The Arms Trade and the Arms Race



Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) was set up in 1974 by a number of peace and other organisations who were concerned about the growth in the arms trade following the Middle East war of 1973. It is a broad coalition of groups and individuals in the UK working to end the international arms trade. This Trade has a negative effect on humans rights and security as well as on global, regional and local economic development.
In seeking to end it CAAT's priorities are to:
CAAT aims

Introduction to Depleted Uranium - the facts on what it does from CADU

  Key Points When Lobbying MP's and Others on:
by Larry Ross

Extinction is Forever - Book Mark

An Easy Way to Spread the Word - Print yourself a book mark and send them to your friends     

Hillary, Hiroshima and US Hubris

by Larry Ross
August 8, 2007

US policies and attitudes have shifted from nuclear deterrence with mass destruction and mutual suicide, to nuclear weapon use against any non-nuclear nation named as a US enemy. It's well documented in the Justin Raimondo article that follows. The named enemy is Iran and Bush has invented a number of lies, false accusations and suspicions to demonise Iran to the American people. Bush used the same 'big lie' technique prior to his unprovoked attack on Iraq in 2003. Then he had the alleged 9/11 'terrorist' attack and knowingly concocted lies linking Saddam Hussein to Bin Laden and this attack. Accusations were enough and worked for Bush in spite of mass demonstrations. Although there was lots of evidence these accusations were wrong, Bush's lies - effectively promoted and repeated by the mass media - were sufficient to get public and Congressional support.

Justifying Mass Murder

by Justin Raimondo
August 8, 2007

The anniversary of the U.S. bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is, perhaps, a good time to note that arguments rationalizing and even valorizing the use of nuclear weapons, once considered beyond the pale, are now back in fashion. Here we have yet more evidence of the Bizarro Effect , which, ever since 9/11, has stood everything – especially our traditional concept of morality – on its head, not only repealing the laws of logic and common sense but also ensconcing evil in the place of good.


US Capitalist System Spins Out of Control

comment by Larry Ross
August 5, 2007

The US capitalist system is a sacred religion, a dogma that cannot be questioned, but is out of control and leading to global environmental destruction as Sullivan illustrates. However its offspring - the military-industrial-political complex - is also out of control, breeding wars and new arms races which threaten to destroy the world in the nearer future. The economic system and values of global humanity keep accelerating this self-destructive system. Increasingly the bulk of human resources go into preparing for, and fighting, endless wars based on lies and myths.

Why do we sell them our souls?

by Charles Sullivan
October 22, 2005

It is painfully obvious that America is a land that worships the market economy. Big money is God here. Big money is all powerful, omnipotent. All solutions, as perceived by the captains of business, therefore, must be market based. Moreover, in the moribund perceptions of the ruling elite, the market must be totally unfettered. It must exist beyond the pale of conscience, bearing no responsibility to the people, or to the earth that sustains it. It must answer only to the bottom line and reject all other input—a function that it has executed only too well.


Nuclear Power for NZ? No Thanks

by Larry Ross
August 2, 2007

For readers looking for pro-nuclear power arguments, Google has over 70,000 articles on this subject they may like to consider. You will also find on Google that there are 8,720,000 results for anti-nuclear power, almost 125 times as many against. . . .
. . . In our world of recurring wars, any nuclear installation can become a target. That could mean widespread radiation for centuries. It would destroy the country's agricultural export industry. That's butter, milk, meat, etc. Naturally the pro-nuclearists do not mention this factor, or play it down as unlikely, etc. in their propaganda.

  US Clash With Russia
comment by Larry Ross
July 25, 2007

As stated in other articles, stationing US missile defence systems on Russian borders, within old USSR satellite states, is a prescription for a new cold war that can quickly heat up and become World War III.
That and the US programme to militarize and dominate space will also start a new arms race.

  Putin's War-whoop: The impending clash with Russia
by Mike Whitney
June 22, 2007

What is a "unipolar" world?
It is a world in which there is one master, one sovereign--- one center of authority, one center of force, one center of decision-making. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.
It has nothing in common with democracy, which is the power of the majority in respect to the interests and opinions of the minority.

  Parasitic Imperialism Drives US to Wars
comment by Larry Ross
July 16, 2007

This article by Professor Hossein-zadeh is a masterpiece which illuminates how the military-industrial-political complex works. It shows why it is a far greater threat today than when President Eisenhower warned about it in his farewell speech in 1961. Its short term success depends on the creation of new enemies and threats. These are used to justify wars, increasing military power, arms racing and military spending. In the long run this run-away situation will degrade and may destroy America . So long as this system rules it will gain momentum and strength and be more difficult to reverse. Always new enemies and crisis will be invented to curb popular pressures for change and reform. And the American people can always be fooled into submission by an array of threats, crisis, lies and tricks invented by highly skilled manipulators and propagandists. I think a useful analogy might be to compare the US to a speeding locomotive, out of control with the driver paralysed due to a heart attack. The throttle is jammed in maximum speed position so the locomotive is accelerating. Eventually it goes off the rails or blows up.

  Parasitic Imperialism
by Ismael Hossein-zadeh
July 10, 2007

How recent U.S. wars of choice, driven largely by war profiteering, are plundering not only defenseless peoples and their resources abroad, but also the overwhelming majority of U.S. citizens and their resources at home.

  Farewell to Arms Control
from Larry Ross
July 8, 2007

Scott Ritter as a Chief Weapons Inspector in Iraq, was in a position to know how the US and UK subverted the process from the beginning to facilitate their planned war with Iraq. Ritter then shows how the staffing of a future arms control regime under UN control was well advanced, until scrapped by the US and UK who preferred a world at war instead. It is important to realise that the military-industrial complexes of both countries are dependant on a series of wars into the future to maintain the financial health and profits of their armaments research and manufacturing industries. These are fundamental driving elements of Western culture and identity. They cannot maintain their lead in weapons and plans for global domination, without active wars as a catalyst. Scott Ritter opened new doors of understanding and concern with his deep experience of the machiavellian workings of the real policies of the US and UK.

  A Farewell to Arms Control
by Scott Ritter
July 5, 2007

The organization that was at the center of the maelstrom of the Iraqi weapons-of-mass-destruction fiasco, responsible for bringing the world to the brink of war on no fewer than a half-dozen occasions during the 1990s, and then unable to prevent a war in March 2003, has departed the global scene.  It left not with a dramatic flair befitting its former status, but rather with barely a whimper, reduced to nothing more than a historical footnote in the grand tragedy that has become Iraq. 

  Depression, Doomsday and Peace
by Larry Ross
July 7, 2007

Scientifically I contemplate the facts, such as:
The 9 arsenals of nuclear weapons with enough fire power to eliminate humanity many times over. Since 1945 famous people and the most informed experts have warned humanity about the nuclear arms race and the many ways it could mean sudden extinction for the human race. That's 62 years of warnings, but nuclear weapons have proliferated and criminal politicians want to use them.
That criminal minds, sociopaths and psychopaths, now control the world's greatest arsenals in the USA, UK and Israel.
... So I contemplate the race toward extinction and wonder “what can I do?”

  War Costs Soar by a Third; Total Could Top $1.4 Trillion
by Noah Shachtman
July 6, 2007

It's not just the troops that are surging.  War costs are up for American operations in Iraq and Afghanistan* -- way up, more than a third higher than last year.  In the first half of this fiscal year, the Defense Department's "average monthly obligations for contracts and pay is running about $12 billion per month, well above the $8.7 billion in FY2006," says a new report , obtained by DANGER ROOM , from the non-partisan Congressional Research Service.
Additional war costs for the next  10 years could total about $472 billion if troop levels fall to 30,000 by 2010, or $919 billion if troop levels fall to 70,000 by about 2013.  If these estimates are added to already appropriated amounts, total funding about $980 billion to $1.4 trillion by 2017.


US Using Nuclear Weapons in Iraq

comment by Larry Ross
June 23, 2007

DU weapons spread toxic radioactive dust wherever they are used. With a half life of 4 billion years, the poisonous effects are gradually spreading around the world causing death and disease. It is like a slow motion form of nuclear war against all humanity, insidiously and secretly drifting world-wide, infecting millions. The US has slyly introduced a form of nuclear weapon and then lied. They claim DU weapons are harmless. The poisonous effects may manifest years later in the form of cancer, genetic mutations in the children of exposed people and a range of other diseases.
Present and increasing DU dust in our global environment can cause mutations in anyone's children, grandchildren and future generations forever. Banning DU weapons and educating others about DU is everyone's responsibility.



From International Action Center, Founded by Ramsey Clark, Former U.S. Attorney General

..... Today, half of the 697,000 U.S. Gulf War troops from the 1991 war have reported serious medical problems and a significant increase in birth defects among their newborn children.

Phil Goff Warns of Nuclear Holocaust
comment by Larry Ross
June 9, 2007

Phil Goff's warning to the 20th anniversary meeting in Christchurch June 9 of NZ's nuclear free zone is 100% correct. World survival is threatened by 27,000 nuclear weapons, some on 'hair-trigger' ready-to-launch status and a total of 8 nuclear weapon nations. At any time the world can be destroyed "by nuclear accident, miscalculation or deliberate act of madness" as President Kennedy warned at the UN in 1963. Even worse are new US nuclear weapons and new doctrines allowing the President to wage pre-emptive nuclear war, and also introduce nuclear weapons use into any conflict. This massive threat means everyone should be worried and active helping to stop this nuclear madness. New Zealand 's nuclear free law is more relevant today as Phil Goff says, than in 1984.

New Zealand politicians stoke anti-nuclear activism
Asia-Pacific News
June 9, 2007

Wellington - On the 20th anniversary of New Zealand's anti-nuclear legislation, the country's politicians have called for a southern hemisphere wide nuclear-free zone and for an end to investment in nuclear weapons, according to statements Saturday.
The New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act was passed on June 8, 1987. It resulted in the country being suspended from the Anzus (Australia, New Zealand and Australia) defence pact with the US and Australia.
But Trade and Disarmament Minister Phil Goff told a forum in the South Island city of Christchurch that he wanted the whole of the southern hemisphere to become a nuclear-free zone within 20 years. He also criticized nations' complacency.
'The threat to the world of nuclear weapons grows as more countries acquire possession of them... With the world having lived with nuclear weapons for over sixty years, a key challenge today is international complacency about the threat they pose,' he said in a statement.
A co-leader of New Zealand's left-wing Green party, which is in the government coalition, also demanded the country withdraw NZ$30 million of taxpayer investment in companies involved in nuclear weapons production.

  Nuclear-Free Legislation—20th Anniversary
Hon Phil Goff
June 7, 2007

Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control): I move, That this House note that 8 June 2007 is the 20th anniversary of the passing by this House of the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act 1987 and resolve that New Zealand should continue to work for a nuclear weapon – free world; and that, in striving for a world free of nuclear weapons, the House call for: the implementation and strengthening of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, including the unequivocal undertaking made by nuclear weapon States in 2000 to move towards the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals; the expansion and strengthening of nuclear weapon – free zones and a nuclear weapon – free Southern Hemisphere; the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty; the enactment of a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty; and the universal implementation of nuclear non-proliferation instruments such as the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism and United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540.

