Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiMajor Lapses in Nuclear Security Are Routine
'You reach out on the motorway and nuclear weapons are an arm's length from you'
Do you know the story of the grizzly bear that nearly destroyed the world? It sounds like a demented fairytale -- but it is true. On the night of 25 October 1962, when the Cold War was at its hottest and Kennedy and Krushchev's fingers were hovering over the nuclear button, a tall, dark figure tried to climb over the fence into a US military installation near Duluth, Minnesota. A panicked sentry fired at the figure but it kept coming -- so he sounded the intruder alarm. But because of faulty wiring, the wrong alarm went off: instead, the klaxon announcing an incoming Soviet nuclear warhead began its apocalyptic wah-wah. Everyone on the base had been told there would be no drills at a time like this. The ashen men manning the station went ahead: they began the chain reaction of retaliation against Moscow.
It was only at the last second that the sentry got through to the station. It was a mistake, he cried -- just a bear, growling at the fence. If he had made that call five minutes later, you wouldn't be reading this article now.
I have been thinking about that bear recently, because there has just been a string of startling security lapses in the British and American nuclear arsenals. In the past year alone, a truck carrying a fully-assembled nuclear weapon has skidded off the road in Wiltshire and crashed, while six nuclear warheads were lost by the US military for 36 hours.
A new documentary called Deadly Cargo, recently premiered in Glasgow, documents a simple and extraordinary fact: every week, fully assembled Weapons of Mass Destruction are driven along the motorways and byways of Britain. Britain's nuclear submarines are up in Scotland, while the factories that need to test and replenish them are down in Reading -- so they are shuttled between them all the time in large green trucks that are followed a half-mile behind by decontamination units. It slipped on ice and crashed not long ago.
The film shows how a group of brave protesters called NukeWatch have been able to figure out the exact route of the convoy and track it. One of them explains, "You reach out on the motorway and they're an arm's length from you. That's how close the British public come to nuclear weapons." If they could work it out, couldn't other groups with uglier motives do the same?
Leaked documents from the Ministry of Defence show them fretting that an attack on the convoy "has the potential to lead to damage or destruction of a nuclear warhead within the UK" and "considerable loss of life".
More amazingly still, Britain's weapons do not have a secret launch code. They can be fired or detonated by the commander in charge of them simply by opening them up manually and turning some switches and buttons. Every other nuclear power has an authorisation code known only to the country's leader, which has to be read out to the soldiers in charge of the weapon before it can be used. Not us. Whenever the British government has tried to introduce this basic safety procedure, the Navy has got huffy and refused to participate, saying it is "tantamount" to claiming their officers are not "true gentlemen".
The Navy dismiss the risk of a hijacking, or a Doctor Strangelove situation where a navy commander goes nuts. But the latter has almost happened. In 1963, a US B-47 bomber crew guarding a nuclear bomb discovered that one of their colleagues had broken all the seals, removed all the safety wires, and turned on the pilot's readiness switch and the navigator's control switch on the nuclear bomb. The man seemed to be going through a bout of insanity.
In the US, an even-more startling nuclear lapse occurred last summer: bombs with the force of 60 Hiroshimas were simply lost by the military. On 29 August, a group of US airmen accidentally attached six nuclear warheads to their plane, mistaking them for unarmed cruise missiles intended for a weapons graveyard. They were then flown across the continental United States and left, unwatched by anyone, on an airstrip in Louisiana. Nobody even noticed they were gone for more than a day. This is not, it seems, a freak event: the Air Force's inspector general found in 2003 that half of the "nuclear surety" inspections conducted that year were failures. Yes, that's half.
This is what we know is happening in relatively orderly and open societies. There have almost certainly been incidents in China and North Korea and Pakistan that we will never hear about -- until the worst happens.
The dangers of any individual nuclear accident are, of course, very small -- but small risks of massive death, accumulating over the 60 years of the nuclear age, suddenly don't look so negligible any more. Those who campaign for a reduction in the number of nuclear weapons are often referred to as utopian, or naíve. In fact, it is utopian to believe we can carry on like this without an explosion sooner or later.
So it is disturbing that the number of nuclear weapons in the world may be about to dramatically increase. Not in Iran, where (thankfully) sanctions seem to be working, but in Russia and China. The Bush administration, backed by the British government, has been insisting for more than 20 years on building a "nuclear shield" that would, in theory, shoot down any incoming nuclear weapons before they struck the US and its allies. After more than $100bn of military-industrial bungs, the technology still doesn't work, but they are pushing on with it anyway. Russia and China have been pleading for a treaty that would prevent it because they want to retain the existing balance of power -- but the Bush administration has flatly refused.
