Olduvaiblog: Musings on the coming collapse

Home » Posts tagged 'Nuclear weapon'

Tag Archives: Nuclear weapon

Experts Fear Nuclear Famine: “A Disaster So Massive in Scale that No Preparation is Possible”

Experts Fear Nuclear Famine: “A Disaster So Massive in Scale that No Preparation is Possible”.

nuke-famine

At last count, there are eight countries in the world that have officially designed, developed and tested nuclear weapons. Another two (Israel and Iran) deny they have built or are building such weapons, but the probability that Israel has them and that Iran is building them is believed by members of the international community to be extremely high.

That being said, it’s only a matter of time before a madman at the helm in any of these ten nuclear-armed states decides to push the button. With the global economy in shambles, the world’s super powers mobilizing military assets, and hundreds of trillions of dollars in unservicable debt soon to be realized by the financial community, how long before history rhymes with previous large-scale events that culminated in the fall of the Roman empire or the World Wars that  devastated tens of millions of lives in the 20th century?

War, it seems, is inevitable. Not just because of the many problems faced by mankind, but because of the nature of mankind itself.

Whether that war is a widespread nuclear conflict involving the world’s super powers, or a more limited event in the middle east involving Pakistan and India, according to anew report published by the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, a nuclear engagement (even a limited one) would lead to widespread destruction across planet earth, with at least 2 billion people at risk of starvation or death.

The kicker? The effects will be so long-lasting, according to the author of the study, that there’s pretty much nothing we can do to survive it:

The threat of nuclear war has been embedded in global consciousness since the invention of the atomic bomb. Most fears are focused on blast radius and radioactive fallout; but the long-term effects of a nuclear conflict could be far more concerning.

According to new research from the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War and Physicians for Social Responsibility, a phenomenon known as “nuclear famine” is keeping experts up at night. The study estimates that more than 2 billion people are at risk.

Its author, Ira Helfand, says even a limited nuclear war could lead to “the end of civilization.”

Helfand theorizes it could occur in stages. The first is climate change. Existing literature shows that a regional nuclear war between India and Pakistan could drastically affect temperatures throughout the world. A 2007 study published in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics predicts that the soot created by such an event could reduce temps by 1.25°C per year for at least a half-decade.

This would wreak havoc on global crops.

The final stage of this catastrophe is starvation.

With his best guess, Helfand breaks the at-risk into three groups: (a) 870 million people already facing malnourishment, (b) grain-importing nations, and (c) the entire population of China. The first group gets more than 75% of its nutrition from grain, and a significant portion would not be able to afford higher prices.

Grain-importing nations, like South Korea, Japan, most of North Africa, and the Middle East, would be hard hit by trading partners who suddenly decide to stop exporting. Additionally, China’s 1.3 billion citizens would use up their rice and wheat reserves in a few months, and international hoarding may make open-market purchases impossible.

As Helfand has said: ”This is a disaster so massive in scale that really no preparation is possible. We must prevent this.”

With the vast majority of the world’s nations still unable to build the bomb, a blanket approach could work. ICAN pleads that the “very survival of humanity depends on nuclear weapons never being used.”

Fool.com via IPNNW Study

The nuclear-armed nations of the world didn’t just build these weapons so they can look at them. Sure, our leaders may claim these weapons are merely deterrents designed to prevent war, but the fact is, advanced weaponry has always been used for the purposes of conquering. Our modern era is no different.

We came dangerously close during the Cuban missile crisis in the early 1960′s. Cooler heads prevailed that day.

And even if starting a war is unintentional, it could happen. On at least one occasion, in 1983, the United States and Russia were literally minutes away from a full-scale confrontation under both country’s policies of mutually assured destruction. It turns out that was a false alarm – but the world was almost destroyed as a result. This is one of the incidents we know about, and given the secrecy behind such military operations, it’s quite possible that there have been more.

The bottom line is that we must assume these weapons will be used at some point – that should be a given. What we don’t know is the scale of the nuclear engagement. It could be that Russia, the United States, Israel, China and North Korea just start lobbing intercontinental ballistic missiles by the hundreds, in which case we’re all pretty much toast. Or, it could be a limited war, with the conflict in India and Pakistan finally coming to a head.