  Almost War with China
comment by Larry Ross
June 4, 2007

This vitally important article in the US Congressional Quarterly is a very important revelation of how close the world came to a major US nuclear war with China . This almost happened because Taiwanese politicians were encouraged by US Defence Department highly-placed necons to declare independence from China. This was clandestinely encouraged by top neocon members of the Bush regime, such as Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, Cambora and right wing Republicans in particular. We can thank Colin Powell, and the US State department at that time, for correcting this impression with independence-minded Taiwanese politicians, saying the US may not defend Taiwan if it declares independence.


Defense Officials Tried to Reverse China Policy, Says Powell Aide

by Jeff Stein
June 1, 2007

The same top Bush administration neoconservatives who leap-frogged Washington's foreign policy establishment to topple Saddam Hussein nearly pulled off a similar coup in U.S.-China relations—creating the potential of a nuclear war over Taiwan, a top aide to former Secretary of State Colin Powell says.

  Arms Race To Extinction
comment by Larry Ross
May 22, 2007

Here are some valuable facts about the US defence expenditures and the rising US arms trade. As Frida Berrigan points out "The US alone spends what the rest of the world combined devotes to military expenditures"
What is the US defence budget? Is it only the $481 billion requested by the Whitehouse? Or should other defence costs be added to this total in order to give a more balanced picture? Such added costs as the US nuclear weapons program -$17 billion. Iraq and Afghanistan wars $ 142 billion. Miscellaneous defence costs $5 billion. Grand total of $647 billion. If you add more invisible costs such as cost impact of Iraq war on global oil prices and lowered consumption of US goods and services by people in other nations, and long-term health care for wounded US veterans the price can rise to between 1 trillion and $2.2 trillion.

  US Takes Gold in Arms Olympics
by Frida Berrigan and Tom Engelhardt
May 21, 2007

They don't call us the sole superpower for nothing. Paul Wolfowitz might be looking for a new job right now, but the term he used to describe the pervasiveness of U.S. might back when he was a mere deputy secretary of defense – hyperpower – still fits the bill.
Face it, the United States is a proud nation of firsts. Among them:
First in Oil Consumption : First in Carbon Dioxide Emissions : First in External Debt : First in Military Expenditures : First in Weapons Sales

  Marine Lt. Col. (Ret) Exposes 9/11 Crime
comment by Larry Ross
May 9, 2007

Colonel Lankford suggests you use Google to verify any comments he makes. He mentions a number of whistle blowers in government or University that have asked awkward questions or exposed Government lies about 9/11. Many have suffered the consequences of their honesty. A growing number of people who have researched the 9/11 questions, have become convinced that the Bush Administration staged a 'false flag' terrorist attack on the US to create a false 'Pearl Harbour'. The intention was to get public support to make war under the new catch-all slogan of 'war on terrorism'.

  Statement of Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, US Marine Corps
February 20, 2007

.... Are you afraid that you will learn the truth and you can't handle it? I think I know some people in that category. Are you afraid you will draw the attention of thugs who could do the things that were done that day? Do you believe your fellow man is just not capable of that degree of evil? I would not have believed that my country would ever become a torture state and have the Congress arguing with the executive about it. I thought that Habaes Corpus was fundamental to our civil rights, and now I find that it is not. I thought my country stood for honorable dealings with other nations, then watch a jingoistic cheerleading orgy on TV, composed like Oscar night, with the centerpiece a campaign of "Shock and Awe" as our armed forces invade a practically defenseless nation, without provocation, while considerable doubt of the validity of the reasons for that invasion exists.

  Physicists Warn Bush Not To Use Nuclear Weapons against Iran
by Larry Ross
April 22, 2007

The Physicists letter, although published in 2006, deserves more consideration. These are the experts who created the bomb and warn of the dire consequences of its use.
If nuclear weapons are used against Iran, there is a danger of an escalation to global war and the use of the 8-9 nuclear weapon arsenals.
There are enough nuclear weapons to equal 200,000 times the power of the Hiroshima bomb. Potentially that is enough to kill 200 billion people.
That's a huge overkill potential, as there are only 6 billion people on the planet. But still governments are spending huge sums to create and refine a variety of evermore powerful nuclear and hydrogen weapons, and now space weapons. Where and when does it end?

  Prominent US Physicists Send Letter to President Bush
by Kim McDonald,
April 17, 2006

Thirteen of the nation's most prominent physicists have written a letter to President Bush, calling U.S. plans to reportedly use nuclear weapons against Iran "gravely irresponsible" and warning that such action would have "disastrous consequences for the security of the United States and the world."
The physicists include five Nobel laureates, a recipient of the National Medal of Science and three past presidents of the American Physical Society, the nation's preeminent professional society for physicists.

  Global Warming - Cause of Wars?
by Larry Ross
April 20, 2007

As the effects of global warming increasingly effect the planet, there will be more wars over shrinking food resources and a changed, less hospitable environment. That's the finding of those who study the climate trends and make predictions as indicated below. Climate change has finally become a common public concern. But it has not yet resulted in the big changes needed in human behaviour.

  Could global warming cause war?
April 19, 2007

A new report warns that conflicts over water and food could intensify as the climate changes.
For years, the debate over global warming has focused on the three big "E's": environment, energy, and economic impact. This week it officially entered the realm of national security threats and avoiding wars as well.

  US Starts New Arms Race in Europe
by Larry Ross
April 18, 2007

Placing US anti-missile defence systems in European countries is a multi-message to Russia, and another indication that the US is restarting the international arms race and a new cold war. If the US launches a pre-emptive nuclear war on Iran, as much expert testimony indicates, and it looks like it may go global, they may implement global pre-emptive nuclear strikes against some other nuclear weapon states. Bush, as Commander In Chief of US military forces, has the legal right (made law by Congress) to launch pre-emptive nuclear war. He may also introduce nuclear weapons into conventional weapon wars.

  The Missile-Defense Flap
by Vladimir Belous
April 11, 2007

... It all sounds like the speech made by Colin Powell during his tenure as U.S. Secretary of State at a meeting of the U.N. General Assembly. In it, he argued Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and the world community was obliged to stop their proliferation and use. The upshot of all that is well known: Such weapons were never found anywhere in Mesopotamia.

  Germany Wants US Missile Defence For Europe
by Larry Ross
April 18, 2007

Here is a UPI article that shows German enthusiasm for a US missile defence system. As might be expected, the German conservatives welcome a new arms race and cold war in Europe. By embracing Bush's and the media lies about an alleged threat from Iran, they have the flimsy excuse. In the short term they may hope for new opportunities for profits. In the long run it can lead to crippling wars, if not nuclear war. I would think that the lessons of history and the potential for far greater wars than World War II, would have taught the Germans some useful lessons. Apparently not.

  Iran Helps US Missile Shield
by Stefan Nicola
April 11, 2007

Iran's latest claim that it is capable of enriching uranium on an industrial level has encouraged proponents of U.S. plans for a missile shield in Eastern Europe, but Moscow is still not amused. After Tehran's nuclear threats, members of German Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives even said more countries in Europe should think about participating in the U.S. anti-missile system.

  Gorbachev Says US Missile Defence For Dominating Europe
comment by Larry Ross
April 18, 2007

This article by Gorbachev is the most comprehensive article on the subject of US attempts to sell missile defence to European countries. I am amazed that they seem to be buying this expensive and dangerous fraud. It means less independence for Europe, huge expenditure,  more US domination and agenda, and an increase in the likelihood of crippling wars. How could Europeans accept American lies and propaganda and do such a self-destructive act as install missile defence systems? It makes no sense particularly after they have had the example of US lying to justify their illegal war on Iraq with over 600,000 people killed

  U.S. seeks control of Europe through missile shield - Gorbachev
from RIA Novosti
April 12, 2007

KALININGRAD, April 12 (RIA Novosti) - Deployment of U.S. missile-defense bases in Poland and the Czech Republic is an attempt by the U.S. to control Europe, the former Soviet president said Thursday. "It is all about influence and domination in Europe," Mikhail Gorbachev said. "I believe it is wrong that America did not even bother to consult its NATO allies."

  US Starts New European Cold War With Russia
comment by Larry Ross
April 18, 2007

Here is the fourth authoritative article showing how the US is starting a new cold war in Europe by installing missile defence systems in European nations.
Allegedly against Iran, the missile shields are aimed at Russia and are designed to frustrate a Russian missile response to a US pre-emptive nuclear strike...
We must recognise and confront these disastrous, very threatening developments and try to help stop the Bush Administration before it is too late.

  U.S. Missile Deals Bypass, and Annoy, European Union
April 13, 2007

Much of Europe is arguing over a Washington proposal to plant in Poland fewer than a dozen antimissile missiles that might not work, to guard against an Iranian threat that may not exist.

  US Historian Predicts Calamity for US Empire 
by Larry Ross
March 26, 2007

737 US Bases in 103 countries and a defence budget larger than that of all other nations in the world. That's the US Empire.
The mission is building the US Empire through imperial conquest, using "9/11 and the war on terror" as their mantra, war cry and justification.
US Military Historian Chalmers Johnson dissects this imperial military industrial complex and predicts calamites for what may be next.
" If there weren't terrorists, Bush and Cheney would have had to invent them? " asks Karlin.

  Is the American Empire on the Brink of Collapse?
by Mark Karlin
March 24, 2007

I believe that we're close to a tipping point right now. What happened to the Soviet Union between 1989 and 1991 could easily be happening to us for essentially the same reasons. Imperial overreach, inability to reform, rigid economic ideology. ... The world's balance of power didn't change one iota on September 11, 2001. The only way we could lose the power and influence we had at that time was through our own actions, and that's what we did. -- Chalmers Johnson, author of Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic
Has our "leadership" traded democracy for empire? Have their over-bloated egos convinced them that they are the world's newly crowned colonial kings? Author Chalmers Johnson is certainly not given to wearing rose-colored glasses. As he concludes in his newest book, Nemesis: "... my country is launched on a dangerous path that it must abandon or else face the consequences."

  PR, Nuclear Power, Weapons and Millions of $
by Larry Ross
March 17, 2007

This article shows how the nuclear power industry is spending millions on public relations to revise the image of nuclear power from something dangerous, not to be touched,  to something clean, green and desirable. The way the PR companies, and the media, use the industry's ex-Greenpeace spokesman - and will not reveal what they pay him - is most instructive. The comments following the original version are excellent and contain many provoking pros and cons of the debate. Serious nuclear power researchers should read these, and develop counter arguments, if they wish to be able to answer the pro-nuclear lobbyists.

  How Reporters Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Nuclear Front Groups
by Diane Farsetta
March 16, 2007

"We just find it maddening that Hill & Knowlton , which has an $8 million account with the nuclear industry, should have such an easy time working the press," concluded the Columbia Journalism Review in an editorial in its July / August 2006 issue.
The magazine was rightly bemoaning the tendency of news outlets to present former Greenpeace activist Patrick Moore and former EPA chief Christine Todd Whitman as environmentalists who support nuclear power, without noting that both are paid spokespeople for a group bankrolled by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). NEI represents nuclear power plant operators, plant designers, fuel suppliers and other sectors of the nuclear power industry. Hill & Knowlton is NEI's public relations firm, though it's not the only firm working to build support for nuclear power.

  Bush Regime Sparks Nuclear Arms Race
Comment by Larry Ross
March 7, 2007

A new US hydrogen bomb will add momentum to the new nuclear arms race. The US disregard of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty - making more bombs rather than nuclear disarmament as promised, and Bush's threat to bomb a non-nuclear nation - Iran - will convince other nations that their security lies with adding to and modernising their own nuclear arsenals.