The result? China and Russia are now saying they will significantly increase their nuclear weapon production. It is, they insist, the only way to ensure they would be able to punch through the US missile shield and so retain some parity with US power.
The more weapons, the more likely an accident -- or worse. But when the world should be scaling down the number of nukes, the Bush administration is actually ensuring they are ramped up.
Almost unnoticed in the Presidential race, Barack Obama has proposed the US recommit itself to moving towards a world without nukes. This isn't out-of-the-blue: his best work as a Senator has been trying to lock up Russia's barely guarded old weapons -- while Bush tried to slash the funding for it. Some 66 per cent of the US public support the zero-nukes goal. Yet Hillary Clinton has been bragging about her ability to "obliterate" Iran instead, while McCain has cheered on the Bush shield-madness. There is no popular movement to pressure them into sanity.
Without the careful multilateral dismantling of these weapons, thousands of them will remain scattered across the earth, waiting -- waiting for an accident with a bear, or a hijacked convoy, or a flipped-out submarine commander. Precisely how many nuclear near-death experiences do you want to risk?
j.hari@independent.co.uk
©independent.co.uk
28 Comments so far
Show AllHi ~Nam~, I sorta doubt there would be any signficant weight difference and if so it would likely be undetectable by the loading crew, they aren't installed by hand.
There are color codes however for different types of weapons and all nuclear weapons stored should have placards with the yellow, international radiation hazard warning. Even the ignintion units for a J-57 jet engine have such warning labels affixed and the radiation danger is almost nil unless one opens the box.
Yep, a cracked window can be costly. That B-52 glided around in the heavy mist and circled several times before it "safely" landed. There was actually very little damage. I heard the farmer shit his pants though.
Two of the crew were almost struck by it as it suddenly appeared out of the mist and swooshed past them as they drifted down in their chutes. It was one of the biggest F-ups in SACs history. Then there was the one where an Air Force fighter accidently shot a B-47 down with a little sidewinder missile. ___ "Oops".
Hi ~Ken~.Indeed the Hound dogs were far different from the newer models. It is not the missiles themselves that have such critical technical data coverage. It's the types of warheads which __(may or may not)__ be loaded in them that have such detailed, mandatory and two man policy coverage.
Only a crew of totally blind AMMs troops could have "acccidently" selected the wrong type of weapons, then listed the serial numbers of the weapons removed and not noticed they were nuclear.
If they indeed had been co-mingled in storage igloos, there still would have been security personnel right there. The two security personel on duty would have called for a security patrol to escort the weapons from the storage area to the aircraft. They would not do that with conventional weapons. So if it happened "accidently", a lot of people would have had to been in on the "accident". It would have had to have been a "planned accident".
BTW, I was a crash investigator also and likely knew your father. We may have even worked together at times, but I was never stationed at Fairchild, don't recall ever landing there either. Ask him to tell you about the B-52 crash from Fairchild where the pilots center windshield blew out. The pilot had written the windshield up an dput it on a on a red X in th eaircraft forms, due to a crack in the glass. A maintenance officer signed it off as "within limits" and the pilot he was ordered by his commander to fly it or else he would fly the important mission. So the pilot flew it figgured he was a better pilot anyway of course.
They subseqently had pressurizaton problems, no A/C and then ran out of fuel when two KC-135A refuel aircraft aborted one after the other. A major screwup. The pilot took the aircraft forms and zipped them up into his flght suit before he ejected. ___ Whooo boy.
The B-52 crew all ejected safely and the bomber made an almost perfect, no power, gear up, belly landing in a farmers field and slid up to the back door of his house and the bombs were undamaged. There was an incident when several full-bull colonels and others were axed. General Curtis LeMay was a bit upset. Butttt, it was all hushed up pretty much. Not good publicity.
Hi Kem,
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. My own expertise with special weapons is naval. My dad was a B-52 driver with the 92nd Bomb Wing at Fairchild about a hundred years ago and he said there is no way it could happen with the old Houndog or SRAM missles he carried because they never made a conventional version of those. He wasn't so sure about the ALCMs or Stealth cruise missles and seems to think that the official version was probably missing some crucial details but was plausible. He was also a trained crash/incident investigator. So I am going to believe him.
Yeah ~Ken~ I always doubted MOST of the mysterious death list.
Hey. I've personally seen several wing, squadron and base commanders and DCMs etc, fired when something went wrong. They don't hesitate to fire scapegoats. The point is, there is no way atomic weapons could have been "accidently" loaded on the B-52, no way. I've spoken with two bomber pilots who retired recently about that Minot deal and they just shook their heads and laughed, said the same thing I say, "Impossible".
