{"id":78777,"date":"2016-09-05T12:00:03","date_gmt":"2016-09-05T11:00:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=78777"},"modified":"2016-09-02T15:34:24","modified_gmt":"2016-09-02T14:34:24","slug":"september-this-month-in-nuclear-threat-history-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2016\/09\/september-this-month-in-nuclear-threat-history-2\/","title":{"rendered":"September: This Month in Nuclear Threat History"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"napf_logo-150x150<\/a>September 2, 1981<\/strong> \u2013 On this date, Dr. Alice Stewart (1906-2002), a distinguished epidemiologist who possessed recognized expertise on radioactivity in the environment which resulted in her winning the Right Livelihood Award in 1986, was interviewed in Birmingham, England by Robert Del Tredici (or one of his representatives or assistants), author of the 1987 book \u201cAt Work in the Fields of the Bomb.\u201d\u00a0 In the interview, Dr. Stewart expressed very serious concerns about not only the long-term health and environmental impacts of nuclear bomb tests (over 2,000 of which were conducted between 1945 and the mid-1990s) but also of the continued use of civilian nuclear power plants, \u201c\u2026the (nuclear) bomb tests have had a measurable effect because you can measure it in your own bones.\u00a0 And if we allow every nation in this world to become dependent on nuclear energy for its electricity \u2013 you\u2019re literally going to set the clock back.\u00a0 It could come to a point where biosphere development, which has taken millennia to produce human beings, will be put slowly into reverse, and humans won\u2019t be the first to go\u2026(the) amoebae and the things that feed on them, then the next, and the next, and the next\u2026and then us.\u201d\u00a0 Her warnings about the frightful impact of contamination from nuclear weapons production, storage, deployment, and accidents as well as from utilizing nuclear energy in today\u2019s 400 global nuclear power plants is as relevant in 2016 and beyond as it was at the time of this interview 35 years ago, \u201cRadioactive waste is bound to increase not only the population load of cancers, but more importantly the population load of congenital defects of future generations of the human race\u2026studies of low-dose effects\u2026(including) a study of nuclear workers in America\u2026show(ed) the effects of age on the risk, the effects of latency on the risk, and the effects of dose level on the risk.\u00a0 The key finding here is that the lower the dose, which in practice means the slower the delivery of radiation to the public, the more cancer risk there is per unit dose.\u00a0 In other words, it doesn\u2019t make it safer to deliver the radiation slowly; it in fact makes it more dangerous\u2026By relying on the technology of (nuclear) fission, we\u2019re going against the very processes that make life possible.\u201d<\/p>\n

September 11, 1974<\/strong> \u2013 At a Congressional hearing, former CIA director and then Secretary of Defense James R. Schlesinger testified on the safeguards and protections afforded to Americans in the event of a counterforce attack (aimed only at U.S. military facilities not civilian population centers) to minimize the impact of a nuclear strike on the United States.\u00a0 Much of the information presented was at least partially classified with specific details denied to the American public.\u00a0 But the reply by Secretary Schlesinger or one of his assistants to a question inquiring about the effect on our nation\u2019s medical infrastructure of such a nuclear attack as \u201cslight,\u201d triggered a news media backlash.\u00a0 Comments:\u00a0 Numerous studies by global medical experts and those with first-hand knowledge of the impact of exposure to a nuclear explosion (studied extensively at Hiroshima and Nagasaki and elsewhere by the 1950 Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission, other U.S. bodies, and subsequent independent, nongovernmental scientific and medical entities) have concluded that even one very limited nuclear attack on the wealthiest country on the planet, the U.S., would have devastatingly horrendous impacts on our medical response.\u00a0 Burns, radiation and related casualties numbering at least in the hundreds of thousands would dramatically overtax the capabilities of our nation\u2019s extensive medical infrastructure. This represents yet another critical reason why global nuclear weapons arsenals should be substantially reduced and eliminated as soon as possible.\u00a0 (Sources:\u00a0 Louis Rene Beres.\u00a0 \u201cApocalypse: Nuclear Catastrophe in World Politics.\u201d\u00a0 Chicago:\u00a0 University of Chicago Press, 1980, p. 162; Ira Helfand, MD; Lachlan Forrow, MD; Michael McCally, MD, PhD: and Robert K. Musil, MPH, PhD, Physicians for Social Responsibility, \u201cProjected U.S. Casualties and Destruction of U.S. Medical Services From Attacks by Russian Nuclear Forces.\u201d\u00a0 Medicine and Global Survival<\/em>. Vol. 7, No. 2, February 2002, http:\/\/psr.org\/resources\/projected-us-casualties-and-destruction.html<\/a>, and Solomon F. Marston, editor, \u201cThe Medical Implications of Nuclear War.\u201d\u00a0 Washington, DC:\u00a0 National Academies (U.S.) Press, 1986, http:\/\/www.ncbi.nih.gov\/books\/NBK219165\/<\/a> both accessed August 16, 2016.)<\/p>\n

