15:23 GMT +323 March 2017
    German Left Party Criticizes US Nuclear Weapons’ Deployment

    All About Russia After All: Washington’s Vow of No New Arms Race Exposed

    © AP Photo/ Charlie Riedel
    Get short URL

    While the Obama administration insists that its $1 trillion plan to upgrade America’s nuclear weapon stockpiles is not in any way aimed at deterring Russian “aggression,” language in the new defense budget proves otherwise.

    The nuclear non-proliferation treaty – agreed to by both the US and Russia – calls on all signatories to further the goal of nuclear disarmament.

    The Obama administration, however, has found a loophole in the agreement, and plans to funnel nearly $1 trillion into upgrading America’s nuclear arsenal. While these improvements include modifying nuclear-equipped ballistic missiles to make them more accurate, and installing adjustable yields to make nuclear bombs more practical, the US maintains the moves are aimed at sustaining current stockpiles, and are not, technically, upgrades.

    It sounds to some a lot like Washington reigniting an old-fashioned Cold War arms race, but the Pentagon insists that this isn’t the case.

    "The Cold War playbook…is not suitable for the 21st century," US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter told NATO allies last year, according to the Intercept.

    But according to the Obama administration’s new defense budget, the US nuclear modernization is explicitly meant to deter Russian "aggression."

    "We are countering Russia’s aggressive policies through investments in a broad range of capabilities…[including] our nuclear arsenal," the budget reads.

    This falls in line with statements made by Brian McKeon, the principal deputy undersecretary of defense for policy, in December 2015.

    "We are investing in the technologies that are most relevant to Russia’s provocations…to both deter nuclear attacks and reassure our allies."

    Those "provocations" refer to Russia’s alleged invasion of Ukraine, an assertion that Russia has repeatedly denied and for which the United States has provided no evidence. US officials also cited Russia’s "invasion" of Crimea, ignoring the fact that the peninsula voted to rejoin Russia in a referendum in which over 96% of the local citizenry approved.

    The plan has received fierce criticism from those concerned that the US is pushing the world toward nuclear war.

    "The United States is on the cusp of launching an unnecessary, expensive, and potentially dangerous plan to modernize its strategic nuclear forces, helping stimulate what is being called a 'new nuclear arms race,'" Professor Gordon Adams and Richard Sokolsky writes for Defense One.

    "The United States can deter any country from using nuclear weapons against America and its treaty allies with a nuclear force that is far smaller, less destabilizing, and less expensive than the one the Pentagon is planning to build."

    Criticism is unlikely to derail the project at this point. Most of the contracts have already been signed, including an estimated $100 billion deal with Northrop Grumman to develop the Pentagon’s new long-range bomber, designed to deliver a nuclear payload.


    US Proposed Nuclear Arms Cuts to Exclude NATO Reductions - Russian Envoy
    US Nuclear Nonproliferation Budget to 'Decline' Due to Bad Ties With Russia
    US Wants Britain to Renew Its Nuclear Missile System – Ashton Carter
    new Cold War, nuclear non-proliferation, Pentagon, NATO, Brian McKeon, Ashton Carter, Russia, United States
    Community standardsDiscussion
    Comment via FacebookComment via Sputnik
    • Сomment
    • klod.infobeez
      These megalomaniacs thought they were to rule the world for 1000 years, but... surprise ! Russia rised again ! :)

      Go back eating junk and playing videogames : safer.
    • avatar
      Jackov Smirnoff
      $1Trillion for weapons that can never be used.... And $Billions to maintain, and dispose of nukes over a lifetime.
    • Beady-eyed Insomniac
      And the madness of the US continues
    • avatar
      The war business, today needed because of Russia and China. Previously, for other invented reasons. But, it keeps going. What a sea of deceit.
    • siberianhusky
      Should not have surprised anybody about America breaking the rule book when it suits them.
      Just like any other spoiled rich kid and they have enough of them there.
    • avatar
      There needs to be international pressure on USA regarding signing agreements with very clear contents on nukes where a is equal to a and where a means a.
      Reading the Reagan files from '82 - it is useful to learn the rhetorics at the NSC: sanctions and pipelines were the issues for the National Security Counsil, so desperately in need to "kill the pipeline" Poor Devils!
    • avatar
      Alvaro Marfan
      Let's push for a Josh Earnest's denial that Obama is planning to give the whole Guantanamo Bay base back to Havana.
    • avatar
      A show down between Russia/ China verses the United States/NATO alliance is only a matter of timing. The United States believes it can survive a nuclear exchange by eliminating incoming ballistic missiles with Ageis, THADD and space based weapons and not destroy themselves or the planet with adjustable nuclear weapon pay loads. As soon as these parts of the puzzle are put together into a comprehensive operating system the US will launch a first strike using some made up justification. Why else the adjustable pay loads? One only needs this option if they are planning a survivable first strike scenario. Russia may have just 10 years until dooms day at the most.
    • avatar
      Follow the money! The U.S. economy is totally dependent on the arms manufacturers hence the eternal war goes on, and on and on........
    • avatar
      If you spoke of these geopolitical developments even a few years ago, you would have been called crazy. But it has been clear for a while that Russia (and China) was going to get in the way of the US drive for global hegemony.
    • avatar
      mzungu in Africa
      Just bring the Dollar down, the rest will follow and the world will be a better place
    • Porkbelly Porkerpigin reply toJackov Smirnoff(Show commentHide comment)
      They will most definitely be used. All Nuclear Weapons will be used in just a few years to fight WWIII. The USA needs to make sure they are prepared to WIN!!!
    • Ivan Buckeye
      American officials never planned on eliminating or reducing its stockpile for the sake of peace. A ruse. It is what it is. It took countries awhile to catch on. Now for a real question...what next? Certainly not entrusting fate with the U.S. gang.
    • avatar
      Russia should NOT further reduce arsenal, unless it by itself decide is too much and unilaterally do so.
      For that Russia needs no treaties. One way is to make them so technologically advanced, that a big stockpile is an overkill.
      In the 80's and before, many warned the Soviets. do not trust west.. Don't listen. Result? See a 1988 Russian map and the one today and hear the laughing all day and night of west.

      Russia best bet , hyper modernize and just one part gets the modern tech,. keeping all fast and very dynamic. The weapons been there doing NOTHING for decades.

      Now Russia FINALLY wakes up and see, what it been told all along. the sanctions are a war . An economic war that Russia have no weapons to combat. Next is to politicize WTO.
      That will turn WTO in trash and will get reforms as per TPP etc.
      Russia is always light years behind west in this mental state. And allow west to always win.

      The best is NO to any treaties. Treaties saw Russia destroyed and ridiculed as the MOST FOOL in history.

      Best to go around and build them capable of defeat THAAD 2 and 3. ANd other solutions including lasers. And make them hypersonic.

      And no more treaties. No matter what the ex old treaties say. Unless is at U.N and thhe whole world sign, and again, no sign..Just watch.
      The ONLY way Russia can fail it's people , is thru those deals. The will of the people. Human Rights treaties, that see Belarus under BOGUS sanctions. And so on.
      Russia should be like the rest of teh world , Living FREE MY WAY... You don't like it? Too bad.
      Russia's aggression is, that Russia can end the west dreams of expansionism, globalism and one nation hegemony. No.. How many ex Soviet states are been COUP by U.S and allies? Cooked the books to create kids that HATE Russia..
      What you need , a slap to wake up?
    • avatar
      Forgot.... Russia can just build X amount super high tech. the rest gets the newest tech the same way. Moving the most recently renewed with tech , as the MOST to get the MOST strategic targets anywhere on earth.
      say 700 missiles. easily defeated by NATO'S newest defenses. rendering Russia's stockpile, obsolete and ineffective . THAT's the idea. But Russia can have an ACE in the sleeve. The newest super secret missiles, that the world couldn't imagine. That will come out of nowhere and RIP apart NATO'S spirits. And FORCE them to bend and sign a deal. Or DIE.

      That's the idea ain't it? So select what is needed. say 50 missiles? Those will get the latest tech and be modernized yearly. And keep SUPER SECRET.. Anyone opening the mouth gets killed.
      So what. 25 or 50 new hypersonic this year?
      As economic Russia should consider selling securities. For no more than 30 years. Reducing teh amount every year. And creating a lot to get interests to maintain teh securities and even pile the cash to repay at maturity. Begin with 1 year. Next year enough could be sold to pay this year and for use tat year.. in may different years. And no more than 0.50% of interests U.S pay.. they will create HUGE lines to buy. And all sell by RUSSIA ONLY. In Rubles.
    • Porkbelly Porkerpig
      The big contradiction here... is that you people want to destroy the US Fed Note dollar, but lie about wanting "peace" at the same time. But, WE know that "peace" means "Socialist Tyranny" so WE reject your "peace". However, if you stock your basement shelter with 5 years worth of bottled water, canned food, plastic spoons, guns and gold coins, then AFTER the Nuclear War, when the US paper dollar becomes worthless, your guns will have increased in value; and your gold will still buy you extra food and water, after you run out.

      So what if the Cable TV stations go off the air for a few years. There are enough DVD's and digital videos out there, to keep everyone busy and entertained enough, to stay in their Fallout Shelters for 10 years, without even caring about the outside world.
    • avatar
      ascoin reply toklod.infobeez(Show commentHide comment)
      klod.infobeez, not before we protect our European Allies by nuking them
    • klod.infobeez
      You have no allies. You have puppet govts, while peoples dream to cut you into pieces, fry your flesh, and eat it.

      Anyway, you're already finished : your money is a walking dead, your weapons don't work (F-35 : bwahahaha !) and, save a very few smart ones, your people is a bunch of uneducated fat and sick couch potatoes.

      Better to undestand that, so to keep the money home and to use it for the building of an education system, a working health care one and to mind people instead of billionaires.

      Well, I'm not even sure that it's still possible. You look like a rotting dead cow, whose belly is still moving thanks to the fermentation. With enough gas pressure, it will just pop out and your real smell will appear to everybody.
    • avatar
      Have you ever heard this lying idiot to ever tell the truth?
    • avatar
      Bob, funny how that usually happens in an election year isn't it?
    Show new comments (0)