Whatever the case, even if those dropped bombs detonate thousands of miles away from you, there is a strong likelihood that you will feel the direct effects in the form of an almost immediate climate change, food scarcity, extreme price rises, and the riots and looting that are sure to follow.

As with any disaster, whether its a nuclear war, global financial collapse, or a natural disaster, we can fully expect the worst of the worst. As the IPPNW report notes:

We would have to expect panic on a far greater scale following a nuclear war, even if it were a “limited” regional war,  especially as it became clear that there would be significant, sustained agricultural shortfalls over an extended period.

It is probable that there would be hoarding on an international scale as food exporting nations suspended exports in order to assure adequate food supplies for their own populations.

Though the report suggests it is impossible to prepare for such an event, one could argue that survival is certainly possible.

Assuming we survive the nuclear impact and fallout because we live in a strategic location (or just got lucky!), your most immediate concerns would be food, water and self defense, all of which must be considered before such an event occurs if you intend to improve your odds of survival.

Surviving a nuclear winter will, of course, not be easy. According to the report, two billion people could die as a result – probably within a matter of months or a year. Asimilar scenario would play out should a disaster like a Super EMP weapon or solar flare take out our national (or global) power grid.

Regardless of the disaster, the aftermath, like any crisis or emergency, is survivable.

From the standpoint of preparedness, this means having long-term food stores and apreparedness plan to go along with them. You’ll first need to survive the initial “die-off” as millions of people search for food and resources. Then, when your own food stores run out, you’ll need to be able to produce your own by way of micro-farming and raising your own livestock.

What it will boil down to is adaptability. We can’t predict what will happen or what we will face. But understanding the potential threats, how to mitigate them when they occur, and the options we have available should our best laid plans fail gives us a much better chance of surviving disasters than just pretending like they can’t ever happen.

 

Russia Stations Tactical, Nuclear-Capable Missiles Along Polish Border | Zero Hedge

Russia Stations Tactical, Nuclear-Capable Missiles Along Polish Border | Zero Hedge.

“Russia will deploy Iskander missile systems in its enclave in Kaliningrad to neutralize, if necessary, the anti-ballistic missile system in Europe.”

– Dmitry Medvedev, former Russian president, November 2008 in his first presidential address to the Russian people

2013 was a year when Europe tried to reallign its primary source of natgas energy, from Gazpromia to Qatar, and failed. More importantly, it was a year in which Russia’s Vladimir Putin undisputedly won every foreign relations conflict that involved Russian national interests, to the sheer humiliation of both John Kerry and Francois Hollande. However, it seems the former KGB spy had a Plan B in case things escalated out of control, one that fits with what we wrote a few days ago when we reported that “Russia casually announces it will use nukes if attacked.” Namely, as Bloomberg reports citing Bild, Russia quietly stationed a double-digit number of SS-26 Stone, aka Iskander, tactical, nuclear-capable short-range missiles near the Polish border.

The range of the Iskander rockets:

From Bloomberg:

  • Russia has stationed missiles with a range of about 500 kilometers in its Kaliningrad enclave and along its border with the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, Germany’s Bild-Zeitung reports, citing defense officials it didn’t identify.
  • Satellite images show a “double-digit” amount of mobile units identified as SS-26 Stone in NATO code
  • Missiles were stationed within the past 12 months
  • SS-26 can carry conventional as well as nuclear warheads

In other words, Russian quietly has come through on its threat issued in April 2012, when it warned it would deploy Iskander missiles that could target US missile defense systems in Poland. From RIA at the time:

Moscow reiterated on Tuesday it may deploy Iskander theater ballistic missiles in the Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad that will be capable of effectively engaging elements of the U.S. missile defense system in Poland.

NATO members agreed to create a missile shield over Europe to protect it against ballistic missiles launched by so-called rogue states, for example Iran and North Korea, at a summit in Lisbon, Portugal, in 2010.

The missile defense system in Poland does not jeopardize Russia’s nuclear forces, Army General Nikolai Makarov, chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, said. 

“However, if it is modernized…it could affect our nuclear capability and in that case a political decision may be made to deploy Iskander systems in the Kaliningrad region,” he said in an interview with RT television.

But that will be a political decision,” he stressed. “So far there is no such need.”

Looks like a little over a year later, the “political decision” was taken as the need is there. But why does Russia need to send a very clear message of escalation at a time when the Cold War is long over, when globalization and free trade, promote game theoretic world peace (or “piece” as the Obama administration wouldsay), oh, and when Russia quietly has decided to reestablish the former USSR starting with the Ukraine.

We’ll leave the rhetorical question logically unanswered.

 

Meanwhile, Russia Casually Announces It Will Use Nukes If Attacked | Zero Hedge

Meanwhile, Russia Casually Announces It Will Use Nukes If Attacked | Zero Hedge.

With the Ukraine situation increasingly precarious, and now even the US state department getting involved with the occasional unexpected harsh warning…

  • U.S. MAY CONSIDER SANCTIONS ON UKRAINE: STATE DEPT

… into what Putin has made very clear is his brand new sphere of influence (it is unclear just why the US is responding in such a way: did the pro-Europe protesters not use Made in the US tear gas or chemical weapons?), Russia casually threw it out there earlier today that it would use nuclear weapons if it comes under an attack. As vice prime minister and defense industry chief made clear, “One can experiment as long as one wishes by deploying non-nuclear warheads on strategic missile carriers. But one should keep in mind that if there is an attack against us, we will certainly resort to using nuclear weapons in certain situations to defend our territory and state interests.” Just in case it wasn’t quite clear…

Rogozin pointed out that this principle is enshrined in Russia’s military doctrine. Any aggressor or group of aggressors should be aware of that, he said. “We have never diminished the importance of nuclear weapons – the weapon of requital – as the great balancer of chances,” Rogozin said.

More from RT:

Russia’s Fund of Perspective Researches (FPI) will develop a military response to the American Conventional Prompt Global Strike (PGS) strategy, Dmitry Rogozin told the State Duma.

 

So far, the FPI has already looked at over a thousand proposed ideas and plans to work on 60 projects, eight of which are top priority, the politician said. He refused to disclose any details, but said that one of those projects is focused on preparing a response to the PGS, which is the “main strategy” that the Pentagon is nurturing.

 

PGS would allow the United States to strike targets anywhere on the planet, with conventional weapons in as little as an hour.

 

As Rogozin explained earlier, the strategy would give America an advantage over a nuclear state, thanks to their better technical capabilities with weaponry, including the speed, RIA Novosti cited.

So if nothing else, at least the primary deterrence strategy of the cold war has just made a roaring comeback. We can only hope that with such skilled heads of the State Department as John Kerry, that the nuclear exchange that was avoided for the duration of the first cold war doesn’t somehow become a GDP-boosting reality.

 

Report: Security Breakdown In America’s Nuclear Command Centers

Report: Security Breakdown In America’s Nuclear Command Centers. (FULL ARTICLE)

Last month a high level source speaking with Infowars revealed insider details of a nuclear weapons transfer within the domestic United States that was executed without an official directive or paper trail. One expert noted that such re-positioning of nuclear warheads doesn’t happen unless they “plan on using them.”

Curiously, just a day later, Senator Lindsey Graham warned that a failure to attack Syria could lead to a nuclear weapon being detonated in South Carolina. It was a notion that raised eyebrows in mainstream media, but more so throughout alternative media circles, which suggested that the sequence of events were indicative of a false flag attack.

Yesterday, we learned that a senior member of U.S. nuclear command and head of the Air Force’s nuclear arsenal was relieved of his command. This has prompted questions about what is going on in the secret nuclear control centers around the country and it’s raising concerns about the security of America’s nuclear weapons.

Now, a report from the Associated Press goes further down the rabbit hole.

Together, the Carey and Giardina dismissals add a new dimension to a set of serious problems facing the military’s nuclear force….

Mapping Iran’s Nuclear New Normal | Zero Hedge

Mapping Iran’s Nuclear New Normal | Zero Hedge.

 

Nagasaki Bomb Maker Offers Lessons for Fukushima Cleanup – Bloomberg

Nagasaki Bomb Maker Offers Lessons for Fukushima Cleanup – Bloomberg.

 

Kerry warns N Korea against missile launch – Asia-Pacific – Al Jazeera English

Kerry warns N Korea against missile launch – Asia-Pacific – Al Jazeera English.

Officials Warn: “North Korea Could Explode A High-Altitude Nuclear Device Over The United States” | Market Daily News

Officials Warn: “North Korea Could Explode A High-Altitude Nuclear Device Over The United States” | Market Daily News.

%d bloggers like this: