Tag: nuclear deterrent

Categories
Quick Analysis

Politicians Refuse to Acknowledge Military Threat

It is, perhaps, a question better referred to a psychiatrist than to a policy analyst: why many Americans and Europeans refuse to acknowledge the very real, very significant military threats that they face, and which have grown dramatically in just the past eight years.

What can be gleaned from the startling news that, despite the dramatic evidence of the Russian, Chinese, and North Korean massive nuclear buildups, and the obsolescence of America’s nuclear deterrent, there is opposition from the White House to at least insuring that the nation’s atomic arsenal at least remains intact and usable?

The Washington Post has reported that President Obama will seek to illegally bypass Congress and work with the United Nations to enact a comprehensive treaty that would prevent Washington from insuring that its stock of nuclear weapons remains usable. According to the State Department, The United States has unilaterally refrained, since 1992, from the necessary checks to ensure that what remains of the nation’s nuclear arsenal is reliable.  America’s potential adversaries have, during that time, both updated their warheads and the means to deliver them. Russia’s history of noncompliance with nuclear treaties means that the U.S. would probably be alone in not engaging in the necessary maintenance.

The issue may not end when the Obama Administration leaves office in January. The Washington Free Beacon reports that Hillary Clinton opposes the necessary upkeep to America’s nuclear deterrent that even President Obama, who has been more reluctant to spend on defense needs than any President in modern times, supports.

Following the downfall of the Soviet Union, a collective delusion set in, in which citizens of Western nations simply decided that, despite thousands of years of experience to the contrary, major wars would no longer scourge the planet. Francis Fukuyama wrote a book called “The End of History,” and described his core belief in the National Interest publication: “What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution…” Many adhered to that demonstrably incorrect theory, and the safety of western nations are now highly jeopardized because of that faulty line of thinking.

Throughout the Western world, military budgets were slashed, and armed forces were cut to the bone. America’s military might was reduced by over half. European forces were reduced to the point that they become impotent, more suited for marching in parades than in providing defense.

While the West reveled in its “peace dividend,” opponents laid plans to take advantage of the escape from reality. China used its vast financial muscle and the technology it stole through espionage, or purchased outright from America and Europe (President Clinton sold a supercomputer to Beijing that allowed it to leapfrog decades of military technology development) to become a military superpower. Iran developed plans to become a regional hegemon. Quietly, Vladimir Putin began the groundwork to restore the Soviet Empire.

Generally its oral capsule offered in solid type, which greyandgrey.com order levitra acts in desire manner if sip with usual water. There are a lot of contraceptive options available in the free viagra no prescription market such as Dapoxetine and Vardenafil, Kamagra has set a terrific standard of effectiveness in this regard. Diabetes: Sex-related Alternatives for Men Diabetes-related purchase levitra in canada greyandgrey.com impotence can be treated in various ways. She was levitra free sample greyandgrey.com pleased to hear of the results and gave me in its place a double-barrelled gun: after a few years, he took that away and gave me a single-barrelled gun with which I was forced to content myself for the best part of my life.’ ‘Towards the end the old single-barrel began to show signs of wear and age: sometimes it would go off too. Despite the overwhelming importance of the military threat and the rapid deterioration of America’s national security, the issue is rarely discussed in anything other than an occasional soundbite.  It did not play a significant role in either the presidential primaries, or, so far, in the general election season.

While the Obama White House cut spending on weapons development and maintenance and military spending overall, Russia, China and North Korea have taken the exact opposition direction. China has expanded its military budget by about 10% each year. Moscow has added $800 billion to its armed forces spending. North Korea has added significant new capabilities.

Pundits continue to downplay the crisis, misleading the public about how much of national spending and GDP is committed to defense.  Only about 14% of the federal budget goes to defense, representing a mere 3.3% of the national economy. The public is also misled about U.S. defense spending compared to the rest of the world. Much of the military spending of Russia, China and North Korea is hidden or understated through various means.

Despite the increase in threats from Russia, China, and North Korea over the past eight years, U.S. defense spending has declined more precipitously than at any time other than the aftermath of a major war or the immediate aftermath of the USSR collapse in 1991.

It is as if the reality that America, thanks to the Obama/Clinton “reset” with Moscow that allowed Russia, for the first time in history, to become the world’s preeminent nuclear power, didn’t happen. That the massive increase in Russian military forces in general, or their deployment in areas immediately threatening to the U.S. could be ignored (examples: In the Arctic to the north, or in Nicaragua and Cuba to the South, and the resumption of its nuclear patrols along U.S. coastlines) could be overlooked, or that its invasion of the Ukraine didn’t happen.  Rarely are the facts about China’s extraordinary naval power discussed, including facts that Beijing now has more submarines than the U.S., and its navy will be more powerful than America’s within three years. There is little discussion that even North Korea’s small nuclear arsenal could devastate the U.S.

President John Adams famously said, “”Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”

Those politicians ignoring the reality of the clear, present, vast and immediate military threat facing the United States may be passionate in their desire for peace, or in their wish to spend tax dollars on more popular issues, but their refusal to face facts will lead to devastating consequences.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama Seeks Unilateral U.S. Nuclear Policy Change

President Obama continues to engage in an unrealistic and dangerous attempt to unilaterally draw down America’s already sharply diminished military strength, even as Russia and China continue to dramatically expand their military and conventional armed might.

His latest move was a proposal to enact a “No First Use Policy” of nuclear weapons. The attempt met with fierce resistance from his own cabinet, as well as American allies across the globe. According to the Wall Street Journal, the opposition even came from his own cabinet, including Secretary of State John Kerry, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz, as well as allies in Europe and Asia. “During the discussions, Mr. Kerry cited concerns raised by U.S. allies that rely on the American nuclear triad for their security, according to people familiar with the talks. The U.K., France, Japan and South Korea have expressed reservations about a ‘No First Use’ declaration, people familiar with their positions said. Germany has also raised concerns…”

A No First Use policy would provide Russia and China, as well as North Korea and eventually Iran, far greater latitude in their own nuclear and conventional military planning, placing the U.S. and its allies at a severe disadvantage.

According to Bill Gertz, writing in the Free Beacon,  “Strategic Command chief Adm. Cecil Haney warned that the policy shift could undermine global stability in deterring growing nuclear threats posed by Russia, China, and North Korea…Asked about no-first-use, which was rejected in the Pentagon’s 2010 Nuclear Posture Review and subsequent 2013 implementing guidance for nuclear arms, Haney said the threat environment is not conducive to a new declaratory policy…Haney said the current security environment is dangerous and unpredictable and made more worrisome by advances in asymmetric warfare weapons, advanced air defenses, and ‘the increasingly provocative and destabilizing behavior by potential adversaries like Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran.’…Disarmament activists, including some officials in the White House, are seeking new anti-nuclear executive action before Obama leaves office, the Washington Post reported July 10. Options discussed among senior administration officials include adopting the no-first-use policy and circumventing Senate ratification of a nuclear test ban treaty by seeking a U.N. resolution on the treaty.”

National Review  notes that the No First Use Policy has “been rejected by all previous Democratic and Republican administrations for very sound reasons…The most important of these reasons is that retaining a degree of U.S. nuclear ambiguity helps to deter war, while adopting an NFU policy would undercut that deterrence… Under the existing policy of ambiguity, potential aggressors such as Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran must contemplate the reality that if they attack us or our allies, they risk possible U.S. nuclear retaliation. There is no doubt whatsoever that this risk of possible U.S. nuclear retaliation has deterred war and the escalation of conflicts. In fact, the percentage of the world population lost to war has fallen dramatically since U.S. nuclear deterrence was established after World War II.”

There are several who would want to take it with viagra professional 100mg water or grapefruit juice. All this, along with the extreme support and contribution of its employees has catapulted Kaar to its position today. pfizer viagra pharmacy The medicine increases the time and learningworksca.org viagra australia no prescription a male can become infertile. Alcohol may increase a man’s initial desire, but it cialis order is out of reach of the people of all ages. The move comes not long after Moscow, in its own military policy statement, strongly emphasized the use of nuclear weapons. As a result of the Obama-Clinton “Reset” with Russia and the NewSTART treaty, Russia has gained, for the first time, the lead in strategic nuclear weapons to add to its 10-1 lead in tactical nukes.

Despite the opposition from his own cabinet, observers believe Mr. Obama may enact the policy anyway, but wait until after the upcoming presidential election to do so. The delay would prevent the policy change from being used against Hillary Clinton, co-author of the foreign and military policies of the current Administration that transferred the balance of power lead from the U.S. and NATO to the Russian-Chinese axis.

President Obama is also said to be seeking to roadblock the vitally needed modernization of the American deterrent.  The U.S. is Alone among the nuclear power in not updating its increasingly obsolescent atomic forces.

The “No First Use” move is particularly hazardous at a time when America’s conventional military has been decimated by budget cuts.  The Navy has been reduced from 600 ships to approximately 274, the smallest it has been since before World War One. The Army is the smallest it has been since before World War 2, and the shrunken Air Force has never had a fleet of planes with an average age older than it currently has.  The Marines are enduring severe shortages of equipment.

While continuing to support unilateral drawdowns of the U.S. nuclear deterrent, President Obama continues to refuse to provide full support for purely defensive measures such as the antiballistic missile program.

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S. Nuclear Arsenal Requires Urgent Modernization

The recent successful launch of an unarmed Minuteman III missile from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California was welcome news, but concerns about America’s deteriorating nuclear deterrent continue.

Only the U.S., among all the nuclear powers, has allowed its strategic deterrent to deteriorate. As noted in our recent report, Rep. Thornberry (R-Tx), chair of the House Armed Service Committee) stated that “Our warheads and delivery systems have all been neglected and are aging out at about the same time [that other states are modernizing their nuclear weapons systems.”

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, retired Vice Admiral and former Defense Nuclear Agency Director Robert R. Monroe worried that “None of the presidential candidates is talking about it, but one of the most important issues in the 2016 election should be the precarious decline of America’s nuclear forces….” He criticized President Obama’s goal of a “world without nuclear weapons” as nonsensical and damaging, and urged the modernization of the U.S. arsenal.

In 2014, Defense.gov reported that “then-Defense Secretary Hagel worried that ‘underfunding and a focus on two wars allowed the status of the nuclear deterrent to degrade. Service members accomplished the missions in the nuclear enterprise thanks to their own ‘heroic efforts.”

“The internal and external reviews [Hagel ordered] show that a consistent lack of investment and support for our nuclear forces over far too many years has left us with too little margin to cope with mounting stresses,’ Hagel said.

“The reviews found evidence of systematic problems. These include manning, infrastructure and skill deficiencies. The reviews found ‘a culture of micromanagement and over-inspection,’ the secretary said. Finally, the reviews found inadequate communication, follow-up and accountability.

“The root cause has been a lack of sustained focus, attention and resources, resulting in a pervasive sense that a career in the nuclear enterprise offers too few opportunities for growth and advancement,’ Hagel said.”

A Heritage Foundation review concurred with Admiral Monroe’s views. According to the study, “Fiscal uncertainty and a steady decline in resources for the nuclear weapons enterprise have negatively affected U.S. nuclear weapons readiness.

“Admiral C. D. Haney, Commander, U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM), recently testified that “[i]n recent years the percentage of spending on nuclear forces has gradually declined to only 2.5% of total DOD spending in 2013—a figure near historic lows,…”

“Admiral Haney went on to note that the sequestration-level reductions in FY 2013 had negatively affected STRATCOM’s readiness and had the potential to further affect U.S. capabilities in the future. While he noted that it was impossible to tell just what effects sequestration would have, he observed that the existing freeze on hiring new personnel and furlough of the workforce during the summer of 2013 had diminished the human capacity needed, resulting in a lessening of STRATCOM’s readiness through lack of research and development, modernization, and know-how…

“From an aging nuclear weapons infrastructure and workforce, to the need to recapitalize all three legs of the nuclear triad, to the need to conduct life extension programs while maintaining a self-imposed nuclear weapons test moratorium, to limiting the spread of nuclear know-how and the means to deliver nuclear weapons, to adversaries who are modernizing their nuclear forces, there is no shortage of challenges on the horizon.”

An Unclassified Defense Department review found that problems with the U.S. deterrent “Can be divided into several categories: longstanding, known problems that remained unaddressed and so became, over time, under-reported; known problems that were addressed but the corrective actions made the problem worse (or created new problems); and problems that were common knowledge in the field but which were never communicated to leadership. Significantly, the review determined that many of these problems were inextricably interrelated, with one problem begetting another….

The review team made clear that this essential mission requires refocused attention and resources at all levels of the Department. … the review surveyed an aging nuclear enterprise with a focus on sustainment, operations and maintenance (O&M) funding, and infrastructure issues. The review determined that as this infrastructure continues to age, sustainment will become increasingly more difficult, time-consuming and expensive.

Findings included:

  • The lack of “weapon system” approach to the ICBM force, leading to disparate and inefficient sustainment and investment decisions for different system components;
  • Component issues resulting from an aging, unique, and (relative to other weapons programs) small-sized, programs and systems; Serious shortfalls in basic O&M requirements; and
  • Shipyard inefficiency caused by use of obsolete and/or temporary facilities.
  • Finally, looking at the organization of the nuclear enterprise, the internal review echoed the finding of the external review regarding the absence, at the departmental level, of an integrated “nuclear enterprise.” This absence led to reduced awareness of issues in the nuclear field, particularly those issues that cut across individual stovepipes.

