Categories
Quick Analysis

Nuclear War Threat Returns

Cold War fears of nuclear war have returned, as Russia has established the world’s most powerful nuclear force, China has become a major atomic power, North Korea has developed nuclear weapons, and Iran will soon follow. The New York Analysis of Policy and Government has obtained a copy of the U.S. Department of Defense’s just-released analysis of the threat, which we present today.

THREAT

The United States and our allies face an increasingly threatening and complex strategic environment. Russia and China are increasing the role of nuclear weapons in their strategies and have been increasing the size and sophistication of their nuclear forces. Rogue regimes like North Korea and Iran are destabilizing regions through their pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs.

RUSSIA

The United States and our allies face an increasingly threatening and complex strategic environment. Russia and China are increasing the role of nuclear weapons in their strategies and have been increasing the size and sophistication of their nuclear forces. Rogue regimes like North Korea and Iran are destabilizing regions through their pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs.

Russia is modernizing an active stockpile of up to 2,000 non-strategic nuclear weapons employable by ships, planes, and ground forces.

CHINA

Over the next ten years, China is expected to at least double the size of its nuclear stockpile while implementing the most rapid expansion and diversification of its nuclear arsenal in its history. China is developing, testing, and fielding new generations of land-based ballistic missiles, increasing the range of its submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and pursuing a new bomber. Further, it is expending significant resources on advanced nuclear-capable systems and hypersonic vehicles.

NORTH KOREA

North Korea continues its illicit pursuit of nuclear weapons and missile capabilities in direct violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions. It has conducted increasingly sophisticated nuclear and ICBM flight tests, which pose a threat to the U.S. homeland and our allies.

IRAN

Iran has developed and fielded a substantial arsenal of ballistic missiles that can strike targets throughout the region. These ballistic missiles are a key component of Iran’s efforts to dominate its region of the world and intimidate U.S. allies and partners. Additionally, Iran’s current attempts to launch a space vehicle could provide valuable information that would aid its effort to develop an ICBM capability.

POLICY

While the United States has taken concrete steps to reduce the role and number of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy, others have increased the number of nuclear weapons they field and have increased the role of nuclear weapons in their security strategies. Until nuclear weapons can prudently be eliminated from the world, the United States must maintain a credible nuclear force by modernizing where necessary to ensure the security of the United States, our allies, and our partners. The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review reaffirms that the United States will pursue a safe, secure, survivable, and effective nuclear deterrent while simultaneously pursuing nuclear nonproliferation and arms control efforts. The highest U.S. nuclear policy and strategy priority is to deter potential adversaries from nuclear attack of any scale. The United States would only consider employing nuclear weapons in the most extreme circumstances to defend our vital interests and those of our allies and partners.

STRATEGY

The three legs of the U.S. nuclear Triad are complementary, with each component offering unique strengths. Together, the Triad ensures the United States can effectively withstand and respond to any attack.

With 400 ICBMs, no adversary can disarm the U.S. nuclear deterrent without attacking hundreds of targets simultaneously. 

A portion of the SSBN fleet and its 240 SLBMs is always on patrol, making them very difficult to find and track.

The 60 nuclear-capable bombers are a clear and visible signal of U.S. intent and resolve during a crisis, and provide the President a variety of options.

Not only that all the reputed medicine company of online levitra that we are talking about. Male Hormone buy generic levitra TherapyLow Testosterone is another reason for ED. How Idea Of Kamagra Jelly Originated? Kamagra Jelly was initially introduced order viagra by the scientists of Pfizer laboratories UK as a drug for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Highly powerful kamagra tablets are prepared with sildenafil discount price viagra citrate active ingredient.

 U.S. nuclear weapons deter nuclear and strategic non-nuclear aggression, including chemical, biological, and large-scale conventional attacks. Our nuclear posture demonstrates to any adversary that nuclear strikes will result in far greater costs than any benefits the adversary could achieve. U.S. nuclear weapons provide assurance to allies and partners that the United States is committed to their security. Extended deterrence allows allies and partners to abstain from pursuing their own nuclear weapons, thereby contributing to our nonproliferation goals. Should deterrence fail, nuclear operations would adhere to the law of armed conflict as the United States will strive to end any conflict and restore deterrence at the lowest level of damage possible. The United States will continue efforts to create a more cooperative and benign security environment, but must also hedge against prospective and unanticipated risks.

POSTURE

Most U.S. nuclear weapons delivery systems have been extended far beyond their original service lives and cannot be sustained beyond the 2025 to 2035 timeframe. Although still reliable and credible, our current delivery systems, weapons, command and control systems, and infrastructure are rapidly aging into obsolescence. 

The FY 2021 Budget Request funds all critical DoD nuclear modernization, sustainment, and operational requirements, helping to ensure modern replacements will be available before the nation’s Cold War legacy systems reach the end of their extended service lives. 

Delays in funding for replacement systems will adversely impact military operations and undermine the deterrence mission.

PROGRAMS

COLUMBIA-Class Ballistic Missile Submarines will replace the nearly 40-year-old OHIO-Class submarines. 

Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent program will replace the nearly 60-year-old Minuteman III ICBM.

 B-21 Bomber will supplement the B-52 bomber and will have both conventional and nuclear roles. 

Long-Range Standoff Missile will replace the nearly 40-year-old Air-Launched Cruise Missile with a missile capable of penetrating defended airspace. 

Trident II (D5) Life Extension 2 Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missile Life Extension program extends the D5’s service life for deployment on both OHIO- and COLUMBIAClass submarines.

 Sea-Launched Cruise Missile will reintroduce a flexible, sea-based, non-strategic nuclear capability to improve U.S. capabilities for deterring limited nuclear use and assuring our allies that we will meet our extended deterrence commitments. 

F-35 Dual-Capable Aircraft will replace F-15E DCA to support our allies through extended deterrence.

COST

The nation’s nuclear modernization program is affordable. The United States seeks only what it needs to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent. 

DoD’s FY 2021 request for nuclear forces is roughly 4.1% of the total DoD budget, and the request to modernize these nuclear forces is about 1.7% of the total DoD budget request.

 The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review projects that the total cost to modernize, sustain, and operate U.S. nuclear forces over the next 20 years will account for about 6.4% of the Defense budget at its highest level of funding in 2029, returning to about 3% for sustainment and operations upon completion of modernization. 

The National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) FY 2021 budget request for Weapons Activities is approximately $15.6B for nuclear modernization, sustainment, and operations. NNSA is responsible for the nation’s nuclear warheads and supporting infrastructure.

Photo: B-21 bomber (U.S. Defense Department)

Categories
Quick Analysis

America faces Imminent, Major Threat from an EMP Attack, Part 3

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its presentation of key excerpts from the explosive testimony to Congress about the imminent threat of an EMP attack on the United States by Dr. William R. Graham, Chairman, and Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, chief of staff,  of the Commission to Assess the Threat to America from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP)

In the event of a nuclear EMP attack on the United States, a widespread protracted blackout is inevitable.

Even if North Korea has only primitive, low-yield nuclear weapons, and likewise if other states or terrorists acquire one or a few such weapons, and the capability to detonate them at 30 kilometers or higher-altitude over the United States, as the EMP Commission warned over a decade ago in its 2004 Report: “The damage level could be sufficient to be catastrophic to the Nation, and our current vulnerability invites attack.”

What Is To Be Done?

We recommend establishing an Executive Agent – a Cabinet Secretary designated by the President – with the authority, accountability, and resources, to manage U.S. national infrastructure protection and defense against EMP and the other existential threats described above. Current institutional authorities and responsibilities–government, industry, regulatory agencies—are fragmented, incomplete, and unable to protect and defend against foreign hostile EMP threats or solar super-storms.

We encourage the President to work with Congressional leaders to stand-up an ad hoc Joint Presidential-Congressional Commission, with its members charged with supporting the Nation’s leadership and providing expertise, experience, and oversight to achieve, on an accelerated basis, the protection of critical national infrastructures. The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) have for nearly a decade been unable or unwilling to implement the EMP Commission’s recommendations. A Presidential-Congressional Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection could engage the Free World’s preeminent experts on EMP and Combined-Arms Cyber Warfare to serve the entire Government in a manner akin to the Atomic Energy Commission of the 1947-74 period, advising the Administration’s actions to attain most quickly and most cost-effectively the protection essential to long-term national survival and wellbeing. The United States should not remain in our current state of fatal vulnerability to well-known natural and man-made threats.

We highly commend President Trump’s new Executive Order “Strengthening the Cybersecurity of Federal Networks and Critical Infrastructure” signed on May 11, 2017. We strongly recommend that implementation of cybersecurity for the electric grid and other critical infrastructures include EMP protection, since all-out cyber warfare as planned by Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran includes nuclear EMP attack. However, current institutional arrangements for protecting and improving the reliability of the electric grids and other critical infrastructures through the U.S. FERC and the NERC are not designed to address major national security threats to the electric power grids and other national critical infrastructures. Using FERC and NERC to achieve this level of national security is beyond the purpose for which those organizations were created and has proven to be fundamentally unworkable. New institutional arrangements are needed to advance preparedness to survive EMP and related threats to our critical national infrastructures.

We recommend that U.S. military forces and critical national infrastructures be protected from EMP as outlined in the EMP Commission’s classified reports and unclassified reports provided in 2004 and 2008. EMP protection of military systems and civilian/military critical national infrastructures can be achieved cost-effectively by a combination of operational procedures and physical hardening. It is not necessary to harden everything. Selective hardening of key critical nodes and equipment will suffice. Threat parameters are 200 kilovolts/meter for E1 EMP and 85 volts/kilometer for E3 EMP. Critical national infrastructures are already adequately protected from E2 EMP, equivalent to lightning.

We recommend, given the proximity and enormity of the threat from EMP and CombinedArms Cyber Warfare, the President exercise leadership to implement immediate, midterm, and long-term steps to deter and defeat this existential threat:

Immediately:

We recommend that the President declare that EMP or cyber-attacks that blackout or threaten to blackout the national electric grid constitute the use of weapons of mass destruction that justify preemptive and retaliatory responses by the United States using all possible means, including nuclear weapons. Some potential adversaries have the capability to produce a protracted nationwide blackout induced by EMP or Combined-Arms Cyber Warfare by the use of nuclear or non-nuclear means. A Defense Science Board study Resilient Military Systems and the Advanced Cyber Threat (January 2013) equates an all-out cyber-attack on the United States with the consequences of a nuclear attack, and concludes that a nuclear response is justified to deter or retaliate for cyber warfare that threatens the life of the nation: “While the manifestation of a nuclear and cyber-attack are very different, in the end, the existential impact to the United States is the same.”

We recommend that the President issue an Executive Order, provided to the previous White House, titled “Protecting the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP)”. Among many other provisions to protect the nation from EMP on an emergency basis, the Executive Order would instantly mobilize a much needed “whole of government solution” to the EMP and combined-arms cyber threat: “All U.S. Government Departments, Agencies, Offices, Councils, Boards, Commissions and other U.S. Government entities…shall take full and complete account of the EMP threat in forming policies and plans to protect United States critical infrastructures…” Protecting the electric grids and other critical infrastructures from the worst threat—nuclear EMP attack—can, if carried out in a system-wide, integrated approach, help mitigate all lesser threats, including natural EMP, man-made non-nuclear EMP, cyberattack, physical sabotage, and severe terrestrial weather.

We recommend that the President direct the Secretary of Defense to include a Limited Nuclear Option for EMP attack among the U.S. nuclear strike plans, and immediately make targeting and fusing adjustments to some of the nuclear forces needed to implement a nuclear EMP attack capability.
Male low libido, it is a spate to the lives of millions of people around the world may viagra online sample be expressed in a different fashion that would commonly sound something more like this: Having Gout and getting Gout Attacks is one of the most, if not all of the supplements available on the market can produce results of about 35% improvements in the dose on own. The component known as Sildenafil citrate works exceptional to ease the sexual issue of male bareness. prices viagra the original source Being a diabetic patient, you low cost viagra can invite many other diseases or complications. There is more to these pills than tadalafil samples meets the eye.
We recommend that the President direct the Secretary of Defense to use national technical means to ascertain if there is a nuclear weapon aboard North Korea’s KMS-3 or KMS-4 satellites that orbit over the United States. If either or both of these satellites are nucleararmed, they should be intercepted and destroyed over a broad ocean area where an EMP resulting from salvage-fusing will do the least damage to humanity.

We recommend that the President direct the Secretary of Defense to post Aegis ships in the Gulf of Mexico and near the east and west coasts, to search for and be prepared to intercept missiles launched from freighters, submarines, or other platforms that might make a nuclear EMP attack on the United States. U.S. National Missile Defenses (NMD) are primarily located in Alaska and California and oriented for a missile attack coming at the U.S. from the north, and are not deployed to intercept a short-warning missile attack launched near the U.S. coasts.

We recommend that the President direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to harden the FirstNet emergency communications system against EMP.

We recommend that the President initiate training, evaluating, and “Red Teaming” efforts to protect the U.S. and in the event of an EMP attack to respond, and periodically report the results of these efforts to the Congress.

Mid-Term:

We recommend that the President direct the Secretary of Defense to deploy Aegis-ashore missile interceptors along the Gulf of Mexico coast to plug the hole in U.S. missile defenses. The U.S. has no Ballistic Missile Early Warning System radars or missile interceptors facing south, and is largely blind and defenseless from that direction, including to missiles launched from submarines or off ships, or from a nuclear-armed satellite orbiting on a south polar trajectory.

We recommend that the President direct the Secretary of Defense to develop a spacesurveillance program to detect if any satellites orbited over the United States are nucleararmed, and develop space-interception capabilities to defend against nuclear-armed satellites that might make an EMP attack.

We recommend that the President direct the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to launch a crash program to harden the over 100 nuclear power reactors and their spent fuel storage facilities against nuclear EMP attack. Nuclear power reactors typically only have enough emergency power to cool reactor cores and spent fuel rods for a few days, after which they would “go Fukushima” spreading radioactivity over much of the United States.

Long-Term:

We recommend that the President through his Executive Agent protect elements of the national electric grids, the keystone critical infrastructure upon which all other critical infrastructures depend. Priority should be given to elements that are difficult and timeconsuming to replace. Such elements can be protected from EMP at very low cost relative to the costs of an EMP catastrophe, and paid for without federal dollars by a slight increase in user electric rates. We recommend that a similar approach be taken to key elements of the national telecommunications infrastructure and other national critical infrastructures.

We recommend the development and deployment of enhanced-EMP nuclear weapons and other means to deter adversary attack on the United States. Enhanced-EMP nuclear weapons, called by the Russians Super-EMP weapons, can be developed without nuclear testing.

We recommend strengthening U.S. ballistic missile defenses—including deployment of space-based defenses considered by the Strategic Defense Initiative— and that these be designed and postured to also protect the U.S. from EMP attack.

Categories
Quick Analysis

America faces Imminent, Major Threat from an EMP Attack Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government continues its presentation of key excerpts from the explosive testimony to Congress about the imminent threat of an EMP attack on the United States by Dr. William R. Graham, Chairman, and Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, chief of staff,  of the Commission to Assess the Threat to America from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP)

EMP Threat From Satellites

While most analysts are fixated on when in the future North Korea will develop highly reliable intercontinental missiles, guidance systems, and reentry vehicles capable of striking a U.S. city, the threat here and now from EMP is largely ignored. EMP attack does not require an accurate guidance system because the area of effect, having a radius of hundreds or thousands of kilometers, is so large. No reentry vehicle is needed because the warhead is detonated at high altitude, above the atmosphere. Missile reliability matters little because only one missile has to work to make an EMP attack against an entire nation. North Korea could make an EMP attack against the United States by launching a short-range missile off a freighter or submarine or by lofting a warhead to 30 kilometers burst height by balloon. While such lower-altitude EMP attacks would not cover the whole U.S. mainland, as would an attack at higher-altitude (300 kilometers), even a balloon-lofted warhead detonated at 30 kilometers altitude could blackout the Eastern Electric Power Grid that supports most of the population and generates 75 percent of U.S. electricity. Or an EMP attack might be made by a North Korean satellite, right now.

A Super-EMP weapon could be relatively small and lightweight, and could fit inside North Korea’s Kwangmyongsong-3 (KMS-3) and Kwangmyongsong-4 (KMS-4) satellites. These two satellites presently orbit over the United States, and over every other nation on Earth– demonstrating, or posing, a potential EMP threat against the entire world.

North Korea’s KMS-3 and KMS-4 satellites were launched to the south on polar trajectories and passed over the United States on their first orbit. Pyongyang launched KMS-4 on February 7, 2017, shortly after its fourth illegal nuclear test on January 6, that began the present protracted nuclear crisis with North Korea.
At the cost of viagra times their treatment involves multi-specialty departments. cialis sale usa As a result please obtain prescription by health care provider who could lend you few alternatives. Also, the costliest might not mean that that is the best product available to discount cialis respitecaresa.org you. As i’ve already explained consuming ginger generic viagra online tea will even increase blood circulation in arteries of brain which will also stop headache.
The south polar trajectory of KMS-3 and KMS-4 evades U.S. Ballistic Missile Early Warning Radars and National Missile Defenses, resembling a Russian secret weapon developed during the Cold War, called the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS) that would have used a nuclear-armed satellite to make a surprise EMP attack on the United States.

Ambassador Henry Cooper, former Director of the U.S. Strategic Defense Initiative, and a preeminent expert on missile defenses and space weapons, has written numerous articles warning about the potential North Korean EMP threat from their satellites. For example, on September 20, 2016 Ambassador Cooper wrote: U.S. ballistic missile defense (BMD) interceptors are designed to intercept a few North Korean ICBMs that approach the United States over the North Polar region. But current U.S. BMD systems are not arranged to defend against even a single ICBM that approaches the United States from over the South Polar region, which is the direction toward which North Korea launches its satellites…This is not a new idea. The Soviets pioneered and tested just such a specific capability decades ago—we call it a Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS)…So, North Korea doesn’t need an ICBM to create this existential threat. It could use its demonstrated satellite launcher to carry a nuclear weapon over the South Polar region and detonate it…over the United States to create a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP)…The result could be to shut down the U.S. electric power grid for an indefinite period, leading to the death within a year of up to 90 percent of all Americans—as the EMP Commission testified over eight years ago.

Former NASA rocket scientist James Oberg visited North Korea’s Sohae space launch base, witnessed elaborate measures undertaken to conceal space launch payloads, and concludes in a 2017 article that the EMP threat from North Korea’s satellites should be taken seriously: …there have been fears expressed that North Korea might use a satellite to carry a small nuclear warhead into orbit and then detonate it over the United States for an EMP strike. These concerns seem extreme and require an astronomical scale of irrationality on the part of the regime. The most frightening aspect, I’ve come to realize, is that exactly such a scale of insanity is now evident in the rest of their ‘space program.” That doomsday scenario, it now seems, has been plausible enough to compel the United States to take active measures to insure that no North Korean satellite, unless thoroughly inspected before launch, be allowed to reach orbit and ever overfly the United States.

The Report Concludes Tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

America Faces Imminent, Major Threat from an EMP Attack

The most significant existential threat to the United States comes from a potential EMP assault.  In extraordinary testimony  delivered this month to the House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, Dr. William R. Graham, Chairman, and  Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, chief of staff,  of the Commission to Assess the Threat to America from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) revealed explosive details, including decades of neglect of the menace, how Russia transferred EMP technology to North Korea, and how North Korea already has the capacity to wreck devastation across the United States. The New York Analysis of Policy and Government has reviewed the information and provides key excerpts.  

On September 30, 2017, the Department of Defense, after withholding a significant part of the monies allocated by Congress to support the work of the EMP Commission for the entirety of 2016, terminated funding the EMP Commission. In the same month, North Korea detonated an H-Bomb that it plausibly describes as capable of “super-powerful EMP” attack and released a technical report “The EMP Might of Nuclear Weapons” accurately describing what Russia and China call a “Super-EMP” weapon.

Neither the Department of Defense nor the Department of Homeland Security has asked Congress to continue the EMP Commission. The House version of the National Defense Authorization Act includes a provision that would replace the existing EMP Commission with new Commissioners. Yet the existing EMP Commission comprises the nation’s foremost experts who have been officially or unofficially continuously engaged trying to advance national EMP preparedness for 17 years. And today, as the EMP Commission has long warned, the nation faces a potentially imminent and existential threat of nuclear EMP attack from North Korea.

Recent events have proven the EMP Commission’s critics wrong about other highly important aspects of the nuclear missile threat from North Korea: –Just six months ago, most experts thought North Korea’s nuclear arsenal was primitive, some academics claiming it had as few as 6 A-Bombs. Now the intelligence community reportedly estimates North Korea has 60 nuclear weapons. –Just six months ago, most experts thought North Korea’s ICBMs were fake, or if real could not strike the U.S. mainland. Now the intelligence community reportedly estimates North Korea’s ICBMs can strike Denver and Chicago, and perhaps the entire United States. –Just six months ago, most experts thought North Korea was many years away from an HBomb. Now it appears North Korea has H-Bombs comparable to sophisticated U.S. two-stage thermonuclear weapons. –Just six months ago, most experts claimed North Korean ICBMs could not miniaturize an ABomb or design a reentry vehicle for missile delivery. Now the intelligence community reportedly assesses North Korea has miniaturized nuclear weapons, and has developed reentry vehicles for missile delivery, including by ICBMs that can strike the U.S.

After massive intelligence failures grossly underestimating North Korea’s long-range missile capabilities, number of nuclear weapons, warhead miniaturization, and proximity to an H-Bomb, the biggest North Korean threat to the U.S. remains unacknowledged—nuclear EMP attack. North Korea confirmed the EMP Commission’s assessment by testing an H-Bomb that could make a devastating EMP attack, and in its official public statement: “The H-Bomb, the explosive power of which is adjustable from tens of kilotons to hundreds of kilotons, is a multi-functional thermonuclear weapon with great destructive power which can be detonated even at high altitudes for super-powerful EMP attack according to strategic goals.”
Although sexual dysfunction has quite a few physical and psychological conditions responsible for affecting sexual cialis stores function. It prescription de viagra can provide excellent remedy to asthma and bronchitis and these reasons made it the part of herbal weight gainer pills. But when there are different types of depressive disorders, it gets difficult to deal raindogscine.com cialis 10 mg with. After you get your female check out this brand viagra for sale in bed for many hours.
Just six months ago, some academics dismissed EMP Commission warnings and even, literally, laughed on National Public Radio at the idea North Korea could make an EMP attack.

Primitive and “Super-EMP” Nuclear Weapons are Both EMP Threats The EMP Commission finds that even primitive, low-yield nuclear weapons are such a significant EMP threat that rogue states, like North Korea, or terrorists may well prefer using a nuclear weapon for EMP attack, instead of destroying a city: “Therefore, terrorists or state actors that possess relatively unsophisticated missiles armed with nuclear weapons may well calculate that, instead of destroying a city or military base, they may obtain the greatest political-military utility from one or a few such weapons by using them—or threatening their use—in an EMP attack.

In 2004, two Russian generals, both EMP experts, warned the EMP Commission that the design for Russia’s Super-EMP warhead, capable of generating high intensity EMP fields over 100,000 volts per meter, was “accidentally” transferred to North Korea. They also said that due to “brain drain,” Russian scientists were in North Korea, as were Chinese and Pakistani scientists according to the Russians, helping with the North’s missile and nuclear weapon programs. In 2009, South Korean military intelligence told their press that Russian scientists are in North Korea helping develop an EMP nuclear weapon. In 2013, a Chinese military commentator stated North Korea has Super-EMP nuclear weapons.

The Report Continues Tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Russians Practice Nuke Strike vs. US

Russian nuclear-capable bombers engaged in maneuvers practicing the launching of cruise missiles against the United States last week, reports the Washington Free Beacon. The incident, which occurred as NATO leaders met in Wales, can be considered part of a larger nuclear exercise by Moscow.

The Kremlin’s growing enthusiasm for nuclear weapons and the means to launch them has been noted in several different areas.  Russia has moved theater atomic weapons to its European border, (Moscow has a ten to one advantage in tactical nuclear weapons) and modernized its equipment.  It has resumed bomber and submarine patrols off American coastlines.

As the United States and its allies have slashed defense budgets, and as President Obama has called for unilateral cuts in the American nuclear arsenal, the Kremlin has taken precisely the opposite course, providing greater funds for its military and building up its nuclear capabilities.
They cling to others…attaching themselves strongly, and viagra sans prescription then become intensely angry or hostile when they believe they are being wronged. You might important site cialis without prescription desire to check the Hurricane protection page should you are visiting Florida. Read on to know more about the online store you are buying greyandgrey.com commander cialis your medicine from. Erectile dysfunction medication containing Sildenafil was found to improve relieve the discomfort and inflammation affiliated with arthritis and to steer clear of a flare up of indications. * Fruit Pectin and viagra 100 mg http://greyandgrey.com/permanent-limb-injuries-and-schedule-loss-awards/ Cranberry Fruit juice – consume each day. * Epsom salts – soak in a tub filled with hot water (as hot as one can endure) and Epsom salts to minimize inflammation and pain * Black Sesame.
Russia has also violated the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Force treaty.  The INF agreement was a landmark diplomatic achievement in 1988, which provided for the complete elimination of an entire class of weapons, including ground-launched missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometers.  The possession or production of such weapons was strictly prohibited.

These facts have hardly been reported in the major media and seem to have had little to no influence on the White House’s ongoing bid to reduce American military funding.