targets inside Russia, in response to what it alleges are violations of the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty. Russia denies US claims that it has violated the INF by flight-testing ground-launched cruise missiles with a prohibited range.
Three options being considered by the Pentagon are the placement of anti-missile defenses in Europe aimed at shooting Russian missiles out of the sky; a “counterforce” option that would involve pre-emptive non-nuclear strikes on Russia military sites; and finally, “countervailing strike capabilities,” involving the pre-emptive deployment of nuclear missiles against targets inside Russia.
The AP states: “The options go so far as one implied—but not stated explicitly—that would improve the ability of US nuclear weapons to destroy military targets on Russian territory.” In other words, the US is actively preparing nuclear war against Russia.
Robert Scher, one of Carter’s nuclear policy aides, told Congress in April that the deployment of “counterforce” measures would mean “we could go about and actually attack that missile where it is in Russia.”
According to other Pentagon officials, this option would entail the deployment of ground-launched cruise missiles throughout Europe.
Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Joe Skewers told AP, “All the options under consideration are designed to ensure that Russia gains no significant military advantage from their violation.”
The criminality and recklessness of the foreign policy of Washington and its NATO allies is staggering. A pre-emptive nuclear strike against Russian forces, many of them near populated areas, could claim millions of lives in seconds and lead to a nuclear war that would obliterate humanity. Even assuming that the US officials threatening Russia do not actually want such an outcome, however, and that they are only trying to intimidate Moscow, there is a sinister objective logic to such threats.
Nuclear warmongering by US officials immensely heightens the danger of all-out war erupting accidentally, amid escalating military tensions and strategic uncertainty. NATO forces are deploying for military exercises all around Russia, from the Arctic and Baltic Seas to Eastern Europe and the Black and Mediterranean Seas. Regional militaries are all on hair-trigger alerts.
US officials threatening Russia cannot know how the Kremlin will react to such threats. With Moscow concerned about the danger of a sudden NATO strike, Russia is ever more likely to respond to perceived signs of NATO military action by launching its missiles, fearing that otherwise the missiles will be destroyed on the ground. The danger of miscalculations and miscommunications leading to all-out war is immensely heightened.
The statements of Scher and Carter confirm warnings made last year by the WSWS, that NATO’s decision to back a fascist-led putsch in Kiev in February, and to blame Russia without any evidence for shooting down flight MH17, posed the risk of war. “Are you ready for war—including possibly nuclear war—between the United States, Europe, and Russia? That is the question that everyone should be asking him- or herself in light of the developments since the destruction of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17,” the WSWS wrote .
In March, Putin stated that he had placed Russian forces, including its nuclear forces, on alert in the aftermath of the Kiev putsch, fearing a NATO attack on Russia. Now the threat of war arising from US policy has been confirmed directly by statements of the US military.
These threats have developed largely behind the backs of the world working class. Workers in the United States, Europe and worldwide have time and again shown their hostility to US wars in Iraq or in Afghanistan. Yet nearly 15 years after these wars began, the world stands on the brink of an even bloodier and more devastating conflict, and the media and ruling elites the world over are hiding the risk of nuclear war.
US President Barack Obama is expected to escalate pressure on Russia at the G7 summit this weekend, pressing European leaders to maintain economic sanctions put in place in response to Russia’s annexation of Crimea last year. The latest outbreak in violence in Ukraine this week, which the US blames on Russia, is to serve as a pretext for continuing the sanctions.
Speaking to Parliament on Thursday, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko warned of a “colossal threat of the resumption of large-scale hostilities by Russian and terrorist forces.” He claimed without proof that 9,000 Russian soldiers are deployed in rebel-held areas of Donetsk and Luhansk, in eastern Ukraine.
“Ukraine’s military should be ready for a new offensive by the enemy, as well as a full-scale invasion along the entire border with the Russian Federation,” Poroshenko said. “We must be really prepared for this.” He said the Ukrainian army had at least 50,000 soldiers stationed in the east, prepared to defend the country.
Poroshenko’s remarks came a day after renewed fighting in eastern Ukraine between Kiev forces and Russian-backed separatists resulted in dozens of casualties. This week’s fighting marked the largest breach to date of the cease-fire signed in February.
Kremlin spokesman Dimitry Peskov told reporters on Thursday that Russia believed the previous day’s hostilities had been provoked by Kiev to influence upcoming discussions at the G7 summit this weekend and the EU summit in Brussels at the end of the month. “These provocative actions are organized by Ukraine’s military forces, and we are concerned with that,” he stated.
Each side blamed the other for initiating fighting in Marinka, approximately nine miles west of the rebel stronghold of Donetsk. Yuriy Biryukov, an adviser to Poroshenko, reported on Thursday that five Ukrainian soldiers had been killed in the fighting, and another 39 wounded. Eduard Basurin, deputy defense minister and spokesman for the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), told Interfax that 16 rebel fighters and five civilians had been killed.
Ukrainian forces also fired artillery at the rebel-held city of Donetsk on Wednesday. Shells landed in the southwest districts of Kirovsky and Petrovsky, killing 6 people and wounding at least 90 others. The city’s Sokol market was severely damaged, with several rows of shops burned to the ground.
Responding to Wednesday’s developments, members of the fascistic Right Sector militia have been called to mobilize for battle. Andrey Stempitsky, commander of the militia’s paramilitary battalion, posted a message on Facebook calling on those who went home during the cease-fire to “return to their combat units.” He warned that the Right Sector would “wage war, ignoring the truce devotees.”
Copyright © 2015 Global Research
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét