Peak Oil News and Message Boards

Cog wrote:Nuclear surety is part of process of keeping our nuclear deterrent credible.

Cog wrote:The employment of two nuclear weapons on Japan saved millions of lives. Most of which were Japanese. While MAD doctrine might not make logical sense, no one has employed a nuclear weapon in war for 73 years.

Research operation Olympic and Downfall.

onlooker wrote:

Cog wrote:The employment of two nuclear weapons on Japan saved millions of lives. Most of which were Japanese. While MAD doctrine might not make logical sense, no one has employed a nuclear weapon in war for 73 years.

Research operation Olympic and Downfall.

Yeah, well research the Cuban Missile Crisis and how close we came to all out nuclear war. Also, research briefcase size nuclear weapons. Given our history of warfare and emotional mindset, having such a devaststing weapon being produced by several countries and with instructions on manufacturing a tactical nuclear weapon on the Net, this should not provide any sense of comfort to anyone. Asymetrical warfare is the manner anyone with a grievance can lash out. And the destruction they can inflict with a nuclear weapon is enormous. So, nothing more complicated than an economic transaction whereby supply meets demand

KaiserJeep wrote:Nuclear weapons were inevitable. Both Japan and Germany had them under development in WW2. The US economy plus the recruiting of scientific minds from many countries enabled the US to win that particular race.

I happen to agree, Nagasaki and Hiroshima - both legitimate military targets in WW2 - were the price for 73 years of peace. Maybe we need a larger threat to secure the peace now.

Kinetic enegy weapons delivered from orbit may be most of the answer. Just as destructive as nukes, they offer pinpoint accuracy and zero nuclear fallout or ground contamination. The size of the industrial base necessary to support a space program will ensure that no upstart countries join the select Kinetic Energy Weapons club. Any country that employs a first strike nuclear weapon - or multiple Muslim countries if NGO groups like Al Quaida employ such - would face a rain of rocks from space until they literally rejoin the Stone Age.

Today, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, issued an interim staff report after multiple whistleblowers came forward to warn about efforts inside the White House to rush the transfer of highly sensitive U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia in potential violation of the Atomic Energy Act and without review by Congress as required by law—efforts that may be ongoing to this day. The report states:

“The whistleblowers who came forward have expressed significant concerns about the potential procedural and legal violations connected with rushing through a plan to transfer nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia. They have warned of conflicts of interest among top White House advisers that could implicate federal criminal statutes. They have also warned about a working environment inside the White House marked by chaos, dysfunction, and backbiting. And they have warned about political appointees ignoring directives from top ethics advisors at the White House who repeatedly and unsuccessfully ordered senior Trump Administration officials to halt their efforts.”

The report warns that that White House efforts to transfer sensitive U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia may be accelerating after meetings last week at the White House and ahead of a planned visit to Saudi Arabia by the President’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner:

“The Committee’s investigation is particularly critical because the Administration’s efforts to transfer sensitive U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia appear to be ongoing. On February 12, 2019, the President met with nuclear power developers at the White House about sharing nuclear technology with countries in the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia. In addition, next week Mr. Kushner will be embarking on a tour of Middle Eastern capitals—including Riyadh—to discuss the economic portion of the Administration’s Middle East peace plan.”

One such concern is the administration’s rejection of advice from lawyers, who warned that its plans to sell nuclear technology violated the Atomic Energy Act, designed to safeguard against the unchecked proliferation of atomic weapons and materials. Another is the brazen and unethical self-dealing by figures close to Trump, who sought to profit from the Saudi deals — including disgraced former national security adviser Michael Flynn and Tom Barrack, the real estate executive and Trump pal who ran the inaugural committee (now also under investigation by federal prosecutors).

According to the interim report, Flynn signed on as “advisor” to a firm known as IP3, which the Washington Post’s Paul Waldman accurately described as an “all-star team” of retired generals and diplomats pushing to build nukes in Saudi. This IP3 outfit recruited Flynn while he was serving as a campaign adviser to Trump, and he continued that role, despite the obvious conflict of interest, after he entered the White House. Others on Trump’s national security staff joined with Flynn to promote the Saudi nuclear sales, sparking conflict with officials who objected both on policy and legal grounds.

As soon as Trump was inaugurated, the IP3 group started pushing him to appoint Barrack as a “special representative” of the U.S. government to “implement the plan.” At the same time, Barrack was considering an investment in Westinghouse Electric, one of the world’s largest builders of nuclear plants. Assisting him was Rick Gates — who had worked for Paul Manafort and ended up with a guilty plea and a cooperation agreement with the Office of Special Counsel.

Let’s pause here to think hard about the wisdom of constructing dozens of nuclear plants, with their potential for terrorist exploitation, in the same country that sent forth the 9/11 hijackers — never mind its recent misadventures in Yemen and its brutal murder of an American resident and Washington Post journalist, Jamal Khashoggi. It is incomprehensible that any American president would consider turning over the most lethal technology to the Saudis, with their aggressive brand of radicalized Wahhabi Islam.

But leaving aside the peril to world peace, there are billions to be made here. And that may be what matters most to the inhabitants of the Trump White House.

In that connection, the interim report notes a fascinating timeline, which begins with a holding company called Brookfield Asset Management acquiring Westinghouse Electric for $4.6 billion in January 2018. (Of course, Westinghouse Electric would benefit hugely from the IP3 plan to build those Saudi nukes.) And just seven months later, Brookfield Asset Management purchased a 99-year lease on 666 Fifth Avenue — the famous Manhattan tower whose $1.8 billion in debt had nearly ruined Jared Kushner’s family company, which owned it.

Brookfield’s decision to bail out the Kushners by paying for that overpriced lease upfront puzzled observers when the company first announced its purchase. After so many other potential investors had passed on that bad deal, why did Brookfield bite?

Perhaps now we will find out.

KaiserJeep wrote:Look, you are applying Western and Christian behaviors and attitudes to [fundamentalist] Islam. 15 of the 19 terrorist assholes on 9/11/2001 were Saudi Arabians who practiced Wahhabism (i.e. fundamentalist Islam). Just because YOU wouldn't blow the world up does not mean that THEY would not. As a matter of fact, I believe that they WOULD, just as soon as they gain the means to do so. Nor would they consider it crazy or an undesirable thing to do. For them it would be a necessary, joyful act, for which they would be rewarded in the afterlife.

Recent press accounts indicate that the effort to provide Saudi Arabia with sensitive U.S.
nuclear technology has shifted to Secretary Rick Perry at the Department of Energy, although the
White House—and Mr. Kushner—allegedly remain directly involved. In fact, the President is
reported to be directly engaged in the effort, maintaining contact with IP3 about the plans and
expressing his support for the transfer of nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia. These reports also
indicate that Saudi Arabia is refusing to agree to prohibitions on enriching uranium and
processing plutonium similar to those agreed to by other countries in the region.

In February 2018, it was reported: “The administration is considering permitting Saudi
Arabia to enrich and reprocess uranium as part of a deal that would allow Westinghouse
Electric Co. and other American companies to build nuclear reactors in the Middle East
kingdom.”28

There is now serious, bipartisan concern with the Trump Administration’s efforts to
transfer sensitive U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia.

For example, on October 31, 2018, Republican Senators Marco Rubio, Todd Young,
Cory Gardner, Rand Paul, and Dean Heller sent a letter to President Trump urging him to
“suspend talks related to a potential civil nuclear cooperation agreement between the United
States and Saudi Arabia” due to “serious concerns about the transparency, accountability, and
judgment of current decision makers in Saudi Arabia.” They explained:

We remain concerned that the Saudi Government has refused, for many years, to
consider any agreement that includes so-called “Gold Standard” requirements against
pursuing technologies to enrich uranium and reprocess plutonium-laden spent nuclear
fuel.47