  Experts Warn New US Weapon Could Jumpstart Nuclear Arms Race
by Haider Rizvi
March 6, 2007

A U.S. plan to develop a new hydrogen bomb could spark production of new nuclear weapons by other countries, including several foes of the Bush administration, warn some of the nation's leading arms control and disarmament advocacy groups.

  Best Analysis of American Empire
Comment by Larry Ross
March 7, 2007

. . . But will it be enough, will it reach enough people? Will it actually motivate them to do enough to stop the Bush regime? Bear in mind the colossal forces, power, money and millions of skilled personnel of the military-industrial-congressional-media complex. Most are dedicated servants of the Bush neocon regime. Opposing that are some dedicated US citizens. But is there enough to make a dent in the plans, plots and covert deceptions of the trillion dollar Bush regime?

  Chalmers Johnson: "Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic"
Interview by Amy Goodman
February 27, 2007

In his new book, CIA analyst, distinguished scholar, and best-selling author Chalmers Johnson argues that US military and economic overreach may actually lead to the nation's collapse as a constitutional republic. It's the last volume in his Blowback trilogy, following the best-selling "Blowback" and "The Sorrows of Empire." In those two, Johnson argued American clandestine and military activity has led to un-intended, but direct disaster here in the United States. [includes rush transcript]

  Profits and Corruption Drive Iraq War
Comment by Larry Ross
January 15, 2007

This paper provides new insights into why the US will not withdraw troops from Iraq. It is the new imperialism and colonialism and exploiting Iraqi oil that provides enormous profits to the 100,000 private military contractors in Baghdad , and provides billions in profits for the military-industrial complex in the US . Money is the great motivator, with no-bid contracts for chosen Pentagon suppliers. Greater war risks, the slaughter or hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, morality and ethics don't matter to people participating in a gigantic profits feeding frenzy in Baghdad and Washington.

  Why the US Is Not Leaving Iraq: The Booming Business of War Profiteers
by Prof. Ismael Hossein-zadeh
January 12, 2007

Neither the Iraq Study Group nor other establishment critics of the Iraq war are calling for the withdrawal of US troops from that country. To the extent that the Study Group or the new Congress purport to inject some "realism" into the Iraq policy, such projected modifications do not seem to amount to more than changing the drivers of the US war machine without changing its destination, or objectives: control of Iraq's political and economic policies.
In light of the fact that by now almost all of the factions of the ruling circles, including the White House and the neoconservative war-mongerers, acknowledge the failure of the Iraq war, why, then, do they balk at the idea of pulling the troops out of that country?

  US Exposes Plans to Militarise Space
Comment by Larry Ross
December 26, 2006

By being the only country to vote "no" at the UN to a resolution to ban weapons in space, the US formally exposes its plans to militarise space. It does not want any legal encumbrances such as the following no weapons in space resolutions.

  UN Vote on Space Resolutions - US against, US alone
Correction on UN Space Vote Report
December 26, 2006

Dear Friends,
There was an error in the report I sent out from the UN about the vote on the two space resolutions.  Cote D'Ivoire and Israel abstained on the Paros resolution to Prevent an Arms Race in Outer Space, while the US was the only country to vote 'No' on A/C.1/61/L.10/Rev 1. .  166 countries voted to prevent an arms race in outer space.  In the second resolution, A/C.1/61/L36, on Transparency and Confidence building Measures in Outer Space, there was only 1 vote against it from the US and one abstention from Israel .  167 nations vote for it.  I've corrected the report below.  Alice    Full Report

  New Nuclear Arms Race
Comment by Larry Ross
December 26, 2006

This is very valuable paper because it shows how influential people and countries are using the terrorist threat to advance their ambitions to make nuclear weapons.
Also, it gives an insight into the origins of American neoconservatism and its American author Leo Strauss, whose mentor was Carl Schmitt, an infamous Nazi law professor under Hitler. Leo Strauss teachings reflected those of his Nazi mentor, and his US students are now highly placed and very influential in formulating American policies under President Bush.

  Germany debating nuclear weapons
January 28, 2006

Remember the Nazis had their law professors too. Carl Schmitt was the most  notorious Nazi Law Professor. He was mentor to and sponsor for Leo Strauss,  who founded the Neo-Conservative Movement in the United States. These Neo-Cons are Neo-Nazis. We have many of these Neo-Con Neo-Nazi Law Professors in the United States, almost all of them affiliated with the right-wing, racist, bigoted, reactionary, sexist, warmongering and totalitarian Federalist Society. Scholz should join the Federalist Society.
He would fit right in. ...
A former top German official said yesterday that his country should
consider building a nuclear arsenal in response to the threat of nuclear terrorism, Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported today.

  $2 Trillion War Robbery
Comment by Larry Ross
December 23, 2006

Considering the war is both preplanned and based on lies, it is a robbery on a gigantic scale. Will Bush and his collaborators get away with this $trillion gigantic fraud, and the totally unjustified mass killing of 655,000 Iraqi people and 3,000 unwitting US Servicemen who believe they are doing their duty?

  The $2 Trillion Dollar War
by Charles M. Young
December 20, 2006

When America invaded Iraq in 2003, the Bush administration predicted that the war would turn a profit, paying for itself with increased oil revenues. So far, though, Congress has spent more than $350 billion on the conflict, including the $50 billion appropriated for 2007.

  Americans Conditioned For War
Comment by Larry Ross
December 22, 2006

Americans have had four years of unjustified, illegal war for no legitimate reason or excuse. Constantly they have been bombarded by a litany of lies, war propaganda, and pro-war commentators, and democratic politicians repeating these lies.
War is the new neocon -generated reality for many Americans.

  Military Escalation: Bush Can't Kick the Habit
by Robert Scheer
December 21, 2006

The Bush Administration is hooked on the drug of military might, with Gates calling for sending more troops to a war we can't win. Here we go again: A new secretary of defense and yet another call for ending the war in Iraq by escalating it. What are they smoking in the Bush White House?

  US Ready For Global War
Comment by Larry Ross
December 15, 2006

U.S. Command Declares Global Strike Capability has been in a state of readiness since 2004. This very limited release raises many questions.
Pre-emptive nuclear war suggests that the USA would not wait to be attacked before launching its pre-emptive attack in anticipation.
In other words they (meaning the Bush Administration or its successor) reserve the right to be intelligence interpreter, judge, jury and executioner. This is because any nuclear strike could kill a nation - or a number of nations. As they have already demonstrated a terrible failure of intelligence over the Iraq war, and many indications they have doctored and biased the intelligence to get the results they wanted to justify war, how can anyone judge the validity of US intelligence excuses they may give to justify a nuclear strike.?

  Pre-emptive Nuclear War in a State of Readiness
by David Ruppe
January 2, 2006

U.S. Command Declares Global Strike Capability    
The U.S. Strategic Command announced yesterday it had achieved an operational capability for rapidly striking targets around the globe using nuclear or conventional weapons, after last month testing its capacity for nuclear war against a fictional country believed to represent North Korea.

  Casualties of the Nuclear Arms Race
Comment by Larry Ross
December 11, 2006

There are many unanswered questions in the following article. such as:
1)   What were new workers told about the dangers of their workplace?
2)   What % of workers were effected by nuclear-related diseases?
3)   What is the mortality rate among workers suffering from nuclear work diseases?
4)   What occupations at the nuclear plants were most dangerous, and were workers warned about these occupations and given any protective measures.
The Bush Administration is adopting the same denial tactics toward nuclear workers it is using towards soldiers complaining of diseases caused by DU poisoning.

  Memo: Administration tried to cut payouts to nuke workers
by Peter Eisler, USA TODAY
December 5, 2006

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration repeatedly sought ways to limit payouts to nuclear weapons workers sickened by radiation and toxic material, according to a memo written by congressional investigators and obtained by USA TODAY.
The investigation focuses on a federal program created in 2000 to compensate people with cancers and other illnesses tied to their work at government and contractor-owned facilities involved in Cold War nuclear weapons production. About 98,000 cases have been filed under the program, and the Labor Department has approved compensation in about 24,000 of those cases. However, program records show that not all of those approved claims have been paid. full story

  Nuclear Industry Workers Radiated In USA
Comment by Larry Ross
December 11 , 2006

... DU munitions - shells, bombs and bullets, are combined with depleted uranium, a by-product of the nuclear industry. As a destroyer, tank-buster and killer, these weapons are much more effective and deadly than conventional munitions. As a result the USA and its allies have used DU weapons in four wars since the first Gulf war in 1991- increasing the DU tonnage used in each war.. But they explode on impact into millions of deadly, microscopic particles that slowly rise into the upper atmosphere, then blow and drift around the planet eventually settling to earth thousands of miles from where they are first used. As they have a half life of 4.5 billion years, they go on killing forever and infecting the gene pool, adults and children of all future generations. They cause many types of cancer, organ failure, other types of lingering killer diseases and horrific genetic mutations of foetuses.

  Nuclear Workers: "At That Time You Just Trusted The Government"
November 13, 2006

"At that time, you just trusted the government," said Yeley, who received compensation this year. "We were out there wallerin' around in it (radiation) and I didn't know a thing." . . .
"The Cold War is still being fought in nursing homes, in convalescent facilities and in emergency rooms and in hospices all over the United States," Borris said. "It's not the type of killer that kills right away.
"It kills over a long period of time."

  U.S. Domination of Space
Comment by Larry Ross
November 23, 2006

The military use of space is part of the  U.S. plan to be able to wage war in space or anywhere in the world. This is illustrated by its votes in the UN below and the US abrogation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the new US National Space Policy statement.

  At the UN today...
from Alice Slater
October 27, 2006

Sadly, the US statement today was consistent with its flagrant assertion in its new space policy doctrine that it “will oppose the development of new legal regimes or other restrictions that seek to prohibit or limit U.S. access to or use of space.”
What hypocrisy and deception!

  Nuclear Doctrines Threaten Humanity
Comment by Larry Ross
November 1, 2006

This is one of the most important papers we have ever re-printed, by a world authority on U.S. nuclear war policies, and U.S. plans to wage nuclear war on Iran . Michel Chossudovsky details the various nuclear war doctrines that are an integral part of Pentagon military options. No longer do the U.S. military consider nuclear weapons 'a weapon of last resort', likely to lead to escalation and an end to humanity.
Today they literally, have learned to 'love the bomb' and have radically changed past perceptions so that nuclear weapons have become just one of a number of military options military commanders may use in various battle situations. They allow the U.S. to suddenly launch a preemptive nuclear strike against a chosen enemy. The enemy may be non-nuclear or nuclear. Also, they claim the right to introduce nuclear weapons use into conventional military conflicts.


Is the Bush Administration Planning a Nuclear Holocaust?

by Michel Chossudovsky
February 22, 2006

Will the US launch "Mini-nukes" against Iran in Retaliation for Tehran's "Non-compliance"?
At no point since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945, has humanity been closer to the unthinkable, a nuclear holocaust which could potentially spread, in terms of radioactive fallout,  over a large part of the Middle East.
All the safeguards of the Cold War era, which categorized the nuclear bomb as "a weapon of last resort" have been scrapped. "Offensive" military actions using nuclear warheads are now described as acts of "self-defense".

  New U.S. Nuclear Weapons
Comment by Larry Ross
October 31, 2006

The following article provides more evidence that the U.S. regards nuclear weapons as an essential component of it's military posture and has no intention of giving them up, as it pledged to do under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
It's new nuclear doctrines, licensing itself to wage 'pre-emptive' nuclear war against nuclear or non-nuclear nations is another indicator. It's plan to allow the introduction of nuclear weapons, and their use, into conventional conflicts is yet another indicator that nuclear weapons have assumed a more important role in the military strategy of the Bush Administration.
The withdrawal of the U.S. from various nuclear disarmament treaties and downgrading of others such as the NPT indicates they don't want any legal encumbrances to their possible, and perhaps intended, use of nuclear weapons.


U.S. Plan for New Nuclear Weapons Advances

by Walter Pincus, Washington Post
October 20, 2006

The United States took another step yesterday toward building a new stockpile of up to 2,200 deployed nuclear weapons that would last well into the 21st century, announcing the start of a multiyear process to repair and replace facilities where they would be developed and assembled and where older warheads could be more rapidly dismantled.

  ‘Peace and Disarmament –NZ's Role' PUBLIC SPEAKERS FORUM
from Larry Ross
October 24, 2006

United Nations Day

  Creeping Fascism
Comment by Larry Ross
October 19, 2006

James Bovard's article shows how Bush is emerging as America's dictator and how media helps this process by portraying it as perfectly normal. Congress and the Senate are allowing Bush to get away with installing a law that allows him to torture suspects. Also, laws to allow the courts to accept testimony obtained under torture, which is generally considered faulty. Most people will say anything just to stop the torture. The  Bush Administration will get the confessions it wants, to justify the sentence it wants to give it's prisoners. Bush can also declare anyone in the world a suspect and does not have to produce evidence to support that charge. It looks like the apathetic American public will accept this, mainly because the media do not make them aware.
If Bush stages a "False Flag" operation to incriminate Iran and then declares war on Iran, the process will be stepped up as well as the popularity of Bush and the Republicans. Few people are aware or care about this frightening loss as their democracy is legislated out of existence.


How to Make a Power Grab 'Mundane'

by James Bovard
October 18, 2006

The Washington Post's story today -- "Bush Signs Terrorism Measure" -- looks like just another routine report on the approval of a piece of legislation, accompanied by the usual "he said/ she said" quotes. A typical reader might shrug at this point and shift to the sports section to read the latest autopsy on the Redskins.
How will we know when a dictatorship has arrived? Not from reading the Washington Post. The Post's story today -- “Bush Signs Terrorism Measure” -- looks like just another routine report on the approval of a piece of legislation, accompanied by the usual “he said/ she said” balancing quotes.

  False Flag Terror * 911 Petition * Iraq-Iran
Editor - Jonathan Mark
October 18, 2006

Terrorstorm exposes how Governments have long staged false-flag terror events in order to achieve political and sociological ends.
1) False Flag Terror Alert
- - Public's Right To Know – Demand Release of 9/11-Documents
- - Official 9/11 story On Life support; Truth is Taking Over
- - Terrorstorm Raises The Bar In Truth Film Making
- - Kucinich Hearing on War Plans for Iran

  Don't Let Them Manufacture Another War
October 18, 2006

Representative Dennis Kucinich knows the neocon playbook used to lead our nation into war. That's why the courageous Congressman is doing everything he possibly can to ensure that the Bush administration fails in its effort to pull the same old tricks in manufacturing a war with Iran. . . .
1) Iran is at least 5 years – but more likely 10 or more years – away from producing weapons-grade nuclear materials
2) Iran poses no imminent threat to the US, Israel, or its neighbors
3) The Bush administration has already selected the military option and is moving to make it operational
4) The consequences of a military confrontation with Iran are global and nightmarish
5) We should be pursuing multilateral negotiations and have missed key opportunities to do so – including not even responding to an Iranian offer to put     recognition of Israel and suspension of its nuclear program on the table.
    Perhaps more than anything else, our refusal to engage Iran frustrates this panel.

  Allies In Space?
Comment by Larry Ross
September 7, 2006

Talk of space wars and weaponizing space, suggests that Israel will choose the path of war, conquest and domination. In the long run, that could result in disaster for all people and nations in the Middle East.


Israeli Official Urges Space-Based Weapons

By Barbara Opall-Rome
January 11, 2005

" Israel is one of the very few nations of the world that routinely abstains from voting for a resolution to ban weapons in space," noted Theresa Hitchens, vice president of the Washington-based Center for Defense Information, a public policy think tank.

  "Come Together Right Now: Organizing Stories from a Fading Empire"
August 6, 2006

Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He frequently travels and offers reflections on organizing and the state of America's soul....

  D.U. Weapons Dust: With us Forever
by Larry Ross
August 3, 2006

D.U. weapons radiation, being spread by the US and UK in Iraq, and now in Lebanon, has a half-life of 4.5 billion years.
Wind currents will carry it around the world. The more DU weapons are used the more people will become radiated, diseased and die - not just in the countries where it is directly used - but eventually it will contaminate and kill everywhere.. The Pentagon assures everyone it is safe. They are fully aware that they are lying. Without doubt this is one of George Bush's most terrible war crimes. .

  The Global Threat of DU
by Dr Robert Anderson
August 2, 2006

Adding to the horrors of the current offensive into Lebanon, with Afghanistan close to anarchy and Iraq drifting into civil war, Bush is now rushing depleted uranium (DU) bombs to Israel. This supports their colossal act of homicide and will increase further global contamination by radioactive DU particles.

July 25, 2006

Pakistan is building a reactor that could produce enough plutonium for 40 to 50 nuclear weapons in what would be a major expansion of its nuclear program and an intensified arms race in South Asia, a report has shown.
Satellite photos show what appears to be the construction site for a larger nuclear reactor adjacent to Pakistan's only plutonium production reactor, according to an analysis by nuclear experts at the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security.

  New American Militarism Breeds Fascism
Comment by Larry Ross
May 24, 2006

Professor Andrew Bacevich, graduate of WestPoint and the Vietnam war is Director of the Center for International Relations at Boston University. He shows how America has spread it's control around the world with "hundred and hundreds of military bases, large and small" and that today "...planning, preparing, and waging war has become the normal state and seemingly permanent condition of the United States" 
America needs enemies to feed its "military/industrial complex" which has become a threat to the continuation of the United States as Americans know and love it. President Dwight Eisenhower warned Americans about this as he left  office in 1960.

  Andrew Bacevich on the New American Militarism
April 20, 2005

We are now in an America where it's a commonplace for our President, wearing a "jacket with ARMY printed over his heart and 'Commander in Chief' printed on his right front," to address vast assemblages of American troops on the virtues of bringing democracy to foreign lands at the point of a missile. As Jim VandeHei of the Washington Post puts it: "Increasingly, the president uses speeches to troops to praise American ideals and send a signal to other nations the administration is targeting for democratic change."

  Resolution to ban pre-emptive nuclear war and any use of nuclear weapons
by Larry Ross
May 13-14, 2006

Accepted by the National Consultative Committee on Disarmament Convention:  
"Threats To Peace And Disarmament - The Way Forward"

  Iran Talks Peace To U.S.
Comment by Larry Ross
May 10, 2006

The President of Iran has reached out to President Bush offering a dialogue of peace instead of preparations for war. My hope is that President Bush will choose to talk, and pull back from starting an escalating war with Iran that could suddenly become nuclear and end the human race. Why on earth would he do that?

  Full Text : The President of Iran's Letter To President Bush
May 9, 2006

For sometime now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, specially in political forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hopes that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them.

  Result of U.S. War On Iran
Comment by Larry Ross
May 3, 2006

Scott Ritter gives a detailed account of U.S. preparations and plans to strike at Iran before June/05. Obviously this has been postponed for unknown reasons. As Iran will retaliate against U.S. attack, the situation could very easily escalate and involve China and Russia. A sudden global nuclear exchange could result. It's so obvious, why is Europe so compliant and people so passive and silent in the face of global nuclear disaster which would kill and maim billions?

  Sleepwalking to disaster in Iran
by Scott Ritter
April 5, 2005

Late last year, in the aftermath of the 2004 Presidential election, I was contacted by someone close to the Bush administration about the situation in Iraq.
There was a growing concern inside the Bush administration, this source said, about the direction the occupation was going.

Comment by Larry Ross
May 2, 2006

Google is a great resource to get the details on U.S. war plans, objectives and methods of making war on other nations. Also, it has many articles on U.S. excuses and justifications for each war. The fact that the Bush Administration engages in an almost continuous flow of lies and false justifications, does not stop the mass media from parroting each and every lie as if it is true. The mass media usually does not publish doubts and exposure of these lies or the real purposes of the Bush Administration. If anything it runs editorials justifying the lies as if the lies are really true. Then it does not print letters exposing these lies.
Search on Google - Results 1 - 10 of about 134,000,000 for Iran War . (0.08 seconds)

  Growth of the American Empire
Comment by Larry Ross
April 21, 2006

Chalmers Johnson is a WWII US Navy vet and a historian of American militarism, ran the Center for Chinese Studies at the University of California. He had a long career as a Japan specialist. His two-part article for Tomdispatch is a very valuable insight into what has happened to America and the enormous magnitude of the problems facing it today.

  What Ever Happened to Congress?
Tom Engelhardt interviewing Chalmers Johnson
March 22 , 2006

In Part 1 of his interview, Chalmers Johnson suggested what that fall-of-the-Berlin-Wall, end-of-the-Cold-War moment meant to him; explored how deeply empire and militarism have entered the American bloodstream; and began to consider what it means to live in an unacknowledged state of military Keynesianism, garrisoning the planet, and with an imperial budget -- a real yearly Pentagon budget -- of perhaps three-quarters of a trillion dollars. Tom

  "Planet Earth As Weapon and Target"
posted April 10 , 2006

Beginning with the use of nuclear energy for military purposes, mankind has entered a seemingly endless race to harness the natural forces within the planet, in the atmosphere and in space for waging war. The earth is already gravely affected by many of those secret research and testing programmes leading to unpredictable environmental and epidemiological consequences .

  War With Iran? - The Most Important Peace Issue
Comment by Larry Ross
March 28, 2006
and Potential Disaster Facing Humanity.
A Google search of "Nuclear War With Iran" on March 11, 2006 produced 18,000,000 articles. A search with just " War With Iran" produced 80,000,000 articles. People are taking this seriously now
  US Nuclear Materials to India Violates NPT
Comment by Larry Ross
March 23, 2006

Prof. Klare shows how Bush has gone against 35 years of US policy supporting the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, by selling India nuclear technology. This is allegedly only to help India's nuclear energy program. But it will allow India to double it's production of nuclear weapons. That effectively scraps a cornerstone of US policy - the NPT.

  Reigniting the Arms Race
By Michael Klare
March 22, 2006

....For thirty-five years nuclear nonproliferation was a major priority of U.S. foreign policy. But now, in a throwback to early cold war power politics, President Bush has agreed to supply nuclear technology to India in blatant violation of the NPT.

  Empire Built On Lies
Comment by Larry Ross
March 5, 2006

Here is yet more evidence that Bush stole the 2000 and 2004 elections, knew about and was involved in the 9/11 attack that was used as an excuse to justify his illegal Iraq war. He now presides over a growing criminal empire of deception and lies that gets stronger every day. The results of his escalating crimes will be felt years into the future, unless his wars trigger off a holocaust that destroys us all first.
The media has covered up for him, and his crimes, at every turn and does everything it can to divert public attention from the truth about 9/11 and the Iraq war. The Democrats have been too beholden to the military/industrial complex to challenge Bush lies and illegal actions. Most people who participated in these crimes against their fellow Americans are too afraid to talk, deeply and profitably involved themselves, or psychopaths and neocons who believe in what they are doing.

  Scholars for 9/11 Truth
Posted by Marty Martin
February 5, 2006
The Bush administration’s justification for our preemptive invasion of Iraq and the continuing costly war is largely based on the official version of events of September 11, 2001.
Imagine the political implications if voters were to discover that fundamental portions of the official story were fabrications.
So far, the mainstream media and public have been unwilling to question the official version, but this may be changing.
A group of scholars, calling themselves Scholars for 9/11 Truth are now educating the public about fatal flaws in the administration’s story.
I encourage you to take a fresh look at the evidence, and support an independent assessment of those events.
  Permanent Bases Point Toward Permanent War
by Evan Augustine Peterson III, J.D.
February 17,2006

"To initiate a war of aggression is, therefore, not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing from other war crimes only in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
- Judgment of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, relating to "Count Two, the Crime of Aggression," as brought against Herman Goering, Joachim von Ribbentrop, and 14 other defendants.
In Mr. Bush's "State 0f The Union" address, he claimed that "US forces will be drawn down as Iraqi forces stand up."
[1] However, this claim is flatly contradicted by the Pentagon's ongoing multibillion-dollar expenditures for the construction of 106 permanent bases - including six hi-tech "super-bases" - inside Iraq. [2]

  WWIII or Bust: Implications of a US Attack on Iran
by Heather Wokusch
February 18, 2006
"This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous... Having said that, all options are on the table."   -- George W. Bush, February 2005
Witnessing the Bush administration’s drive for an attack on Iran is like being a passenger in a car with a raving drunk at the wheel. Reports of impending doom surfaced a year ago, but now it’s official: under orders from Vice President Cheney’s office, the Pentagon has developed “last resort” aerial-assault plans using long-distance B2 bombers and submarine-launched ballistic missiles with both conventional and nuclear weapons.
  Preparations to Bomb Iran
Comment by Larry Ross
February 15, 2006
Nuclear reactions from any of the other 8 nuclear weapons states could spread the war. There would be further pressures on some of the other states to "use their nuclear weapons or lose them" leading to a general nuclear war.
It would be worthwhile for other states and peace groups to act now to try and prevent U.S. attacks against Iran, because it would be totally unjustified, and could lead to many adverse effects as detailed above.
  US prepares military blitz against Iran's nuclear sites
by Philip Sherwell
February 12, 2006
Strategists at the Pentagon are drawing up plans for devastating bombing raids backed by submarine-launched ballistic missile attacks against Iran's nuclear sites as a "last resort" to block Teheran's efforts to develop an atomic bomb.
  Thousands would die if US attacked Iran: study
from Reuters
February 13, 2006
Thousands of military personnel and hundreds of civilians would be killed if the United States launched an air strike on Iran to prevent it developing nuclear arms, a British think tank said in a report released on Monday.
The report by the independent Oxford Research Group said any bombing of Iran by U.S. forces, or by their Israeli allies, would have to be part of a surprise attack on a range of facilities including urban areas that would catch many Iranians unprotected.
"I think there is at least a 50:50 risk of some sort of real crisis, probably with military action, before the end of next year," said the report's author, Professor Paul Rogers of the University of Bradford.
"There is always the possibility that the Israelis do (it). I don't think you can rule that out," he told Reuters.
  More Evidence of Planned US Attack on Iran
Comment by Larry Ross
December 27, 2005
...What happens once nuclear weapons are introduced is anyone's guess. It could spin out of control into general nuclear war involving the 9 nuclear weapon states. That spells the end for humanity. There is curiously little protest or adverse comment about this dire prospect. Why?...
  Speculations over US attack against Iran
by Jürgen Gottschlich
December 23, 2005
Are the USA planning a rocket attack against targets in Iran? In secret discussions Washington was preparing the Allies for appropriate air strikes in 2006, agencies disclosed to day. Especially in the NATO country Turkey, speculations about an attack against Iranian nuclear facilities are taking place.
  Bombing Civilians in Iraq
Comment by Larry Ross
December 20, 2005

The great increase in U.S. bombing in Iraq does not help the U.S. win their illegal war.
It does make many more Iraqi casualties and many more opponents of the U.S. occupation and war making. The U.S. then calls them "terrorists", thereby attempting to justify even more bombing.
......It is not a war on terrorism in Iraq. The U.S. makes terrorists where there were none before.
It is a war on civilians.

  Ignoring the Air War
December 14, 2005

The American media continues to ignore the increasingly devastating air war being waged in Iraq against an ever more belligerent Iraqi resistance -- and, as usual, Iraqi civilians continue to bear the largely unreported brunt of the bombing.
When the air war shows up at all in our press, it is never as a campaign, but as scattered bare-bones reports of individual attacks on specific targets, almost invariably based on military announcements.

  Nobel Prize Winner Warns World
Comment by Larry Ross
December 13, 2005

El Baradei was praised by the Nobel chairman for resisting U.S. pressures to find the hard nuclear evidence against Iran
they could use in their plans to justify attack.
That may not be enough to stop the U.S. and Israel from attacking Iran.

  Peace prize winner urges arms cuts
Walter Gibbs
December 11, 2005

The director-general, Mohamed ElBaradei, said a "good start" would be for the United States and other nuclear powers to cut nuclear weapons stockpiles sharply and redirect spending toward international development.

  U.S. Neocons Promote War With Iran For Israel
Comment by Larry Ross
December 13, 2005

One of the strongest influences in the Bush Administration are the Neo-Conservatives. They fill many of the top positions in the Bush Administration. Their war plans for the U.S. in the Middle East have so far been implemented, such as their phoney war with Iraq. It was promoted before the 9/11 attack- the "Pearl Harbour" the Neocons claimed they needed to justify the war to the American people. Although the war was based on a number of lies - now well-known and publicised, both the Republicans and Democrats want victory over Iraq - nothing less. This and John Kerry and Hillary Clinton's silence about the war lie's is one of many indications that the Democrats have sold out to the Republicans and that the American system of Democracy has been corrupted by the military/industrial complex, other corporates, the oil interests and other special interests.

  Neocons Concentrate on Promoting U.S.-Iran War
by Andrew I. Killgore, Washington Report
March 2005

Steven P. Weisman wrote in The New York Times of Nov. 19 that the “biggest challenge” in President George W. Bush’s second term is “how to contain” Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, however, Iran constitutes no threat to the United States. Its “threat” is to Israel, according to “some” (read neocons) in the administration who believe that Iran supports violence against Israel and helps the resistance in Iraq.

  U.S. Threatens To Use Nuclear Weapons 17 Times
Comment by Larry Ross
November 17, 2005

.....The next U.S. pre-emptive war could be against Iran, and/or Syria. Both have been mentioned as potential targets by Bush, as has North Korea if it dares to try and make nuclear weapons.
...... From the following record, and George Bush's actions and statements, we know what to expect.
Hopefully this should encourage people to work to keep New Zealand nuclear-free, and encourage other countries to adopt this step toward a nuclear weapons-free world.

by Zoltan Grossman
revised September 20, 2001

U.S. military spending ($343 billion in the year 2000) is 69 percent greater than that of the next five highest nations combined. Russia, which has the second largest military budget, spends less than one-sixth what the United States does. Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Cuba, Sudan, Iran, and Syria spend $14.4 billion combined; Iran accounts for 52 percent of this total.

  Fighting Terror or Expanding U.S. Empire
Comment by Larry Ross
October 20, 2005

Over 350(US) billion dollars yearly finances the US Global War On Terror (GWOT).
As the following report by the Center For Defense Information shows, much of it is wasted. Some 12 billion cannot be accounted for. As pointed out in other papers on this site, the U.S. continues to create enemies in order to justify ever increasing defence budgets. These in turn help make arms corporations very, very wealthy. Naturally that assures continuing large campaign donations from the mainly republican arms trade corporations to ensure Bush and other Republican candidates and chosen Democrats get re-elected.

  Important New CRS Report on War Spending
from CDI
October 13, 2005

From Sept. 11, 2001, to last week, the federal government has spent $357 billion on the “Global War on Terror.” These expenses include military operations, reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan and security at U.S. bases and embassies overseas.

  War Bankrupting U.S.
Comment by Larry Ross
October 19, 2005

...Only by constantly inventing new enemies and justifying new wars, can Bush and his Republican allies satisfy the needs of a growing military/industrial complex. President Eisenhower warned Americans in 1960 about the growing power of "the military-industrial complex". Now this has become the military-industrial-political-scientific-academic complex, as so many Politicians, Scientists and Academics depend on this complex of interests.


"Never before in the history of the world has so much been spent,
so quickly and recklessly on so much wanton destruction and evil by so few."

  Many Peace Issues To Work On
Comment by Larry Ross
September 21, 2005

There are many important peace issues and Flyby News gives you vital information about them, as does this web site. Flyby also suggests constructive ways to help and things you can do.

  NASA's Cassini space probe executed a flyby maneuver around the Earth on August18, 1999

This space ship was traveling at record speeds, more than 10 miles per second, and carrying more than 72 pounds of radioactive plutonium on board. It was only seconds away from a possible inadvertent reentry into Earth's atmosphere, which would have released more than 400,000 curies of radiation in a breathable/ingest able form. This could have resulted in millions of fatalities, and untold suffering for generations to come.
NoFlyby's Press Release, "The FORCE Behind Cassini" explains why NASA might have conducted such a high-risk civilian space mission. Flyby News covers this issue of the militarization of space and other concerns vital for life's survival in the 21st Century.

Another Step to Self-Extinction
by Larry Ross
August 23, 2005

Carefully analyse the Russian warning below. It is an ominous warning, but unlikely to deter the Bush Administration's advanced war plans for Iran.
All governments should know about Bush's policies on pre-emptive nuclear war, instructions to the Pentagon for a nuclear assault plan that might be used against Iran, taking out those nations the President decrees could become potential enemies, his 'Axis of Evil' speech and what it means, his Nuclear Posture Review, warning that up to 7 nations could be attacked with US nuclear weapons including Russia and China and the 3 crisis situations that could set it off: (1) The Middle East, (2) The Korean Peninsula (3) China and Taiwan. There are more. The self-justifying, self-fulfilling delusional aspects of Bush's reality, as he chooses to define and express in his recent speeches, also have to be taken into account. Never forget that Bush and Blair manufactured the hideous situation they studiously defend and continue in spite of being exposed as dangerous liars.

The next World War starts in Iran
by Mike Whitney
August 22, 2005

"We consider that it would be counter-productive and dangerous to use force, the serious consequences of which would be barely predictable." warning from the Russian Foreign Ministry to the Bush Administration about prospective plans to attack Iran.

It's Not Just About U.S.Ships In N.Z. Ports
by Larry Ross
August 14, 2005

Feedback on Nuclear Free NZ issues raised on "Agenda" TVNZ 1, Sunday August 13.
US President Bush's nuclear weapons policy and pre-emptive war policy are major reasons why New Zealand should not change it's nuclear free legislation. He is planning to make new nuclear weapons and resume testing, and has sabotaged the nuclear non-proliferation treaty conference...
These are points that should have been raised with ex-US Deputy Secretary Kenneth Dawn when talking about NZ-US relations.
They are strong reasons for keeping New Zealand nuclear-free.

  A global campaign for a nuclear weapons convention by 2010
from Mr. Akiba Tadatoshi
August 6, 2005

Op-ed for August 6th the 60th anniversary of Hiroshima - signed by the Mayor of Hiroshima and co-signed by 72 Belgian mayors
Sixty years ago at 8:15 a.m. the sun was radiant in a blue and silent sky when the U.S. B-29 Enola Gay bomber appeared as a shining silver bird above the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Seconds later it dropped the uranium bomb 'Little Boy' which was detonated 580 meters above the city. The bomb instantly created a blinding flash and firestorm of up to 4000 degrees Celsius. Never before had a bomb of 15,000 tons of TNT equivalent been dropped above a city with hundred of thousands of people. It immediately turned the city into a living nightmare, where thousands of people burned alive, while thousands of others were killed by the enormous blast which destroyed most buildings. The city was soon changed in a ghost-town, with heavily burned people and enormous suffering everywhere. There was hardly any medical help as hospitals, doctors and nurses had not been spared by the atomic bomb.

The Iran War Buildup
July 21, 2005

There is no evidence that President Bush has already made the decision to attack Iran if Tehran proceeds with uranium-enrichment activities viewed in Washington as precursors to the manufacture of nuclear munitions. Top Administration officials are known to have argued in favor of military action if Tehran goes ahead with these plans--a step considered more likely with the recent election of arch-conservative Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as Iran's president--but Bush, so far as is known, has not yet made up his mind in the matter. One thing does appear certain, however: Bush has given the Defense Department approval to develop scenarios for such an attack and to undertake various preliminary actions. As was the case in 2002 regarding Iraq, the building blocks for an attack in Iran are beginning to be put into place.

Financial Basis of US Militarism, War, and the Drift to Fascism
by Larry Ross
July 11, 2005

Can you imagine that in a time of peace at the end of the cold war, with the US recognised as the only superpower, the US military takes 68 cents of every tax dollar for defence, as against only 32 cents on everything else. And it's not enough, they want more.

Two-Thirds On Defense
by Jurgen Brauer and Nicholas Anglewicz
July 10, 2005

Many Americans believe that 19 cents on defense for every 81 cents on non-defense is a reasonable way to spend a tax dollar. But by another calculation, the tax dollar splits 68 cents for defense and 32 cents on everything else. It is a common misconception that U.S. defense expenditure is equivalent to the Department of Defense outlays. Instead of $436.4 billion of defense expenditure, as Congressional budgeteers count, government statisticians in the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) counted $548.0 billion for calendar year 2004—a whopping $112 billion difference. And by our own calculations, U.S. defense expenditure is much higher than even the BEA's numbers suggest, namely $765.6 billion in calendar year 2004—about $330 billion or than the Department of Defense outlays.

World Military Spending Topped $1 Trillion in 2004
by Peter Starck
July 7, 2005

STOCKHOLM - World military spending rose for a sixth year running in 2004, growing by 5 percent to $1.04 trillion on the back of "massive" U.S. budgetary allocations for its war on terror, a leading research institute said on Tuesday.

US Ambassador Fires Nuclear Parting Shots
from Larry Ross
July 6, 2005

In answer to U.S. Ambassador Swindells (July 5) the theory that humanity must exist under the threat of global nuclear destruction for reasons of security was rejected by New Zealanders when they enacted the Nuclear Free Act in 1987. In spite of the end of the cold war, why do Russia and the U.S. still have thousands of nuclear missiles ready for instant launch against each other.

More Contamination for Planet Earth
by Larry Ross
June 29, 2005

Obviously the US does not need the poisonous U-238 for security as claimed. The US is already the one and only super power and can destroy any enemy, even the whole of humanity, at any time. In these perilous times, it is not beyond possibility that an 'End Times Nuclear War' would be launched by a religious Fundamentalist nutter Administration. They may think it is time for the religious Armageddon that Fundamentalists believe was promised in the Bible.

US Plans to Resume Plutonium 238 Production - Report
June 28, 2005

NEW YORK - The United States plans to produce highly radioactive plutonium 238 for the first time since the Cold War, The New York Times reported on Monday.
The newspaper quoted project managers as saying most, if not all, of the new plutonium was intended for secret missions. The officials would not disclose details, but the newspaper said the plutonium in the past powered espionage devices.
The Times said Timothy Frazier, head of radioisotope power systems at the US Energy Department, vigorously denied in a recent interview any of the classified missions would involve nuclear arms, satellites or weapons in space.
"The real reason we're starting production is for national security," Frazier was quoted as saying.
Officials at the Energy Department could not be reached for comment.

Operation Northwoods - More Comprehensive Details
by Larry Ross
June 27, 2005

James Bamford's book "Body of Secrets" gives particularly valuable insight into who was involved in Northwoods; how pervasive such thinking was in the Pentagon, and how incredible extremist and evil it was. Secretary of Defence McNamara's rejection of the plan in 1962, for the US to create terrorist acts and blame Cuba as a pretext for launching a war on Cuba, did not stop such thinking and planning.

Posted June, 2005

...In [Joint Chief's chair] Lemnitzer's view, the country would be far better off if the generals could take over. [JFK assassination legend has it some general presided over the fudgy JFK autopsy. --Mk]
For those military officers who were sitting on the fence, the Kennedy administration's botched Bay of Pigs invasion was the last straw. "The Bay of Pigs fiasco broke the dike," said one report at the time. "President Kennedy was pilloried by the super patriots as a 'no-win' chief . . . The Far Right became a fount of proposals born of frustration and put forward in the name of anti-Communism. . . Active-duty commanders played host to anti-Communist seminars on their bases and attended or addressed Right-wing meetings elsewhere."
From BODY OF SECRETS, James Bamford, Doubleday, 2001, p.82 and following.
Scanned and edited by NY Transfer News.

by Larry Ross
June 23, 2005

Bush knows enemies are much more politically potent vote-getters than peace partners looking for a solution to a very expensive 50 year problem. The US and Korea are still at war and Bush wants to keep it that way. So he spurned Kim's offer of nuclear peace talks.
The US has 10,000 nuclear weapons and Trident subs loaded with nuclear missiles cruising off the Coast of North Korea. They can wipe out North Korea anytime. Nevertheless the US propaganda machine will portray it as the ultra dangerous enemy with it's few nuclear weapons.

Bush spurned 2002 North Korea overture
June 22, 2005

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - North Korean leader Kim Jong-il attempted to engage President Bush directly on the nuclear weapons issue three years ago but the administration spurned the overture, two American experts on Asia said on Wednesday.
Writing in the Washington Post, former U.S. ambassador to South Korea Donald Gregg and former journalist Don Oberdorfer expressed concern that Kim's November 2002 initiative was never pursued and urged Bush to respond positively to his current overture, made last week.

Body of Secrets the book by James Bamford
Review by Robert Finn
June, 2005

Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency From the Cold War Through the Dawn of a New Century
Back in 1982 James Bamford published THE PUZZLE PALACE, the first book-length study of the National Security Agency, the U. S. Government's mammoth but super-secretive agency devoted to electronic eavesdropping on the rest of the world. That book caused some sharp tremors in military and government circles.
Now Bamford is back with an updated and much more exhaustive study of the same subject. BODY OF SECRETS is detailed history, description, critical assessment, editorial comment, and character study all rolled into one massively researched volume. It should cause an earthquake or two.     
Read an Excerpt

Ban DU Weapons
Comment by Larry Ross
June 21, 2005

Everyone should see this DU documentary on Sunday June 26 at 11.00 pm on TV1 in NZ.
Poisoning the Iraq people and neighbouring states with DU weapons and residue is bad enough. But with a half life of 4.5 billion years, eventually DU dust will drift around the planet and contaminate all life.
That's all of us regardless of where we live, including our children, grandchildren and future generations.
Unless we can stop manufacture and use of this evil weapon (already used by the USA and UK in four wars), the whole planet will be poisoned.
It's time the NZ government took a position on banning DU weapons. Concerned citizens and nations took a stand to ban land mines. It was successful. The same kind of concern can apply to DU weapons which are far worse.
Ban them

U.S. spending on Iraq may soon surpass Korean War budget
from CBC News
June 20, 2005

Lawmakers in the United States were scheduled to vote on Monday to approve $45 billion US in additional funding for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, making the recent Middle East foray more expensive than the entire Korean War.
Since the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress has approved $350 billion, mostly for combat and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The amount, which includes $82 billion approved last month, is equal to the total amount in today's dollars spent on the Korean conflict from 1950-53.

The Great Awakening to the Iraq Deception
by Justin Raimondo
June 20, 2005

The Downing Street memos have created such a stir that even Congress is rubbing its eyes and awakening from its long slumber to ask questions about the Iraq war: a hearing convened by antiwar Democrats, chaired by Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), has created quite a lot of buzz, generating headlines – and howls of outrage from all the usual suspects, as well as from the Washington Post's Dana Milbank and – surprise, surprise! – Howard "The Scream" Dean. Milbank snarks:
"In the Capitol basement yesterday, long-suffering House Democrats took a trip to the land of make-believe. They pretended a small conference room was the Judiciary Committee hearing room, draping white linens over folding tables to make them look like witness tables and bringing in cardboard name tags and extra flags to make the whole thing look official."

Posted June 18, 2005

It is inescapable historical reality that leaders of nations will lie to their people to trick them into wars they otherwise would have refused. It is not "conspiracy theory" to suggest that leaders of nations lie to trick their people into wars. It is undeniable fact.    This brings us to the present case.
Did the government of the United States lie to the American people, more to the point, did President Bush and his Neocon associates lie to Congress, to initiate a war of conquest in Iraq?
This question has been given currency by a memo leaked from inside the British Government which clearly indicates a decision to go to war followed by the "fixing" of information around that policy. This is, as they say, a smoking gun.

A Guide to Future US Covert Ops?
Comment by Larry Ross
June 10, 2005

It is 1962, at the height of the induced US paranoia over Cuba. Pentagon Hawks and their right-wing political allies
created a diabolically evil plan to covertly murder American citizens and blame Cuban agents in the US. The purpose was to provide a believable excuse that would anger Americans and the world, causing them to support a US war against Cuba. All top Pentagon generals approved this plan. The Kennedy Administration did not approve it.

Pentagon Proposed Pretexts for Cuba Invasion in 1962
The National Security Archives
April 30, 2001

In his new exposé of the National Security Agency entitled Body of Secrets, author James Bamford highlights a set of proposals on Cuba by the Joint Chiefs of Staff codenamed OPERATION NORTHWOODS. This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods.

US Creates Terrorism
Comment by Larry Ross
June 6, 2005

Although this article was first published on Jan 1, 2004, it applies today.
It shows how a more moderate approach by the Bush Administration "to pull the plug on Iraq" was over-ruled
by the neoconservatives and Pentagon, who installed a diabolically evil 3 billion dollar fund to establish "a radical new counterinsurgency program."

Phoenix Rising
by Robert Dreyfuss
January 1, 2004

Tucked away in the Iraqi appropriation was $3 billion for a new paramilitary unit. Vietnam similarities?
With the 2004 electoral clock ticking amid growing public concern about U.S. casualties and chaos in Iraq, the Bush administration’s hawks are upping the ante militarily. To those familiar with the CIA’s Phoenix assassination program in Vietnam, Latin America’s death squads or Israel’s official policy of targeted murders of Palestinian activists, the results are likely to look chillingly familiar.

