Babylon the Great Expands Her Nuclear Horn (Daniel 7)

The Air Force’s Global Strike Command Is Preparing For A Delivery Of New Nuclear Weapons

Key point: The command is in the beginning of a modernization effort costing tens of billions of dollars.

The U.S. Air Force’s nuclear command says it’s about to undergo a major reorganization as it prepares to field new bombs, missiles, bombers and rockets.

Air Force Global Strike Command stood up in 2009 as the successor to Strategic Air Command, which maintained around-the-clock nuclear alerts during the Cold War.

Today the command’s 34,000 personnel oversee 20 B-2 stealth bombers, 76 B-52 bombers and 450 Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles together capable of delivering thousands of nuclear warheads.

It also operates 62 B-1 bombers that do not have a nuclear mission.

AFGSC’s forces comprise the aerial and ground “legs” of the United States’s atomic triad, which also includes the U.S. Navy’s submarine-launched Trident ballistic missiles.

The command’s forces are capable of extinguishing essentially all life on Earth within a matter of hours.

Accidents and misbehavior marred AFGSC’s early years. In 2014 ICBM crews got caught cheating on tests. In 2018 security forces at Minot Air Force Base, home to a portion of the Minuteman fleet, lost track of some of their weapons. The suicide rate is high in the atomic force.

Now the command is in the beginning of a modernization effort costing tens of billions of dollars. New B-21 stealth bombers are slated to supplant the B-1s and B-2s starting in the mid-2020s. The Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent rocket, a replacement for the 1960s-vintage Minuteman, is in development.

The new Long-Range Stand-Off Weapon, a nuclear-tipped cruise missile, will replace the B-52’s current nuclear cruise missiles. The bomber fleet is getting a refurbished model of its main atomic gravity bomb, the B-61. The missile wings’ security forces are swapping out their five-decade-old UH-1 helicopters for new MH-139s.

AFGSC wants new concepts to accompany the new hardware. “The need for a clear way ahead is more prevalent now than ever with the rising tensions between Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and transnational violent extremism, and the increase in our adversaries’ nuclear capabilities and innovations,” AFGSC stated.

Some reforms already are underway, according to Air Force Magazine reporter Rachel Cohen.

“The Air Force is beefing up its nuclear education and leadership development, charting missileer career paths for reservists and trying to be mindful of operations stress, the need for a sense of purpose and other health concerns. As the service tries to cut its suicide rate, Ray noted his command can draw on the knowledge of a nearby Department of Veterans Affairs hospital in Louisiana.”

Looking ahead, the command is focusing on the bigger picture. “Among the roadmap’s nine overall goals is an effort to grow the services Global Strike can offer U.S. Strategic Command, which oversees daily operations of nuclear forces, as its air component,” Cohen explained.

Global Strike and STRATCOM practiced what that might look like during Exercise Global Thunder earlier this fall [2019], trying approaches that “have not been done since the Cold War ended” and—in some cases—offer more capability than the military had at that time, Ray said.

Global Thunder is an annual exercise where the U.S. and allied nations like Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom train for conflict scenarios involving nuclear forces.

“We don’t have sanctuary in the United States based on lots of different threats,” Ray said. “We start thinking about hypersonics, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, submarines, space and cyber, all those things will be a dimension of this. How do we operate with those particular challenges working against us? That’s probably been more relevant than we’ve done in a very long time.”

He added that the exercise incorporated newer aspects like space, cyber and electronic warfare “probably more correctly,” but said the details are classified.

AFGSC’s modernization efforts could take decades. The new Ground Based Strategic Deterrent won’t even begin to enter service until the late 2020s, at the earliest. B-21s could be in production through the 2030s.

But Ray is in a hurry to refine the command’s operational concepts. “I want to have the operational concepts and how we present the forces redone in the next six to nine months,” he told Air Force.

David Axe serves as Defense Editor of the National Interest. He is the author of the graphic novels  War Fix, War Is Boring and Machete Squad.

Babylon the Great’s New Tactical Nukes

U.S. Submarines Are Getting New W76-2 Tactical Nuclear Warheads (And It Might Be a Giant Mistake)

It was a small, obscure-sounding item in the 2020 defense budget—a mere $19.6 million to procure W76-2 warheads, a sum which could pay for just one quarter of a single F-35A stealth fighter.

But it, along with a select few other items including plans for a Space Force and border wall funding, generated such controversy that Senate Republicans and House Democrats spent three additional months hashing out a compromise defense budget after striking an initial deal this summer.

Ultimately, the House conceded on most of its defense policy priorities—meaning funding will continue flowing to deploy the W76-2 nuclear warheads manufactured by the Pantex plant in Texas.

The W76-2 is a less powerful variant of the W76-1 warhead deployed on 13.5-meter-tall Trident II ballistic missiles deployed on the U.S. Navy’s Ohio-class submarines. Whereas the four 90- or 100-kiloton independently reentering warheads carried on a standard Trident each explode with six times the force of the Little Boy uranium bomb that killed over 60,000 Japanese at Hiroshima, the 5 to 7 kiloton W76-2 has an explosive yield a third or half that of the Hiroshima blast.

The difference reflects that the W76 is a strategic weapon designed to obliterate hardened nuclear missile silos and annihilate large populated areas in an apocalyptic nuclear war—and more pointedly, to deter foes from initiating such a war—while the W76-2 is a tactical nuclear weapon designed to hit individual military bases and formations on the battlefield.

The W76-2 has been championed by officials such as former Defense Secretary James Mattis as a means to give the U.S. military an additional too with which to retaliate rapidly and proportionally to the tactical nuclear weapons possessed by Russia.

But opponents, including many former senior defense and foreign policy officials and a broad swathe of arms control experts fear that introducing such a capability simply increases the risk of devastating nuclear war.

Escalate to De-Escalate?

In the 1950s, it was initially assumed that small nuclear weapons would liberally—even routinely—be employed in future battlefields. However, when their use was simulated in NATO’s aptly-named Carte Blanche wargame in 1955, the results were horrifying.

At best, the “small” nukes were used in such large numbers that Europe was left a devastated, irradiated wasteland. Worse, the fighting could cause both sides to escalate to large-scale strategic nukes.

Today, U.S. defense officials fear that Moscow may espouse an “escalate to deescalate” doctrine in which a tactical nuclear strike is employed to signal Moscow’s resolve. Such a limited strike or strikes might be employed after Russian conventional forces have secured a vulnerable target (ie. the Baltics) and before NATO has mustered a large-scale counterattack, in order to convince member states to back down from a conventional conflict Russia would likely lose.

Unlike strategic nukes, tactical nuclear weapon numbers are not regulated by treaty. Russia has around 2,000 tactical nuclear weapons which can be launched by tube artillery, cruise and ballistic missiles, and air-dropped munitions.

As Russia’s odds of winning a conventional war against a fully mobilized NATO are slim, the thinking goes that intimidating adversaries into backing down by leveraging the threat of Russia’s nuclear arsenal may be Moscow’s only winning strategy.

Arms control advocates point out Russia’s tactical arsenal actually has shrunk in the last decade, so that claims that the threat is growing are dubious. Furthermore, evidence as to whether Moscow genuinely plans on an “escalate to deescalate” strategy is mixed at best, and contradicted by official doctrine.

However, defense hawks argue that new Russian hypersonic missiles may allow Russia’s nukes to hit their targets faster, and with less chance of being intercepted, than before.

Thus, the Trump administration’s 2018 Nuclear Posture Review argued the United States should expand its tactical nuclear strike capabilities so that it could proportionally retaliate against Russian tactical strikes. As with much nuclear strategy, the ultimate “victory” for such weapon is to deter enemies from necessitating their use in the first place.

However, the United Staes already maintains an arsenal of around 500 air-dropped B61 tactical nuclear bombs with a yield that can be dialed from .3 to 400 kilotons. 150 B61s are forward deployed and shared with select NATO partners. These can be dropped by fourth-generation jet fighters (F-15, F-16 and German Tornados), long-range B-2 stealth bombers and soon F-35 stealth fighters.

Advocates for the W76-2 argue that jets aren’t good enough, as they take longer to deploy and reach their target than ballistic missiles and may suffer losses to Russian air defenses.

By comparison, a Trident missile can be launched within minutes of receiving a low-frequency signal from an E-6 Mercury “doomsday” plane, can hit a target thousands of miles away within a half hour traveling at up to twenty-four times the speed of sound, and doesn’t put pilots at risk.