Since when does BUSHCO fire the people that do it's bidding? The general in charge of Minot (along with scores of others) was fired.
Here is a little information on the "suspicous death" list (probably be on Snopes before long).
From Minot yes - But Involved With "Loose Nukes" ?
Airman 1st Class, Todd Blue, died while on leave in Virginia while visiting his family. No cause of death has been cited, so far, in news reports. [ KFYR TV report, September 12, 2007 ]. According to Citizens For Legitimate Government, Blue was involved in the "loose nukes" incident but they provide no evidence for that.
Deaths that happened before "loose nukes" incident
[ Two Minot AFB members whose death seem inappropriately
grouped in the "suspicious death" list, because they actually died in
July ] :
1st Lt. Weston Kissel, from Minot AFB, was killed [ Bismark
North Dakota Tribune July 20, 2007 ]
Adam Barrs, from Minot AFB, killed when a car he was riding in went off the road, hit a tree, and caught on fire. Garrett was 20 years old. Airman Stephen Garrett, who was driving, was taken to the hospital in critical condition. [ AP report ]
Non-Minot AFB Deaths also not clearly related to "Loose nukes" incident: we don't actually know what this couple, from Barksdale AFB, did. Should they be included ? We have no indication, so far, that they should be on this list:
Two members from Barksdale AFB, a husband and wife whose
names have not yet been released, died when their Harley was hit by a van. [ Shreveport Louisiana Times, September 15, 2007 ]
Involved with "Loose Nukes" or either Airbase ?
Air Force Captain John Frueh, found dead close to his rental
car, apparently while hiking in Oregon. Frueh's death ( he was 33 years old ) was odd but at the time he was based in Florida. Had he been recently transferred from Minot or Barksdale ? Who knows. [ KOMO TV, September 10, 2007 ]
Well ~Kendpotter~, I understand six of the men involved with the "accidental" loading and flight of the atomic weapons died of accidents within a month of the occurance, including one of the pilots, and some other family menbers also died. If that is true and I could beat that kind of odds and probablilites, I'd be banned from entering Nevada or Atlantic City.
Even if the wrong weapons were initially selected from the storage igloo, the serial numbers of the missiles would have automatically waved red STOP flags. And if they were intermingled with conventional weapons, which I serioulsy doubt, surely they would have been roped off and adequately tagged with the nuclear warnings.
Why would those warning tags have been removed. They have to log the serial numbers of the weapons selected and loaded. It is not just the color codes that are different. The first letters in the serial number are different. The things you have said about it are the official version. Do you believe the official version?
As to safety of nuclear power plants? Human faults are ony ONE of many reasons nuclear power will never be safe enough. Operation of a nuclear power plant is not the same thing as safely storing and loading atomic weapons either. No comparrison.
It only takes the mental screw-up of ONE human to have a serious nuclear power accident. For that flight of the atomic weapons accidently loaded, would have requied several people to screw up. It would be like ten or twelve highly trained coach drivers all drove to an intersection and each ran a red light one after the other and none saw the light was red. When I see someone flying to the moon by arm power with their head stuffed up their ass, I'll believe the official version.
KEM,
As I noted in my post, the incident ivestigation noted that both the aircraft commander and the crew chief "saw blue (practice ordnance) through the inspection windows of the missles on the one pylon, but didn't check the other."
I spent 20 years in the military including time as an FZ keyholder. I know how these things happen - Complacency. These guys have done this so many times that they were just going through the motions.
It started off with one bad decision. They were lacking storage space in the ready service igloos at Minot. The decision was made (and approved) to comingle weapons types in the igloo. From that point on, all it took was a couple of young, dumb ordy techs, an inattentive WEPSO, and negligence on an aircraft crew's part. It is a whole lot easier explanation than some kind of conspiracy.
You delight in telling us all how nuclear power will never be safe enough because people can't be trusted to do the right thing. How can it be possible to believe people will never be smart enough to operate a nuke plant and always be too smart to screw up handling nuke weapons?
You are a fine historian. Are you telling me there are no other examples comparable to this? You can't because you know as well as I that accidents occurr not when just one thing goes wrong. It usually requires a whole string of things to go wrong. Yet, accidents still happen.
Yes ~WTF~ but "care free" is appropriate wording when we had aircraft flying across county or across other countires while carrying atomic bombs is concerned.
Remember the four that were dropped in Spain and one was lost for over a month, and the the accident in Greenland with four atomic bombs amd a plutonium spill and the one that was dropped off the coast of Carolina and has never been found. That could be considered rather care free.
KEM
Uh, my comment "care-free" was sarcastic.
~WTF~ when it came to nuclear weapons before your time, from the very first nuke made in New Mexico, there was never ANYTHING "care free" about handling them. After being loaded on an aircraft and airborne, there were a few incidents and "Brocken Arrow" accidents. Far too many actually.
You may have heard about the heavy cruiser the Indianappolis, that delivered the two atomic bombs to Tinian island in late July or August of 1945. It's mission was so "ultra secret", that after the ship left Tinian, no one except the ship's captain and his staff knew where it was located. Well, the Japanese navy located it.
It was torpedoed by a Japanese submarine and sank and the survivors were in the water for several days before by sheer luck spotted by the crew of an American aircraft and those who remained were finally rescued. Well over 300 sailors were taken by sharks and many more drowned.
When atomic bombs were loaded on a bomber, the aircraft was roped off, the bomb bays were draped and no one was allowed near the aircraft except the AMMS team, the aircraft crew chiefs and the security guards. There were always two guards, unless or until it was parked in the ultra-secure alert area and then there was a single armed guard and other guards patrolled the entire arert area with dogs and in vehicles.
No one could go near the aircraft alone, the two man policy was ALWAYS enforced. Any pair who did have clearance had to provide proof of special clearance, even general Curtis E. LeMay was not exempt from that regulation. In all the 23 years I was in the USAF, I never once actually saw an atomic bomb.
I saw them being towed on special trailers on the flight lines, but they were always fully draped and armed guards right next to them. If any were ever seen by any who did not have the need to know, they were dummy bombs. Loading atomic bombs or missiles on an aircraft accidently is impossible.
So he could blow his head out of his ass.
Some things are possible, not the three all at once.
Interesting and scary article. Especially about Bush and the neocons continuing to push these weapons in a post Cold War world, and the recent B-52 "screw up".
I have read conspiracy theories about the B-52 incident, most indicating Cheney has a personal chain of command in the Air force that got caught. Why would he need his own nukes?
The US has the most beefed up military in the world yet 911 made use of primitive $20 tools like box cutters! All this focus on weapons tends to end up cursing its benefactor, "shooting the self in the foot" on a massive scale.
Given that India and Pakistan have nuclear technology, when you consider the desperation of very poor people, the black market trading in this "fire of the gods" becomes a more likely plot, particularly now when so many (especially Muslims) have reason to believe the US and its military is insistent on THEIR demise.
We can only hope that once Bush gets out, maybe some nations will back away from all this macho posturing and things like oil scarcity, climate change, and the GENUINE needs of their people may trump all this who's the baddest bad boy pomp and posturing. We can hope!
KEM said That would be just as possible as accidently loading atomic weapons on an aircraft.
Absolutely! SAC was before my time, and I know that procedures today are even more robust, profound and rigidly adhered to than the "care-free" days of the Cold War. (Think OSHA, EPA, FAA, etc.)
This "missing nukes" incident was conceived and had a purpose. What that purpose was has not been disclosed to we mere mortals.
~KENDPOTTER~ I don't know shit about physics or chemistry and have never pretended that I did. I do often quote other scientists and geologists, etc here with blogs.
I do know a few things about how a SAC base worked and how nuclear weapons were handeled and helped write Air Force regulations concerning such. There is no way any nuclear weapons could be "accidently" loaded on an aircraft.
In addition, if that absolute impossibility ever did occur, the aircraft was then pre-flighted by the aircraft team chiefs crew, then a final pre-flight by the flght crew and it not have been detected that the missiles loaded had atomic warheads is beyond any reason.
That would be as ludicrous as believing a crew was scheduled to fly a B-52H, tail nmber 68-001 and they instead accidently drove a fire truck cross country and didn't realize it until they reached the ocean.
Then the pilots signature and many other signatures required, etc. So many critical safety measures would have had to have been violated, it would be beyond any possible reason. ___Impossible. ___ And don't anyone bother to come back with the words, "nothing is impossible". __ Some things are.
For example: Try bending over and actually shoving your full head up your ass and then recite the entire US Constitution while you wave your arms and fly to the moon. That would be just as possible as accidently loading atomic weapons on an aircraft.
Johann Hari has done well to pinpoint the major lapses in nuclear security one of which might land the world into a global meltdown.
As one who has followed the Indian nuclear programme right from its inception and also the builtin hypocrisy of the US nuclear policy inextricably tied to their hegemonic aspirations I would like to take the liberty of submitting my recent communications to Mrs.Sonia Gandhi, President Indian National Congress expressing strong misgivings about this Nuclear Deal as definitely injurious to the Indian sovereignty . I think the Congress would be making a grievous blunder at the cost of the Indian nation if it allows the nuclear deal to nuke the UPA government.With Bush preparing for world war III as per the article Bush's World War III 'Solution'By Scott Ritter, Truthdig October 23, 2007 http://www.alternet.org/story/65846/ I think the world is being pushed into an armageddon. Hence I took the liberty of sending the following communications to the Indian National Congress President, Mrs.Sonia Gandhi. 18th and 22nd August, 2007: Madam, America has alway entertained a patronising and hegemonic attititude towards India. And now it has the cheek to warn India that we cannot conduct tests. This is outrageous. I cannot understand how the External Affairs Ministry has so blunderingly failed to read the fine print of the Indo-US nuclear Pact.
The Indo-US nuclear deal besides being an isufferable affront to India's national sovereignty is an ipso facto extension of the US hegemonistic global sweep. I would like to recall that I had written to the then prime minister Indira Gandhi dt. March 1, 1983 referring to her "meaningful observations when addressing the Foreign Correspondents' Association on 25.2.83. when she said that she was "a bit divided within myself" about using nuclear energy even for peaceful purposes, and that while she was personally opposed to using nuclear energy even for developmental purposes because of its adverse ecological effects, as head of a government and in the face of an energy crisis it had become imperative to use nuclear energy in industry and agriculture for speedy development."
Further I said: "I find your above observation complementary to what you proposed in your keynote address at the UN Conference on New and Renewable Sources of Energy held at Nairobi in august,1981, when she called for a "world energy programme" and an international consortium to plan and monitor it to provide aid, knowhow and expertise to the Third World countries with an emphasis on new and renewable sources of energy Voicing my serious misgivings about India's nuclear programme and the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, Dr. Sethna's claim that "India is the only country to have full control over the fuel cycle(uranium mixing and ,milling, fabrication of fuel elements and storage of waste) apart from major nuclear countries such as the U.S. Russia, France and Britain."
"I am afraid Dr. Sethna's claim cannot be sustained in the context of the operational facts of the nuclear plants the world over and the Tarapur plant which has been beset by grave difficulties from its very inception and that environmental hazards of nuclear power to the power plant operator or to those in its immediate vicinity were far less than that caused y cigarette smoking.
Further I wrote:
"When I wrote to Lord Flowers, FRS, former Rector of the Imperial College of Science and Technology , London and Chairman of the British Royal Commission on Environmental Protection appreciating his recommendations in the Commission's Sixth Report on Nuclear Power and the Environment he was good enough to send me a copy of his speech Problems of Nuclear Power delivered at the Geneva Colloquium on Nuclear Energy in 1977.
"Lord Flowers has expressed his belief that political decisions arising from major technological developments should be taken in the light of popular but rational debate, and has urged extreme caution in the future development of nuclear power beyond the present generation of thermal reactors.
"Conceding the radioactive waste management to be a profoundly serious issue, central to the environmental evaluation of a nuclear power programme the Commission concluded that the "development of fission power on the scale we have described earlier carries implications and potential risks for society which are too serious to be disregarded on the grounds that they are necessarily speculative and of a kind that we have not hitherto expected to address in decisions on technological development. Decisions should not be taken simply on the basis of technological or economic advantage and the assumed necessity of securing increasing energy supplies. The social and ethical issue involved are real and important, and should be widely appreciated and discussed" Hence, Lord Flowers concludes definitely that there should be no commitment to a large programme in Britain until it has been demonstrated "beyond reasonable doubt" that a method exists to contain high level waste indefinitely."
Indira Gandhi was good enough to note my view and refer my letter to the then Minister of State Science & Technology Atomic Energy,Space Electronics & Ocean Development, Shri Shivraj Patil who responded in his letter dated May 19, 1983 as follows:
"Dear Shri Bal Patil,
Please refer to your letter of 1st March 1983 to the Prime minister regarding your apprehensions about our nuclear power programme. The Prime Minister, as you no doubt are aware, has on several occasions voiced her concern about conservation, environmental protection and the need to safeguard against the hazard of pollution and the Government is fully alive to its special responsibility in this regard. Government has embarked on its programme for utilization of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes including the generation of power keeping in mind its ecological and other implications. I would like to assure you that these aspects are taken due note of and accorded due importance.
As regards some of the opinions cited by you, you may also be aware of the existence of equally committed pro and anti groups when it comes to issues related to nuclear energy. I would venture to suggest that some of the reports in certain sections of the press do tend, for reasons not clear, to mis-inform and create needless alarm by distorting facts. It is necessary to see the matter objectively and in its entirety.
Yours sincerely,
Sd/-
Shivaraj V.Patil
The US is the original culprit in the atomic proliferation right from first atomic test which culminated in Truman's dropping of the two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki even when Japan was on the verge of surrender. It was done only to show to the world now America was invincible. America was so secretive then that it would not even share the atomic technology with their closest ally the UK.
Madam, I seriously urge you that the only honorable course open to the Government now is to terminate the Pact summarily and tell the US: thus far and no further."
I followed it up with a further letter dt. August 21, 2007 as follows:
FOR IMMEDIATE AND URGENT ATTENTION PLEASE
DEAR MADAM,,
I REFER TO MY EARLIER LETTER DT.AUG.18, 2007, ABOUT THE INADVISABILITY OF PROCEEDING WITH THE NUCLEAR DEAL. SINCE IT IS MY HUMBLE CONVICTION THAT THE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISORS TO THE PRIME MINISTER ARE NOT SUFFICIENTLY INFORMED ABOUT THE HISTORIC GENESIS OF THE US NUCLEAR POLICY, AND SINCE AS AN INDIAN CITIZEN I DO NOT THINK THAT THE NATION SHOULD BE PLUNGED IN THE ELECTORAL TURMOIL I TAKE THIS LIBERTY.
I BESEECH YOU MADAM NOT TO PLUNGE THE INDIAN SUB-CONTINENT INTO THE US-ENGINEERED NUCLEAR INFERNO. IN CASE YOU ARE STILL IN TWO MINDS PLEASE CONSIDER FOR GOD'S SAKE THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT OF STIMSON, THE THEN SECRETARY OF STATE TO THE THEN PRESIDENT TRUMAN PUBLISHED IN THE
BULLETIN OF THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS FEB.3, 1947:
"THE FUTURE MAY SEE A TIME WHEN SUCH WEAPON MAY BE CONSTRUCTED IN SECRET AND USED SUDDENLY AND EFFECTIVELY WITH DEVASTATING POWER BY A WILFUL NATION OR GROUP AGAINST AN UNSUSPECTING NATION OR GROUP OF MUCH GREAT SIZE AND MATERIAL POWER. WITH ITS AID EVEN A VERY POWERFUL AND UNSUSPECTING NATION MIGHT BE CONQUERED WITHIN A VERY FEW DAYS BY A VERY SMALLER ONE…"
QUOTING THIS THE MOST DISTINGUISHED EXPERIMENTAL PHYSICIST AND NOBEL PRIZE WINNER IN 1948 P.M.S. BLACKETT SAYS IN HIS BOOK 'THE MILITARY AND POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ATOMIC ENERGY' (1948): "THE OBVIOUS RESULT HAS BEEN TO STIMULATE A HYSTERICAL SEARCH FOR 100 PER CENT SECURITY FROM SUCH ATTACK. SINCE THERE CAN BE NO SUCH COMPLETE SECURITY FOR AMERICA EXCEPT THROUGH WORLD HEGEMONY BY AMERICA IN ONE FORM OR ANOTHER…"P.128
MADAM, OFFICIALS AND ANALYSTS IN THE UNITED STATES HAVE BEEN WARNING THAT AL-QUAIDA OR ASSOCIATED GROUPS ARE PLANNING SUCH NUCLEAR ATTACKS ON AMERICAN SOIL.
DUBBED AMERICAN HIROSHIMA THE PLAN APPARENTLY TARGET NEW YORK , MIAMI LOS ANGELES, PHILADELPHIA, CHICAGO, SAN FRANSISCO, LAS VEGAS , BOSTON AND WASHINGTON D.C.
FORMER US DEFENCE SECRETARY WILLIAM PERRY SAYS THERE IS AN EVEN CHANCE OF A NUCLEAR ATTACK ON THE US THIS DECADE.
RENOWNED INVESTOR WARREN BUFFET HAS PREDICTED "A NUCLEAR TERRORIST ATTACK…IS INEVITABLE…."
IN THE ABOVE CONTEXT I BESEECH YOU , MADAM, PLEASE CONSIDER WHETHER IT WOULD NOT BE SUICIDAL FOR INDIA TO ALLY WITH SUCH A HORRIBLE NUCLEAR SHADOW.
-BAL PATIL
Besides a few websites that carry the Russian sub story, the history channel ran an hour long program about the three Russian subs a few months ago and the commander of one of the subs verified it was factual.
I was assignved at a B-52 base at the time and there were so many radio calls for refuels over our southern holding area near Spain that final day it was mind boggling. Normally we had two Crome Dome aricraft orbitiong that area 24/7, that day there were at least 40 and the Russians were well aware that we were there. Also for the first and only time in our history, some full alert and armed bombers launched that day from several SAC bases. It was very scary.
In addition to the larger missiles Russia had in Cuba, they also had short range tactical nukes in Cuba to use against any landing force we may have used if we had decided to invade Cuba, as McNamarra and LeMay among others had urged JFK to do. That also has been verified by Kruchev.
We were very close to an all out war and if the Russian subs had fired torpedoes as ordered, nuclear or not at our navy ships, it's very likey WW-3 would have begun.
kendpotter
I have read the US perspective of the actions of the Russian diesel subs during Oct-Dec 1962 in the National Security Archives. The US action at the time was to deploy "practice depth charges" which is tantamount to ordering the sub to surface, which the Russians did. Only one Russian Officer has come forth (in 2002) and said something about a near mutiny at depth whereupon the Russian sub commander wanted to load the nuke. This has not be corroborated by others as far as I know.
Since Glasnost, the Russians have been extremely forthcoming and accommodating about "incidents" and "accidents", and some have been far worse than this. Again, the Russian Navy has said nothing. I remain unconvinced that the situation was a close as KEM (and many web sites) claim.
WTF,
As much as I hate agreeing with KEMPATRICK on anything, I believe he is correct. He may not know much physics or chemistry but there is nothing wrong with his ability as a historian. I may have seen some of the same records he is alluding to in the archives of "Proceedings" which is the US Naval Institute's magazine of record.
Insofar as the handling of the nukes that flew to Barksdale, yes mistakes can happen when people are sloppy and ignore proper procedures. Guidelines call for keeping nukes and conventional weapons in separate igloos. This was not done. Guidelines call for experienced personnel to supervise inexperienced ones and the weapons crew at Minot did not recognize the significance of what they were doing. The pilot is supposed to do a "complete" walk around. He saw blue (practice ordnance) through the inspection windows of the missles on the one pylon, but didn't check the other.
It wasn't any conspriracy. Like any other accident, there wasn't just one break-down in procedures, there were multiple. Stupidity and carelessness above and beyond the call of duty. A bunch of heads have rolled over it and justifiabley so. A sense of complacency creates the environment in which accidents like this happen.
Kem,
Actually the bear story is true. Well, sort of. The "intruder" in Duluth was handled just fine. However, the initial alarm in Duluth also automatically tripped alarms at nearby bases. One of those being in Central Wisconsin (Volk Field), about 50 miles from where I grew up. That's where the wiring was wrong and the wrong alarm sounded. Link to story #6 here: http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear-weapons/issues/accidents/20-mishaps-maybe-caused-n...
I've heard rumors (and partial confirmations) about this story before, including from my brother who was an Air Force officer in the 60s and from a friend who is a retired full bird colonel. The retired colonel told me the story was overblown. Volk Field did not have bombers, only nuclear armed fighter interceptors. Even if they had taken off (they did not) they would have been awaiting orders to engage Soviet naval assets. Assuming the Soviets weren't sailing in Lake Michigan at the time, that would have meant hours of flying and refueling time to reach - where? - the Artic or Pacific Ocean, maybe the Carribean/Cuba (though that was already covered out of Florida at the time).
While the intruder bear part is true, the implication that we were five minutes from bombs dropping is total horseshit.
@ncycat
You are 100% correct that nukes cannot be "accidentally" shipped. For Pete's sake people, despite what you think of your military, the people that handle nukes are hand chosen and are the cream of a highly technical and intelligent work force. There are too many redundant protocols protecting nukes. MOST of your tax dollars spent on nuclear programs are into making them safe to handle and store.
I do believe the "missing nukes" was a part of a planned and coordinated exercise, but I do not subscribe to the premise that it was related in anyway to saber-rattling the Iranians.
"You cannot talk like sane men around a peace table while the atomic bomb itself is ticking beneath it. Do not treat the atomic bomb as a weapon of offense; do not treat it as an instrument of the police. Treat the bomb for what it is: the visible insanity of a civilization that has ceased...to obey the laws of life."- Lewis Mumford, 1946
In 1963, when Mordechai Vanunu was nine years old the Zionists came to his home town of Marrakech, Morocco and convinced his Orthodox father to abandon his general store and pack up the first seven of eleven children for the land of milk and honey. The Vanunu's were banished to the desert of Beesheva, a few months after Shimon Peres, then Israel's Deputy Minister of Defense met with President John Kennedy, inside the White House.
Kennedy told Perez, "You know that we follow very closely the discovery of any nuclear development in the region. This could create a very dangerous situation. For this reason we monitor your nuclear effort. What could you tell me about this?"