The NPT review conference: no bargains in the UN basement
by Patricia Lewis
June 1, 2005

The United States joined with other states to wreck the nuclear non-proliferation treaty’s 2005 review conference. Patricia Lewis of the United Nations Institute of Disarmament Research examines what went wrong.

Introduction to Depleted Uranium - the facts on what it does
from CADU
May 31, 2005

The Campaign Against Depleted Uranium (CADU) was launched in 1999 to focus specifically on trying to achieve a global ban on the manufacture, testing, and use of depleted uranium weapons.

Jonathan Schell on Crossing Nuclear Thresholds
by Tom Engelhardt
May 25, 2005

Call it Star Wars, parts VII-XXII; but last week, just as Revenge of the Sith was opening galaxy-wide -- multiplexes on Tatooine alone were expected to pull in billions -- reporter Tim Weiner revealed on the front page of the New York Times that a new presidential directive will soon essentially green-light the future U.S. militarization of space.
(When, in December 2001, the administration withdrew from the Antiballistic Missile Treaty, which forbade the weaponization of space, it opened the way for exactly the kind of Pentagon R&D that now threatens to come to mutant fruition in the heavens.) Just three days before Weiner's piece appeared, military analyst William Arkin reported in the Washington Post that "early last summer, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld approved a top secret 'Interim Global Strike Alert Order,'" preparing the way for devastating attacks against hostile powers developing weapons of mass destruction, air strikes that could be carried out more or less on demand anywhere on the planet and, if so desired, included a "nuclear option."

American Militarism: Is The USA Is Addicted To War?
by Evan Augustine Peterson III
May 24, 2005

First Consider The Evidence, Then Draw Your Own Conclusions
Let us consider the possibility that the USA has become addicted, in an economic sense, to war. While the evidence offered below is by no means exhaustive, it is directly relevant and highly probative. Therefore, the reader should consider ALL of the evidence in Exhibits A through D before judging whether or not a prima facie case has been made that America is economically addicted to war.

Comment by Larry Ross
May 18, 2005

The radioactive microscopic dust residue from depleted uranium weapons has a half-life of 4.5 billion years and eventually drifts from wherever it was first used, around the world. It kills and causes life-threatening diseases wherever it goes, and also contaminates the gene pool causing hideously malformed foetuses.
The US and UK like it because it is such an effective battlefield weapon; so they keep defending it's usage.
They have used D.U. weapons in 4 wars so far. It also kills or contaminates many US and UK war veterans and their offspring. There is a very large amount of evidence of it's damage, and many groups working to outlaw such weapons.
The long-term effects around the world are potentially devastating for the human race, as D.U. goes on killing forever.

by Robert C. Koehler
March 25, 2004

“After the Americans destroyed our village and killed many of us, we also lost our houses and have nothing to eat. However, we would have endured these miseries and even accepted them, if the Americans had not sentenced us all to death.”

Lowering Still Further, the Barrier to Nuclear War     Reappraisal
Comment by Larry Ross
May 11, 2005

Following this analysis, is a Pentagon paper on implementing Bush's new pre-emptive nuclear war doctrines.
It has much deeper implications than I first thought.
.....Bush, and his ally, the UK, both threatened to use nuclear weapons to accomplish their objectives - if they claimed their chosen enemy used what Bush and his allies decided was WMD. That is, Bush and his allies threatened to use nuclear weapons to accomplish military objectives in a war they started based on lies they invented.
I find that mind-blowingly evil and pathologically stupid.

Draft U.S. Paper Allows Commanders to Seek Pre-emptive Nuke Strikes
by Kyodo News
May 1, 2004

"Geographic combatant commanders may request presidential approval for use of nuclear weapons for a variety of conditions," the paper says.

Our New Nuclear Age
by Jonathan Schell
May 4, 2005

All but unheard in the snarling din are the true voices of peace -- voices calling on the one group of nations to resist the demonic allure of nuclear arms and on the other group to rid themselves of the ones they have, leaving the world with a single standard: no nuclear weapons. Of the countries represented at the conference, fully 183 have found it entirely possible to live without atomic arsenals, and few -- barring a breakdown of the treaty -- show any sign of changing their minds. In the UN General Assembly the vast majority of them have voted regularly for nuclear abolition. Behind those votes stand the people of the world, who, when asked, agree. Even the people of the United States are in the consensus. Presented by AP pollsters in March with the statement, "No country should be allowed to have nuclear weapons," 66% agreed. In other countries, the percentage of supporters is higher. On the day their voices are heard and their will made active, the end of the nuclear age will be in sight. - May 23rd edition

Pre-emptive Nuclear Strikes May Be Initiated by Local Commanders
by Larry Ross
May 2, 2005

Here is a Pentagon paper on implementing Bush's new pre-emptive nuclear war doctrines.
It is a proposal on actions a local commander may request to initiate a limited nuclear war action.

Now the cowboys can really play God!
Real war games for the boys but the world they are gambling with is ours too.

Draft U.S. Paper Allows Commanders to Seek Pre-emptive Nuke Strikes
by Kyodo News
May 1, 2004

"Geographic combatant commanders may request presidential approval for use of nuclear weapons for a variety of conditions," the paper says.

Preparing for Nuclear Extinction
Comment by Larry Ross
April 21, 2005

Since 1945 and the Hiroshima/Nagasaki nuclear bombings, the US has led the way in developing nuclear weapons. A total of nine states now deploy nuclear weapons, supposedly for their security. They were originally portrayed as a deterrent to prevent attack. But now the US, under Bush, has changed the rules. They can now be used for war-making as one of a number of options in a conventional war situation.

Nobel Laureates, Organizations Appeal for Removal of Nuclear Weapons from "Hair-Trigger" Status
April 5, 2005

More than 30 Nobel laureates have joined hundreds of organizations and lawmakers in signing a statement to be released today calling for all strategic nuclear weapons to be taken off "hair-trigger" and "launch on warning" alerts
(see GSN, June 22, 2004).

Making New Enemies - Essential to Healthy Military/Industrial Complex
by Larry Ross
April 3, 2005

To justify the war on Iraq and everything since, Bush's neocons wrote in their pre-9/11 Iraq war plans that "we need another Pearl Harbour". 9/11 gave it to them, and they were keen to start the pre-planned Iraq war from the day 9/11 happened. They did not have a shred of real evidence to support this war, so they created a litany of justifying lies. Other articles on this site under "US Elections" and "9/11 Questions" show US election fraud and doubt the 'official' story on the origins of 9/11.

The Good News About Terrorism
by Paul Robinson
April 3, 2005
‘We are facing the gravest threat that this nation has ever faced.’ Elizabeth I, speaking of the Spanish Armada? Winston Churchill, in the aftermath of Dunkirk? No. Home Office minister Baroness Scotland on Newsnight, justifying the new Prevention of Terrorism Act by reference to the threat from al-Qa’eda.
‘Hang on,’ I said to myself on hearing the Baroness, ‘that can’t be right.’ My mum can remember lying in bed hearing bombs drop, and she once saw a V1 go over and heard the engine cut out as she watched. As an army officer a decade ago I used to have to check under my car for IRA bombs every time I went out. Army officers don’t have to do that any more. The gravest threat ever? Surely not.
The US has been inviting the excuse to retaliate for years
Comment by Larry Ross
April 3, 2005

This article below is particularly important because it reveals that the US itself creates many of the terrorism incidents and then blames other for these actions. Thus they are creating the excuse they need for increasing their military action.

Into the Dark
November 1, 2002

The Pentagon Plan to Provoke Terrorist Attacks
This column stands foursquare with the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, when he warns that there will be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large. We know, as does the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, that this statement is an incontrovertible fact, a matter of scientific certainty. And how can we and the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, be so sure that there will be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large?
Because these attacks will be instigated at the order of the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense.

Crazies In Charge?
by Larry Ross
March 3, 2005
This is one of the most authoritative articles I've read on Iran-US relations, the nuclear question,
Israel's nuclear arsenal, threats to Iran, US-Israel relations, and the 'crazies' (neocons) now in charge in Washington.
It explains why the 'crazies' plan for war with Iran is likely to be implemented, and the complex web of circumstances behind it. A major reason is that there is little apparent opposition to the neocon plan - and the devastation it may bring
McGovern on the Iranian and Israeli nuclear programs
March 1, 2005
.......Suddenly, after 9/11 (when the site where the World Trade Center had once stood was dubbed "ground zero" as if a nuclear explosion had taken place on American soil), nuclear weapons zoomed back to the head of the line. At least in administration rhetoric, mushroom clouds began to go off over American cities and there was a drumbeat of fear about Saddam Hussein's nuclear program (and the rest of his -- as it turned out, nonexistent -- WMD), leading of course to the invasion of Iraq under the rubric of a "counterproliferation war."
Now, another of those drumbeats, this time about the much-disputed Iranian nuclear bomb that no one yet claims actually exists, has begun. ....
NZ leads on nuclear-free stance – 20 years on from Oxford Union Debate
From NZ Parliament
March 1, 2005

Disarmament Minister Marian Hobbs will be advocating for a strengthened nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty when she represents New Zealand at the five-yearly NPT review conference in New York in May.
It is 20 years today since former Prime Minister David Lange won the 1985 Oxford Union debate arguing that nuclear weapons were morally indefensible. Today Marian Hobbs reiterated that nuclear disarmament remains New Zealand's ultimate goal.

Dangerous Doctrine
by Roger Speed and Michael May,   Atomic Scientists
March/April 2005
A U.S. policy of preemption and a push for new nuclear weapon designs could be a recipe for disaster that makes proliferation more likely, not less.
In September 2002, President George W. Bush announced his new National Security Strategy. Although this doctrine retains some elements from the past, in some respects it is a bold departure from previous U.S. policy. It declares that the United States finds itself in a unique position of military and political dominance and that it has a moral duty to use this strength to establish a new liberal democratic world order.
The National Security Strategy and Bush's supporting speeches argue that the United States must in effect establish and maintain a global military hegemony to secure its envisioned democratic, peaceful world. According to the strategy, carrying out this mission requires that any challenge to U.S. military dominance must be blocked, by force if necessary. A significant challenge to world stability comes from terrorists and certain states that are seeking weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Concerned that the Cold War doctrines of deterrence and containment may no longer work, and that "if we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long," Bush announced in the National Security Strategy a new "preemption doctrine" against such threats.
Nuclear Terror at Home
by Noam Chomsky
February 26, 2005
Nuclear destruction isn't a high-probability event. But if a low probability event keeps happening over and over, there's a high probability that sooner or later it will take place.
If you can imagine some rational observers from Mars looking at this curious species down here, I don't think they'd put very high odds on survival – another generation or two. In fact, it's kind of miraculous that we've come along this far.
The world has come extremely close to total destruction just in recent years from nuclear war. New Mexico plays an important role in this. There's case after case where a nuclear war was prevented almost by a miracle. And the threat is increasing as a consequence of policies that the administration is very consciously pursuing.
U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld understands perfectly well that these policies are increasing the threat of destruction. As you know, it's not a high probability event, but if a low probability event keeps happening over and over, there's a high probability that sooner or later it will take place.
More stories by Noam Chomsky
Nuclear weapons: Who has what?
by BBC
February 11, 2005
Five nations are officially recognised as possessing nuclear weapons by the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
These are the US, the first to acquire nuclear capability in 1945, Russia (1949), the UK (1952), France (1960) and China (1964).
As information about nuclear arsenals is secret, there are only estimates about their nuclear weapons.
The Arms Control Association (ACA), a US weapons research organisation, estimates the number of strategic warheads held by these states to be about 6,000 for the US, 5,000 for Russia, 300 for China, 350 for France and under 200 for the UK.
The NPT, which has 187 signatories, was created to prevent other countries from acquiring nuclear capability, to promote cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy and to work towards nuclear disarmament.
America’s Nuclear Stealth War
by Paul Rogers
February 10, 2005
The United States denounces Tehran’s development of nuclear weapons while quietly modernising its own arsenal.
  The Fear That Terrorism Will Go Nuclear
by Steve Coll
February 10, 2005
"There has been increasing interest by terrorists in acquiring nuclear weapons," Mohamed ElBaradei, the Egyptian director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said recently. "I cannot say 100 per cent that it hasn't happened [already]."
  Push to Redesign Nuclear Warheads Ignites Arms Race Fears
by William Broad
February 9, 2005
The relatively small initial program, involving fewer than 100 people, is expected to grow and produce finished designs in the next five to 10 years, culminating, if approval is given, in prototype warheads.

US Warns about Nuclear Proliferation, While It Proliferates

Summary by Larry Ross
February 9, 2005

"The Energy Department now spends 35% more on the US nuclear arsenal each year than it did between 1948 and 1991(when it spent the equivalent of $4.2 billion annually in current dollars) The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) "plans to increase spending on the US arsenal to $7.6 billion by 2009"
"Even the Pentagon's own Defence Science Board has come round to the view that there is no need to rebuild large numbers of high yield "legacy" nuclear weapons to support a credible and effective deterrence policy."

by Christopher Paine
March 7, 2004

US Spending Twice as Much on Nukes as 10 Years Ago


Guess What? We're Spending Twice As Much

by Joe Rothstein - edtor
10 May 2004

Now on Nuclear Weapons Than We Did Ten Years Ago
Experts have nodded approvingly at President Bush’s program for non-proliferation enforcement. Leaders of all the nuclear nations agree—for the record—that the nuclear ogre must be brought under control.
But here’s the problem. Any nation that might be inclined to live by the President’s nuclear control words has to be highly unsettled by his deeds.



Comment by Larry Ross
February 8, 2005
The US used as an excuse to make war on Iraq, that it had WMD and plans to attack the US and UK. It was completely untrue but served as an excuse for the US war. The plan below indicates such an excuse may be used to justify more wars.

StratCom Will Oversee WMD Efforts

February 7, 2005
The U.S. Strategic Command will oversee the Defense Department's efforts to combat weapons of mass destruction, the Omaha World-Herald reported in its Sunday editions.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld last month assigned the task to StratCom, which is based at Offutt Air Force Base near Bellevue.

U.S. Redesigning Atomic Weapons

February 7, 2005
The officials say the program could help shrink the arsenal and the high cost of its maintenance. But critics say it could needlessly resuscitate the complex of factories and laboratories that make nuclear weapons and could possibly ignite a new arms race.
So far, the quiet effort involves only $9 million for warhead designers at the nation's three nuclear weapon laboratories, Los Alamos, Livermore and Sandia. Federal bomb experts at these heavily guarded facilities are now scrutinizing secret arms data gathered over a half century for clues about how to achieve the new reliability goals.
"These are big decisions," Mr. Norris said. "They could backfire and come back to haunt us."

Space Wars Dream - Will It Fizzle Out Again?

Comment by Larry Ross
February 6, 2005

. . . . In this deadly nuclear gamesmanship, would the present or a future US administration ever decide to make a surprise massive first nuclear strike against Russia, China or some other state, taking a calculated risk that they can destroy the retaliatory power of their chosen enemy?


Star Wars Faces a Budget Hit

by Stan Crock
February 4, 2005

Unreliability is just one reason why funding is being cut.
The other is the changing nature of potential threats to U.S. security.

by Brad Knickerbocker
January 6, 2005

In an age when weapons of mass destruction can be slipped into the United States in a cargo container or even a suitcase, is Ronald Reagan's 1983 dream of building an umbrella against long-range enemy missiles passé? Or is it a necessary screen against the possibility of North Korea or another rogue state tossing a nuclear-tipped rocket our way?
As the US moves ahead with testing and deployment of the system, new questions are swirling about the merits of pursuing such a costly program in a time of war and increased demand for defense dollars.
The debate comes amid enduring skepticism about the technological feasibility of erecting an effective shield. In December, the US missile defense program suffered another test failure when the rocket carrying the "kill vehicle" meant to destroy an incoming mock enemy warhead shut down before launch from the Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific Ocean.

Iran, EU still at odds over nuclear freeze: Tehran
February 2, 2005
Iran and the European Union are still at odds over whether Tehran should be able to resume work on its sensitive nuclear fuel cycle, Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi said Wednesday.
"Our condition is that the suspension of uranium enrichment is short term but the Europeans are demanding a long-term halt," student news agency ISNA quoted him as saying.
Iran Uninterested in Missile That Can Reach Europe
February 2, 2005
Minister Iran, EU still at odds over nuclear freeze: Tehran Pakistan and Islamic group back EU approach to Iran nuclear row


by Larry Ross
December 28, 2004

"One thing leads to another". So people should think it through carefully before they allow NZ to further steps up the escalation ladder. This also is a strong argument for the Labour Government to resist the lobbying efforts of NZ's arms industry to go further, and reverse the dangerous trends. We thank Labour for maintaining NZ's 1987 Nuclear Free Law, but warn then against being seduced into abandoning it.

Action from PMA and WARP
October 12, 2004

"Made in New Zealand: a label to be proud of ?
Not when it is the label on shoot-to-kill training equipment, grenades, land mines effect simulators, weapons firing control systems, 'special purpose' ammunition, and aerial bombing score systems ...
And not when the label is used by NZ companies that have overseas parent companies involved in the manufacture and deployment of nuclear weapons."
[quote from the new No WARP! leaflet]

by Tim Weiner
November 28, 2004
"It used to be just an airplane company. Now it's a warfare company. It's an integrated solution provider. It's a one-stop shop. Anything you need to kill the enemy, they will sell you."
-- John Pike, longtime military analyst and director of, discussing role of Lockheed
  War with Iran
Comment by Larry Ross
October 21, 2004

Noam Chomsky and Professor Francis Boyle, an international lawyer, both agree that "if Bush decides it is necessary to go to war in order to win in November, he will go to war" with Iran, Syria or North Korea. In my writings I have predicted the same thing.

  Bush Censure Is Not Enough
August 28, 2004

....there is now considerable writing that the US will authorize an Israeli attack on the Iranian nuclear reactor at Bushehr. Also, the US will now be engaging in major naval maneuvers right off the coast of North Korea in late October. So Syria, Iran, and North Korea--the last two  part of the "axis of evil", along with Iraq. I stand by my conclusion, which Chomsky agrees with, that if Bush decides it is necessary to go to war in order to win in November, he will go to war.

  Pre-emptive Nuclear War?
Comment by Larry Ross
October 20, 2004

To even consider a "pre-emptive nuclear first strike" indicates the flawed thinking of some of the top military and political people in the European Union (EU).

  EU Preemptive Nuclear War
October 10, 2004

PARIS (Own report) - Military strategists of the European Union define the EU defense strategy initiated by Berlin and are considering a preemptive nuclear first strike. The EU military doctrine initiated by Berlin - the first one in the history of the EU - specifically envisions the possibility of conducting preventive wars. A recently presented "European Defense Paper", written with the participation of a former German minister of state, included nuclear arms in the first strike strategy of the EU. It states that British and French nuclear powers could be included "explicitly or implicitly" in this preventive military option.

  Missile-defence plan shot down
by Michael Byers
October 16, 2004

Review: - Rushing to Armageddon, The Shocking Truth About Canada, Missile Defence, and Star Wars by Mel Hurtig
If Canada's probable participation in missile defence could be challenged in court, opponents of the plan would want Mel Hurtig as their lawyer. In this short volume, the fiery Canadian nationalist argues that missile defence won't work, that it entails the weaponization of space, that it will make Canadians less rather than more secure, and that Prime Minister Paul Martin and Defence Minister Bill Graham have been "intentionally misleading" the country.

  A Nuclear Headache: What if the Radicals Oust Musharraf?
by David E. Sanger & Thom Shanker
December 30, 2003

Two recent assassination attempts against Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, have renewed concern in the Bush administration over both the stability of a critical ally and the security of its nuclear weapons if General Musharraf were killed or removed from office.
Administration officials would not discuss their contingency plans for Pakistan, but several said the White House was revisiting an effort begun just after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to help Pakistan improve the security of its nuclear arsenal and to prevent Al Qaeda or extremists within the Pakistani military or intelligence services from gaining access to the country's weapons and fissile material.

  Comment on Australian missile plan sparks regional arms race fears
by Larry Ross
August 28, 2004

The Australian decision to arm warplanes with US long-range stealth missiles, highlights a trend since the 9/11 attack and before, for Australia to adopt policies which echo or compliment US policy.
There has been sufficient time since 9/11 for the most backward of countries, to assess the widespread international concerns about the dangers of US policies, particularly the US nuclear policies, and the well-documented thrust of US policy toward global dominion at any cost. The UK and Australia are not backward - they have sophisticated analysts more than capable of determining real US policy and it's dangers.

  Top 10 Conspiracy Theories of 2003-2004  
by Mike Ward  
May 18, 2004

On August 6, 2001, while vacationing in Crawford, Texas, George Bush received an intelligence briefing called "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." It included revelations that al Qaeda members were conducting "surveillance of federal buildings in New York"; the World Trade Center was mentioned in the first paragraph, the prospect of terrorist "retaliat[ion] in Washington" in the second. According to the briefing, Osama bin Laden's organization was acting in ways "consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."

  A Nuclear Headache: What if the Radicals Oust Musharraf?
by David E. Sanger & Thom Shanker,
December 30, 2003

Two recent assassination attempts against Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, have renewed concern in the Bush administration over both the stability of a critical ally and the security of its nuclear weapons if General Musharraf were killed or removed from office.
Administration officials would not discuss their contingency plans for Pakistan, but several said the White House was revisiting an effort begun just after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to help Pakistan improve the security of its nuclear arsenal and to prevent Al Qaeda or extremists within the Pakistani military or intelligence services from gaining access to the country's weapons and fissile material.

  by Tom Abate
May 18, 2003

$1 trillion missing -- Bush plan targets Pentagon accounting
The Department of Defense, already infamous for spending $640 for a toilet seat, once again finds itself under intense scrutiny, only this time because it couldn't account for more than a trillion dollars in financial transactions, not to mention dozens of tanks, missiles and planes.


  Weapons of Mass Destruction found!    
  Zoom on Doom: Easy-to-find nuclear weapons map
April, 13, 2003

Since the US and the UK are having such a hard time finding
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, we thought we'd lend a
hand by providing this easy guide to the nukes we know about.


Into the Dark
November 1, 2002

The Pentagon Plan to Provoke Terrorist Attacks
This column stands foursquare with the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, when he warns that there will be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large. We know, as does the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, that this statement is an incontrovertible fact, a matter of scientific certainty. And how can we and the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, be so sure that there will be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large?
Because these attacks will be instigated at the order of the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense.


Home     Disclaimer/Fair Use