September 17, 1966<\/strong> \u2013 After years of Cold War-fueled bluff and bluster (that began in the late 1950s and continued in 1964 with statements by then Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev boasting of a \u201cfantastic new weapon\u201d and \u201ca monstrous new terrible weapons,\u201d respectively), it was determined later that on this date, the Soviet Union had, in fact, begun a series of nearly a dozen tests on the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS) which continued through late 1967.\u00a0 The FOBS was a nuclear-armed, de-orbital satellite that would be undetectable by early warning radars built in Canada and facing northward.\u00a0 Because of their low orbits, there would be less time to detect the orbiting H-Bombs as they came in from a southern trajectory as compared to nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles that had to travel thousands of miles over the Arctic Circle to reach U.S. targets.\u00a0 This threat convinced nuclear strategists and scientists to consider countering Soviet FOBS with similar U.S. orbital H-Bombs.\u00a0 Thankfully, it was determined that orbiting systems didn\u2019t have the payload capacity or accuracy of weapons launched in a ballistic trajectory.\u00a0 And the 1967 Outer Space Treaty prohibited Cold War nuclear arms racing in outer space or on celestial bodies such as the Moon.\u00a0 Comments:\u00a0 Unfortunately with renewed Cold War II tensions apparent today, FOBS may be just one area of nuclear weapons development that may be considered in the future, despite their illegality in international law.\u00a0 More likely is the threat of FOBS development by a rogue nation such as North Korea.\u00a0 Another related threat has recently been uncovered by the news media.\u00a0 Both the U.S. and Russia are planning to develop hypersonic nuclear weapons platforms that could strike earthbound targets from above the atmosphere.\u00a0 A few weeks ago, Colonel General Sergei Karakayev, Russian Commander of the Strategic Missile Forces (SMF), confirmed statements made earlier by Lt. Col. Aleksei Solodovinikov to the Russian news media that the SMF Academy is developing a hypersonic strategic bomber capable of striking with nuclear weapons from outer space.\u00a0 This state of affairs represents yet another reason why these doomsday weapons should be sharply reduced immediately and eliminated completely as soon as possible.\u00a0 (Sources:\u00a0 John Pike, Eric Stambler, Christopher Bolckom, Lora Lumpe, David C. Wright, and Lisabeth Gronlund.\u00a0 \u201cChicken Little and Darth Vader:\u00a0 Is the Sky Really Falling?\u201d\u00a0 Federation of American Scientists, Oct. 1, 1991, pp. 6-7 and \u201cNew Russian Bomber to be Able to Launch Nuclear Attacks From Outer Space.\u201d\u00a0 Sputnik News<\/em>.\u00a0 July 13, 2016, http:\/\/sputniknews.com\/military\/20160713\/1042888473\/russia-space-bomber-engine.html<\/a> accessed August 16, 2016.)<\/p>\n

September 19, 2004<\/strong> \u2013 On this date, the Washington Post<\/em> published an op-ed by Dr. Bruce Blair, a former Minuteman nuclear missile launch control officer, Brookings Institution nuclear policy analyst, and president of the Center for Defense Information\/World Security Institute in Washington, DC.\u00a0\u00a0 Titled, \u201cThe Wrong Deterrence:\u00a0 The Threat of Loose Nukes is One of Our Own Making,\u201d the piece noted that, \u201cEven the U.S. nuclear control apparatus is far from fool-proof.\u00a0 For example, a Pentagon investigation of nuclear safeguards conducted several years ago made a startling discovery \u2013 terrorist hackers might be able to gain back-door electronic access to the U.S. naval communications network, seize control of radio towers such as the one in Cutler, Maine, and illicitly transmit a launch order to U.S. Trident ballistic missile submarines armed with 200 nuclear weapons apiece.\u00a0 This exposure was deemed so serious that Trident launch crews had to be given new instructions for confirming the validity of any launch order they receive.\u00a0 They would now reject certain types of firing orders that previously would have been carried out immediately.\u00a0 Both countries (the U.S. and Russia) are running terrorist risks of this sort for the sake of an obsolete deterrent strategy.\u00a0 The notion that either the U.S. or Russia would deliberately attack the other with nuclear weapons is ludicrous, while the danger that terrorists are plotting to get their hands on these arsenals is real.\u00a0 We need to kick our old habits and stand down our hair-trigger forces.\u201d\u00a0 Comments:\u00a0 Dr. Blair\u2019s point is still valid today twelve years after he wrote this op-ed although U.S.-Russian relations have worsened due to the Crimea-Ukraine Crisis, NATO expansion, and the deployment of military forces, including nuclear weapons, by both sides along their common borders in Europe.\u00a0 In fact, it is even more valid in an era when cyberattacks have increased exponentially by all the major nuclear powers and by non-state actors, and terrorist groups.\u00a0\u00a0 Andrew Fuller\u2019s recent Arms Control Today<\/em> article points out that, \u201cTop military and defense officials in the U.S. are currently contemplating plans to use cyberattack capabilities against enemy missile and command-and-control systems as part of a new push for full-spectrum missile defense.\u201d\u00a0 There is clearly a growing danger that leaked documents including procedures or methodologies regarding cyberattack successes may serve as a road map for terrorists to facilitate their hacking into nuclear launch systems.\u00a0\u00a0 Another concern is that messing around with other nuclear powers\u2019 command-and-control systems might inadvertently trigger an accidental, unintentional, or inadvertent nuclear missile attack, especially if that power perceives that their early warning system is being interfered with or shutdown by a nation that may be about to launch a first strike.\u00a0 All these issues speak to the importance of not only working toward global zero nuclear forces but to immediately instituting global de-alerting of all nuclear arsenals.\u00a0 (Source:\u00a0 Andrew Fuller.\u00a0 \u201cThe Danger of Using Cyberattacks to Counter Nuclear Threats.\u201d\u00a0 Arms Control Today<\/em>.\u00a0 July\/August 2016, http:\/\/www.armscontrol.org\/ACT\/2016_07\/Features\/The-Dangers-of-Using-Cyberattacks-to-Counter-Nuclear-Threats<\/a> accessed August 16, 2016.)<\/p>\n

September 25, 1959<\/strong> \u2013 A U.S. Navy P-5M antisubmarine aircraft carrying an unarmed nuclear depth charge developed mechanical problems but was unable to reach land to make an emergency landing and crashed into the Puget Sound near Whidbey Island, Washington.\u00a0 The nuclear weapon was never recovered despite an extensive search.\u00a0 Comments:\u00a0 While it is very unlikely that a long-lost and probably corroded nuclear warhead would detonate, there remain deadly serious concerns about the very long-term radioactive contamination from this incident and hundreds of other similar Broken Arrows.\u00a0 These nuclear threats can impact human and other species virtually forever unless such devices are found and disposed of properly.\u00a0 After all, the radioactive isotopes found in nuclear weapons or in the reactor cores of naval surface ships, submarines, and in the payload bays of aircraft lost at sea since 1945 possess an extremely long half-life of decay \u2013 713 million years for uranium-235 and 4.5 billion years for uranium-238!\u00a0 (Source:\u00a0 Richard Halloran.\u00a0 \u201cU.S. Discloses Accidents Involving Nuclear Weapons.\u201d\u00a0 New York Times<\/em>.\u00a0 May 26, 1981.)<\/p>\n

September 29-30, 2015<\/strong> \u2013 After Jeremy Corbyn won a landslide leadership vote to head the British Labour Party, he stated publicly his opposition to spending over 100 billion pounds to replace Britain\u2019s current Trident force with a new generation of nuclear submarines.\u00a0 Not only that, he won the renewed support of countless numbers of global antinuclear politicians, activists, and citizenry by going further, \u201c187 countries don\u2019t feel the need to have a nuclear weapon to protect their security, why should those five (U.S., Russia, Great Britain, France, and China) need it themselves?\u201d\u00a0 He also noted that, \u201cnuclear weapons didn\u2019t do the U.S.A. much good on 9\/11,\u201d and even more impressively he shocked some of his own party members by saying on BBC Radio on September 30th<\/sup> that if he was elected prime minister, he would never press the nuclear button.\u00a0 Corbyn concluded that interview by saying, \u201cI am opposed to the use of nuclear weapons.\u00a0 I want to see a nuclear-free world.\u00a0 I believe it is possible\u2026I think we should be promoting an international nuclear weapons convention which would lead to a nuclear-free world.\u201d\u00a0 Comments:\u00a0 Unfortunately the ultra-powerful, entrenched British Military-Industrial-Parliamentary Complex viciously responded to Corbyn\u2019s optimistic views on ending the nuclear arms race with personal attacks and appeals to the so-called logic and reasonableness of seventy flawed years of nuclear deterrence theory.\u00a0 Even a Labour Party MP John Woodcock fueled the firestorm of attacks by hypocritically claiming that, \u201cMr. Corbyn\u2019s position would make the grotesque horror of a nuclear holocaust more likely.\u201d As the weeks and months passed since Corbyn\u2019s brave pronouncements, more and more British MPs and other spokesmen and women of the status quo fell into line and last month on July 18, 2016 members of the House of Commons including the entire ruling Conservative Party and a majority of opposition Labour Party members cast their vote (472-117) to spend at least the equivalent of up to 250 billion U.S. dollars by 2036 to build new strategic nuclear submarines.\u00a0 New Conservative Party Prime Minister Theresa May was wholeheartedly behind heightening Britain\u2019s participation in a renewed global nuclear arms race by adding she would be willing and able to order a nuclear attack anytime it was necessary.\u00a0 The only ray of light was the bloc voting support of the Scottish National Party MPs who voted with the minority against upgrading the British nuclear arsenal.\u00a0 (Sources:\u00a0 \u201cJeremy Corbyn Row After \u2018I\u2019d Not Fire Nuclear Weapons\u2019 Comment.\u201d BBC<\/em>.\u00a0 Sept. 30, 2015, http:\/\/www.bbc.com\/new\/uk-politics-34399565<\/a> and Dan De Luce.\u00a0 \u201cBritish Parliament Votes to Spend Big on Nukes.\u201d Foreign Policy<\/em>. July 18, 2016, http:\/\/www.foreignpolicy.com\/2016\/07\/18\/british-parliament-votes-to-spend-big-on-nukes\/<\/a> both accessed on August 16, 2016<\/p>\n

Go to Original \u2013 wagingpeace.org<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

September 25, 1959 \u2013 A U.S. Navy antisubmarine aircraft carrying an unarmed nuclear depth charge developed mechanical problems but was unable to reach land to make an emergency landing and crashed into the Puget Sound, Washington. The nuclear weapon was never recovered despite an extensive search. There remain deadly serious concerns about the very long-term radioactive contamination from this incident and hundreds of other similar Broken Arrows. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[148],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-78777","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-history"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78777","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=78777"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78777\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=78777"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=78777"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=78777"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}