However, critics point out that the submarine launching the Trident will be placed at increased risk afterwards as the launch exposes its general position, endangering the submarine’s roughly 150 crew and the vital strategic missiles it carries.

They also argue that difference in response speed shouldn’t matter that much for retaliating against a “signaling strike,” as the intention is less about hitting a specific military target in a short time window than conveying a political message.

But there’s a much scarier risk: Russia likely wouldn’t be able to distinguish a Trident carrying a tactical warhead from a strategic one. And a Trident launched from the Atlantic at a tactical target in Eastern Europe may look very much like it could be headed to wipe out Russia’s leadership in Moscow instead.

Thus, a tactical Trident strike could inadvertently trigger a strategic nuclear riposte—the kind that could result in some or all the major cities in the United States and/or Europe meeting the same fate as Hiroshima.

In fact, when the United States tested its own “escalate to deescalate” doctrine in the 1983 “Proud Prophet” wargame, it decided to disavow the strategy after discovering it invited precisely such a disastrous consequence.

Weaker, more “useable” nuclear weapons may indeed also be perceived as having a lower threshold for use—particularly by civilian leaders who misjudge the implications—increasing the risk that the chain of escalation described above occurs.

Thus, most arms control experts argue that deploying additional less-destructive nukes actually increases the odds of a civilization-shattering nuclear conflict.

Essentially, whether the W76-2 improves American security is much more about psychology than technology. Would the presence of tactical-yield Trident missiles dissuade U.S. adversaries from employing their own tactical nukes against U.S. forces or their allies?

And even if that’s the case, would that benefit outweigh the risk that the tactical Trident option makes use of nuclear weapons seemingly more usable and likely, and that such use could inadvertently escalate to a strategic nuclear conflict?

We can only hope such scenarios remain strictly theoretical. With the policy fight resolved in the weapon’s favor in Congress, the new warheads should soon enter service on Ohio-class submarines if they have not already, giving them a new tactical nuclear capability along with their established strategic nuclear mission.

Sébastien Roblin holds a master’s degree in conflict resolution from Georgetown University and served as a university instructor for the Peace Corps in China. He has also worked in education, editing, and refugee resettlement in France and the United States. He currently writes on security and military history for War Is Boring.

Image: Reddit.

Babylon the Great’s New Tactical Nukes

U.S. Submarines Are Getting New W76-2 Tactical Nuclear Warheads (And It Might Be a Giant Mistake)

It was a small, obscure-sounding item in the 2020 defense budget—a mere $19.6 million to procure W76-2 warheads, a sum which could pay for just one quarter of a single F-35A stealth fighter.

But it, along with a select few other items including plans for a Space Force and border wall funding, generated such controversy that Senate Republicans and House Democrats spent three additional months hashing out a compromise defense budget after striking an initial deal this summer.

Ultimately, the House conceded on most of its defense policy priorities—meaning funding will continue flowing to deploy the W76-2 nuclear warheads manufactured by the Pantex plant in Texas.

The W76-2 is a less powerful variant of the W76-1 warhead deployed on 13.5-meter-tall Trident II ballistic missiles deployed on the U.S. Navy’s Ohio-class submarines. Whereas the four 90- or 100-kiloton independently reentering warheads carried on a standard Trident each explode with six times the force of the Little Boy uranium bomb that killed over 60,000 Japanese at Hiroshima, the 5 to 7 kiloton W76-2 has an explosive yield a third or half that of the Hiroshima blast.

The difference reflects that the W76 is a strategic weapon designed to obliterate hardened nuclear missile silos and annihilate large populated areas in an apocalyptic nuclear war—and more pointedly, to deter foes from initiating such a war—while the W76-2 is a tactical nuclear weapon designed to hit individual military bases and formations on the battlefield.

The W76-2 has been championed by officials such as former Defense Secretary James Mattis as a means to give the U.S. military an additional too with which to retaliate rapidly and proportionally to the tactical nuclear weapons possessed by Russia.

But opponents, including many former senior defense and foreign policy officials and a broad swathe of arms control experts fear that introducing such a capability simply increases the risk of devastating nuclear war.

Escalate to De-Escalate?

In the 1950s, it was initially assumed that small nuclear weapons would liberally—even routinely—be employed in future battlefields. However, when their use was simulated in NATO’s aptly-named Carte Blanche wargame in 1955, the results were horrifying.

At best, the “small” nukes were used in such large numbers that Europe was left a devastated, irradiated wasteland. Worse, the fighting could cause both sides to escalate to large-scale strategic nukes.

Today, U.S. defense officials fear that Moscow may espouse an “escalate to deescalate” doctrine in which a tactical nuclear strike is employed to signal Moscow’s resolve. Such a limited strike or strikes might be employed after Russian conventional forces have secured a vulnerable target (ie. the Baltics) and before NATO has mustered a large-scale counterattack, in order to convince member states to back down from a conventional conflict Russia would likely lose.

Unlike strategic nukes, tactical nuclear weapon numbers are not regulated by treaty. Russia has around 2,000 tactical nuclear weapons which can be launched by tube artillery, cruise and ballistic missiles, and air-dropped munitions.

As Russia’s odds of winning a conventional war against a fully mobilized NATO are slim, the thinking goes that intimidating adversaries into backing down by leveraging the threat of Russia’s nuclear arsenal may be Moscow’s only winning strategy.

Arms control advocates point out Russia’s tactical arsenal actually has shrunk in the last decade, so that claims that the threat is growing are dubious. Furthermore, evidence as to whether Moscow genuinely plans on an “escalate to deescalate” strategy is mixed at best, and contradicted by official doctrine.

However, defense hawks argue that new Russian hypersonic missiles may allow Russia’s nukes to hit their targets faster, and with less chance of being intercepted, than before.

Thus, the Trump administration’s 2018 Nuclear Posture Review argued the United States should expand its tactical nuclear strike capabilities so that it could proportionally retaliate against Russian tactical strikes. As with much nuclear strategy, the ultimate “victory” for such weapon is to deter enemies from necessitating their use in the first place.

However, the United Staes already maintains an arsenal of around 500 air-dropped B61 tactical nuclear bombs with a yield that can be dialed from .3 to 400 kilotons. 150 B61s are forward deployed and shared with select NATO partners. These can be dropped by fourth-generation jet fighters (F-15, F-16 and German Tornados), long-range B-2 stealth bombers and soon F-35 stealth fighters.

Advocates for the W76-2 argue that jets aren’t good enough, as they take longer to deploy and reach their target than ballistic missiles and may suffer losses to Russian air defenses.

By comparison, a Trident missile can be launched within minutes of receiving a low-frequency signal from an E-6 Mercury “doomsday” plane, can hit a target thousands of miles away within a half hour traveling at up to twenty-four times the speed of sound, and doesn’t put pilots at risk.

However, critics point out that the submarine launching the Trident will be placed at increased risk afterwards as the launch exposes its general position, endangering the submarine’s roughly 150 crew and the vital strategic missiles it carries.

They also argue that difference in response speed shouldn’t matter that much for retaliating against a “signaling strike,” as the intention is less about hitting a specific military target in a short time window than conveying a political message.

But there’s a much scarier risk: Russia likely wouldn’t be able to distinguish a Trident carrying a tactical warhead from a strategic one. And a Trident launched from the Atlantic at a tactical target in Eastern Europe may look very much like it could be headed to wipe out Russia’s leadership in Moscow instead.

Thus, a tactical Trident strike could inadvertently trigger a strategic nuclear riposte—the kind that could result in some or all the major cities in the United States and/or Europe meeting the same fate as Hiroshima.

In fact, when the United States tested its own “escalate to deescalate” doctrine in the 1983 “Proud Prophet” wargame, it decided to disavow the strategy after discovering it invited precisely such a disastrous consequence.

Weaker, more “useable” nuclear weapons may indeed also be perceived as having a lower threshold for use—particularly by civilian leaders who misjudge the implications—increasing the risk that the chain of escalation described above occurs.

Thus, most arms control experts argue that deploying additional less-destructive nukes actually increases the odds of a civilization-shattering nuclear conflict.

Essentially, whether the W76-2 improves American security is much more about psychology than technology. Would the presence of tactical-yield Trident missiles dissuade U.S. adversaries from employing their own tactical nukes against U.S. forces or their allies?

And even if that’s the case, would that benefit outweigh the risk that the tactical Trident option makes use of nuclear weapons seemingly more usable and likely, and that such use could inadvertently escalate to a strategic nuclear conflict?