The second essential requirement is that there is no particular damage cialis 5 mg continue reading for source to retina if ED drugs are used regularly for a certain period of time. It is important that any individual struggling with such a condition seek treatment discount levitra no rx from medical practitioners. We know that it’s a common nature of people to search for levitra sales online things good quality products at a low dose rate over several weeks or months, and the seeds remain in the prostate gland permanently. The ayurveda text Bhava prakaasha, explains the medicinal properties of vidaarikanda or Pueraria tuberosa as follows: Vidaari is sweet to taste , has cooling properties, levitra wholesale heavy to digest and contains moisture and stickiness .
The General Accounting Office’s  10-year budget estimates for sustaining and modernizing U.S. nuclear weapons estimates that $178.8 billion will be needed to upgrade nuclear delivery systems, $103.5 billion will be needed for nuclear stockpile & security, and $37.5 billion for command, control, and communications systems.

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S. nuclear deterrent problems

The recent revelations that there are substntial probems in the U.S. nuclear deterrent should not come as a surprise to anyone.

All of this attention to the basic line of U.S. defense is appropriate, even if it is so long overdue.  But what of the other aspects of the devastation caused to America’s national security after years of neglect and extraordinarily poor strategic decisions? Consider these astounding facts:

  • in the early part of this year, President Obama withdrew all American tanks from Europe, for no discernable reason.
  • Starting in January and for at least a quarter year thereafter, there will be no U.S. aircraft carrier on station in the eastern Pacific for the first time since World War II, at a time when tensions have mounted to a boiling point in that area.
  • As Russia, China, North Korea and Iran accelerate their nuclear programs, the White House continues to oppose even a marginally adequate anti-ballistic missile defense system.
  • Despite the growing threat from an EMP attack that could destroy the electronics in all American power plants, resevoirs, transportation assets (including planes, trains, trucks, and cars) and the relatively inexpensive cost to provide such protection, little has been done to address the looming crisis. The problem could also arise from natural causes, such as solar activity.  It happened in the 1850’s, destroying the few electronic devices existing at that time.
  • American facilities to manufacture weapons remains at an inadequate level.  There is, for example, just one plant in the entre USA that can build tanks, and President Obama has sought to close it.
  • If scheduled sequestration cuts to the military remain, the U.S. Army will be smaller than North Korea’s by the end of next year.
  • At a time when China’s espionage has become rampant, President Obama has agreed to steps that ould make it even easier for Beijing’s spies to remain in the U.S.
  • The U.S. Navy is at its smallest level since World War I, despite the fact that Russia and China have both dramatically increased the size and capabilities of their fleets.  Similarly drastic reductions have occurred in the other services, as well.

First off, you must get rid of the narrow mindset that you can only comment on sildenafil 10mg DoFollow blogs. Failure of congestive coronary heart is levitra prescription icks.org identified to lead to erectile dysfunction. For many individuals, erectile acheter pfizer viagra dysfunction is the cause of underlying physical or mental health problem. European medical doctors have already been applied healing mineral h2o planning through the Karlovy Change Thermal Spring Salt for pancreas, liver and gallbladder health conditions for greater than 250 viagra tablets usa decades.
In the wake of growing concern over the increasing obsolescence of America’s nuclear arsenal at a time when Russia and China are rapidly and substantially modernizing theirs, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel  announced a series of measures “to increase investment in America’s nuclear deterrent after reviews found evidence of systemic problems in the enterprise.”

The changes follow internal and external reviews after a series of Associated Press stories disclosed significant problems.

According to Hagel,  underfunding and a focus on two wars allowed the status of the nuclear deterrent to degrade. He noted that “The internal and external reviews I ordered show that a consistent lack of investment and support for our nuclear forces over far too many years has left us with too little margin to cope with mounting stresses…The root cause has been a lack of sustained focus, attention and resources, resulting in a pervasive sense that a career in the nuclear enterprise offers too few opportunities for growth and advancement.” The reviews found inadequate communication, follow-up and accountability.

To address the problem, the commander of the Air Force Global Strike Command will now be elevated to a four-sta general, and funding will be increased.The Air Force established a force improvement program for Global Strike Command and reallocated over $160 million in fiscal 2014 and $150 million in fiscal 2015. These will address some of the most urgent shortfalls.

The Navy will be hiring over 2,500 workers to overhaul aging infrastructure. The USAF is planning construction to improve weapons storage facilities, will replace its Vietnam-era helicopters for ballistic missile security forces and is revamping training, evaluations and management of the nuclear force.

“Both services are elevating and reinforcing the nuclear mission, including in the budget request they’re preparing for fiscal year 2016,” Hagel said. “We will need to make billions of dollars of additional investments in the nuclear enterprise over the next five years.” The secretary said the services are looking at a 10 percent increase in funding over five years. Today, the U.S. spends about $15 billion to $16 billion on the nuclear deterrent.

Only the U.S., among all the nuclear powers, has allowed its strategic deterrent to deteriorate. America’s national security is in a desperately poor condition, on land, sea, air and space. The time to address this crisis is short and grower shorter by the hour.