Peres replied, "I can tell you most clearly that we will not introduce nuclear weapons to the region, and certainly we will not be the first."
By September of 1986, Peres was convulsing over Vanunu, who had been employed as a lowly tech in his progeny; the secret underground nuclear weapons centre in Dimona. Peres ordered the Mossad, to "Bring the son of a bitch back here."
Peres ordered Vanunu's kidnapping that included a clubbing, drugging and being flung upon an Israeli cargo boat back to Israel for a closed door trial.
In 1985, before quitting the Dimona, Vanunu shot 56 photos of the top-secret labs and production processes that proved Israel had become a major nuclear power by stockpiling between 100 and 200 atomic bombs within the six underground levels where plutonium production, and secret nuclear weapons were assembled without any knowledge, debate or authorization from its own citizens. Israel has yet to allow International Inspectors into the aged Dimona plant which is leaking and endangering the health of its own citizens.
In 1986, Vanunu was sentenced to 18 years for treason and espionage and spent nearly twelve years of it in solitary confinement. For 18 years Vanunu was isolated in a tomb sized cell without a window; a well known form of torture that can cause deep emotional scars and mental impairment. During this period Vanunu was subjected to constant harassments and humiliations by the Mossad to break his will. Amnesty International described the conditions of his ordeal as "cruel, inhuman, and degrading."
For the last four years Vanunu has walked the streets of east Jerusalem and attended churches and political meetings he has met thousands of internationals, pilgrims and tourists. Everyone he has crossed paths with feels sorrow and indignation over his situation. If they are a Christian they also feel anger at Israel for their denying a Christian the right to leave Jerusalem and fade into history, instead of keep making it, as he is in the May 15, 2008 Norwegian Lawyer's Petition for Vanunu posted on:
WAWA Blog May 14, 2008: UPDATE: May 18: PHOTO, May 16, 2008...On May 13, 2008 Vanunu wrote...
http://www.wearewideawake.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=905&Itemid=200
@KEM PATRICK
I do not believe this story has ever been verified by either navy. It is true that the US was unaware that the Soviet diesel subs carried "special weapons", but the Russians (especially Kruschev) were not idiots and had vowed to keep Cuba safe, not turn it into a nuclear battle ground.
It is time for Americans to wake up and realize that Russia was never spurred to world domination. That was American propaganda, skillfully crafted to hide its own intentions, as is painfully obvious today. Instead, Russia was always playing catch-up in the MAD scenario, and sought only to defend its borders (which had been invaded by megalomaniacs several times in the past 2oo years).
AC-tually...those nuclear bombs "accidentally" shipped scross the US and"mistaken" for spent missiles were no such thing. The protocols for shipping nuclear weapons are very stringent, no accident there. And six men died under weird circumstances surrounding that "mistake," leading investigators to speculate that we were dealing with grand theft nuclear weapons destined for a preemptive strike against Iran.
The bear story is bogus to the max. "The security guard hit the wrong button", ___ LOL.
We did however come within ten minutes of Armageddon during the Cuban Missile Crisis but it wasn't a bear that caused it or a security guard that prevented it. It was a Russian submarine commmander who disobeyed his orders. ___Wow, they don't do that!___ Orders are orders.
The sub commander of a fleet of three subs had lost radio contact with his home base and instead of firing atomic missils or atomic torpedoes at our naval fleet at the specific time he had been ordered to fire, he waited ten minutes, surfaced, and contacted his home base to confirm his orders. He was ordered to stand down and return to base.
Ten minutes!! Humanity owes it's existance to a Russian sub commander whoo disobeyed his orders. If he had used atomic weapons on our fleet, or likely even conventional weapons, on that critical day, we had over 40 B-52s airborne in the Southern "Crome Dome" route and the northern "Hard Head" route, fully prepared to 'oblterate' Russia. There were hundreds more B-52s on full alert during those days, fully prepared to launch, plus our ICBMs. ___ KA-BOOM.
If he had made that call five minutes later, you wouldn't be reading this article now.
This outrageously misleading statement is but one of dozens of mistruths stated by Johann Hari in this article. While the article may be well-meaning, Hari has no idea of what he speaks.
The leaders have become used to the risk, and no longer think that an accident is going to happen. They're partly right, I doubt that the detonation of one bomb somewhere is going to trigger the launch of all bombs, but the death toll from that one bomb has the potential to be unthinkable.
Having built a nifty sword of Damocles, we're far too used to being underneath the thing. Ban them, they're not useful weapons. Their only purpose is to render the human race extinct, I thought suicide was unlawful in the countries that have them.