We can only hope such scenarios remain strictly theoretical. With the policy fight resolved in the weapon’s favor in Congress, the new warheads should soon enter service on Ohio-class submarines if they have not already, giving them a new tactical nuclear capability along with their established strategic nuclear mission.

Sébastien Roblin holds a master’s degree in conflict resolution from Georgetown University and served as a university instructor for the Peace Corps in China. He has also worked in education, editing, and refugee resettlement in France and the United States. He currently writes on security and military history for War Is Boring.

Image: Reddit.

The Church’s Blessings on Nuclear War

Intercontinental ballistic missile Topol-M exhibited at the annual Victory day Parade dress rehearsal on May 6, 2012 in Moscow, Russia. Credit: Pukhov K / Shutterstock

Russian Orthodox Church considers ending blessings for nuclear weapons

Moscow, Russia, Jul 10, 2019 / 05:00 pm (CNA).- The Russian Orthodox Church is debating an end to the practice of blessing large scale weapons, including nuclear missiles. 

Last month, a committee on ecclesial law met in Moscow and recommended ending the practice of blessing missiles and warheads, and suggested that priests should instead bless only individual soldiers and their personal weapons. 

According to a report by Religion News Service, Bishop Savva Tutunov of the Moscow Patriarchate said that it would be more appropriate to bless only the warrior who is defending their country, and their own personal weapon–instead of bombs. 

“One can talk about the blessing of a warrior on military duty in defense of the fatherland,” said Tutunov. 

“At the end of the corresponding ritual, the personal weapon is also blessed — precisely because it is connected to the individual person who is receiving the blessing. By the same reasoning, weapons of mass destruction should not be sanctified,” he said.

The proposal to end the blessings for larger weapons has yet to be approved by Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, head of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Weapons systems, including Topol-class intercontinental ballistic missiles, are frequently blessed by members of the Russian Orthodox clergy during military parades and other events. These blessings are seen as a way of spiritually protecting the country. 

In 2007, Russia’s nuclear weapons were consecrated in a service at the Christ the Savior Cathedral in Moscow. In Russian Orthodoxy, the patron saint of Russia’s nuclear weapons is St. Seraphim. 

Tutunov’s view is not universally held in the Orthodox Church. According to  the piece published by Religion News Service, Fr. Vsevolod Chaplain, a former spokesman for the Patriarch of Moscow, said that Russia’s nuclear arsenal is akin to the “guardian angels” of the country and are needed to protect Orthodoxy. 

“Only nuclear weapons protect Russia from enslavement by the West,” Chaplin said to a Russian newspaper. 

Patriarch Kirill is rumored to have been a KGB agent prior to the fall of the Soviet Union. His predecessor, Patriarch Alexy II is also believed to have been a KGB agent. The Moscow Patriarchate denies this. 

The Catholic Church is explicitly opposed to nuclear weapons, and supports countries dismantling their arsenals. 

Pope St. John XXIII called for the banning of nuclear weapons and wrote that “a general agreement must be reached on a suitable disarmament program, with an effective system of mutual control” in his 1963 encyclical Pacem in Terris. 

The Catechism of the Catholic Church describes acts of war aimed at the indiscriminate destruction of entire cities or large areas as “a crime against God and man.” 

“A danger of modern warfare is that it provides the opportunity to those who possess modern scientific weapons – especially atomic, biological, or chemical weapons – to commit such crimes.”

In November, Pope Francis is expected to visit Nagasaki and Hiroshima–cities where the United States deployed two atomic bombs during World War II–on his apostolic visit to Japan.

Russian Nukes Are Considered Holy!

THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH MAY STOP BLESSING NUCLEAR WEAPONS

A faction of clergy within the Russian Orthodox Church wants to end the eyebrow-raising practice of blessing the country’s nuclear missiles.

First of all, yes: Russian priests currently sprinkle holy water on nuclear missiles as part of an old tradition in which Orthodox priests bless soldiers and their weapons, reports Religion News Service. But that may change, as some priests feel that intercontinental ballistic missiles belong in a different category from individual firearms.

Faith Militant

The Russian military and the Russian Orthodox church have long worked hand in hand, according to RNS, framing many of the country’s military conflicts as holy wars. The nuclear arsenal even has its own patron saint — RNS reports that St. Seraphim’s remains were found in a Russian town that housed several nuclear facilities.

As such, the push to stop blessing nukes faces strong opposition among members of the clergy, such as the high-ranking priest Vsevolod Chaplin, who referred to the country’s nukes as “guardian angels.”

“Only nuclear weapons protect Russia from enslavement by the West,” Chaplin once said, per RNS.

Changing Hearts

One priest, Dmitry Tsorionov, parted from the more militant aspects of the Orthodox Church after seeing men willingly sign up to fight Russia’s wars “under the banner of Christ,” he told RNS. Now he wants to see less warmongering among the clergy.

“It was not uncommon to see how church functionaries openly flirted with these toxic ideas,” he told RNS. “It was only then that I finally realized what the blessing of military hardware leads to.”

Bearbeite"Russian Nukes Are Considered Holy!"

Russia’s Satanic Nuclear Bomb is Ready

This file photo shows a Russian Yars RS-24 intercontinental ballistic missile system in Red Square during the Victory Day military parade in Moscow, Russia, on May 9, 2017.

PHOTO: NATALIA KOLESNIKOVA/AFP/GETTY

RUSSIA’S ‚INVULNERABLE‘ SATAN 2 NUCLEAR MISSILE WILL BE READY TO FIRE BY THE END OF 2020, SPACE AGENCY OFFICIAL SAYS

By David Brennan On 7/08/19 at 6:25 AM EDT

NEWS RUSSIA WEAPONS MISSILE ICBM

Russia’s latest nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missile—which Russian President Vladimir Putin has claimed can defeat all existing American defenses—will complete its testing phase by the end of 2020, the country’s space agency has announced.

Dmitry Rogozin, the head of Russia’s state space corporation Roscosmos, told reporters Saturday that the RS-28 Sarmat ICBM—known in the West by its NATO code name „Satan 2″—is already undergoing launch tests ahead of its adoption by Russian armed forces.

„Firing tests are already underway,“ Rogozin told reporters, according to state news agency Tass. „The bulk of firing tests will be completed by the end of the year. We expect the closing stage of tests at the end of next year.“

Though Rogozin said the tests remain on schedule, the adoption of the RS-28 Sarmat has been beset by delays. It was originally supposed to become operational by 2016, but hold ups meant it was only even announced by Putin in March 2018 at his annual state of the nation address.

Putin said that the „invulnerable“ silo-based weapon has been in development since 2001, following President George W. Bush’s decision to pull out of a 1972 U.S.-Soviet anti-ballistic missile treaty. Revealing the weapon, Putin addressed the U.S. and said he had warned Bush not to withdraw from the treaty. „You didn’t listen to our country then,“ he said, „Listen to us now.

The massive 220-ton weapon will replace the Cold War-era RS-36M Voyevoda missiles. The RS-28 Sarmat will reportedly carry a nuclear payload large enough to wipe out an area the size of Texas or France.

Putin said the missile „has practically no range restrictions,“ though The Guardian cited state media reports detailing a range of around 6,800 miles. Regardless, the president claimed it can evade „even the most advanced missile defense systems,“ such as those fielded by the U.S.

Traveling at Mach 10—around 16,000 m.p.h.—the RS-28 Sarmat can carry 10 to 15 warheads, all of which can target a different location. Putin’s announcement of the weapon was accompanied by an unsettling CGI video demonstrating its capabilities, in which nuclear warheads were shown falling on a region closely resembling the Tampa Bay area of Florida.

Viktor Bondarev, the head of Russian Senate’s Defense and Security Committee, has claimed that the U.S. would need 500 missiles to defend against one RS-28 Sarmat launch.

American defense officials have warned that the U.S. must rethink its overarching military strategy, and pivot from the counter-terrorism stance adopted since 9/11 back to one of great power competition.

Russia's New Satanic Nuke

Putin's scientists readying 'TEXAS KILLER' nuke that could obliterate whole countries

The RS-28 Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile known in Russia as "Satan 2" will be the world's heaviest and most powerful nuclear missile when it is complete.

Satan 2 missiles are capable of carrying nuclear warheads with payloads of up to 20,000 kilotons – more than one thousand times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Nagasaki.

At maximum payload a direct hit on New York would kill 4.5million people, injure 3.6million, and send radioactive fallout stretching more than 600 miles.

SHOCK: The missile has the power to take out an area the size of Texas

The "Texas Killer" is Russia’s newest nuclear missile design, and when completed will be the heaviest weapon of its kind to ever be deployed.

It can reportedly carry 10 heavy nuclear warheads and is designed to break through U.S. missile defense systems.

Last year, the Defense Ministry’s Zvezda news agency claimed Sarmat was so powerful, that a single missile could evade Washington’s defenses and wipe out the entire state of Texas.

DANGER: This missile has the potential to level several cities in one go

But, the Russian scientists in charge of developing Satan 2 have suffered a setback which means that it won't be ready until later this year according to the Moscow Times.

Fears over all-out nuclear war are now at fever pitch after Kim Jong-un revealed that North Korea is ready to launch its most powerful nuke ever.

Donald Trump has not allayed fears by preparing to set up a missile system on the border with the secretive state.

In January it was also revealed that the US was planning a surprise nuke attack on China and Russia.

Satan: The New Nuclear Standard

Satan 2: World's most powerful nuclear weapon exposed

Russia's State Rocket Center named after Makeyev has declassified first photos of MS-28, Sarmat missile, better known as "Satan 2". The nuclear capacity of the new missile is enough to wipe out the US East Coast in a few minutes.

The "Satan 2" missile appears on the website of the design bureau under the title "Experimental design work "Sarmat." The state contract for the development of the new missile was signed in June 2011. The purpose of its creation is to ensure guaranteed and effective implementation of nuclear deterrent tasks by Russia's strategic forces.

The new "Satan-2" missile will replace RS-36M "Satan" - the intercontinental missile nuclear complex that was developed in the 1970s by Yuzhnoye Design Bureau.

"Satan 2" has thus become the world's most powerful weapon. The capacity of the missile is 40 megatons, which is 2,000 times the capacity of the bombs that the USA dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

According to Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Russia's current SS-18 Satan warhead can destroy 3/4 of the State of New York, while 5-6 warheads will be able to wipe out all the US East Coast. One Satan-2 missile can carry up to a dozen of such warheads.

Satan 2 will be put into operation in 2018.

Pravda.Ru

Babylon Will Be Destroyed In One Hour (Rev 18:17)

Russia Reveals 'Satan 2' Nuclear Missile Capable of Destroying Texas in One Blow

Michael Nunez

Russia is flexing its military muscle as tensions with the US simmer in the wake of a heated third presidential debate, where Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton called Republican candidate Donald Trump a “puppet” for Russian President Vladimir Putin. Now, Russia has declassified the first image of its new thermonuclear intercontinental ballistic missile.

The RS-28 Sarmat missile—better known as the Satan 2 nuclear missile—has finally been revealed after years of being hyped by the Russian government. According to a Russian publication aligned with the Kremlin called Sputnik, the super-nuke has a payload capable of destroying an area “the size of Texas.”

The new weapon can deploy warheads of 40 megatons, or about 2,000 times as powerful as the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagaski in 1945.

Former assistant secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy Dr. Paul Craig Roberts called the atomic bombs that Washington dropped on Japan “popguns” compared to today’s thermo-nuclear weapons. “One Russian SS-18 wipes out three-fourths of New York state for thousands of years,” he said in a blog post. “Five or six of these ‘Satans’ as they are known by the US military, and the East Coast of the United States disappears.”

To make it even more frightening, the Satan 2 is also capable of evading radar defenses and could travel far enough to strike the US East and West Coast.

The picture of the rocket was published today by chief designers at Makeyev Rocket Design Bureau. Along with photos of the rocket, the designers included the following statement (roughly translated by Google Translate).

In accordance with the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation: On the state defense order for 2010 and the planning period 2012-2013. JSC SRC Makeyev instructed to begin the development of OCD Sarmat. In June 2011, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation signed a state contract for OCD Sarmat. Prospective strategic missile systems (RKSN) Sarmat is created in order to secure and effective nuclear deterrent tasks of Russia’s strategic forces.

This rough translation can give you at least some insight into how long the engineers have been working on this missile, and it shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who has been following the US-Russia relations. In 2013, Russian announced it would begin deploying a new type of long-range missile to replace its Cold War standby, the original Satan missile. The Satan 2 missile realization of the deployment.

The original Satan missile was developed in the 1970s, as the Soviet Union achieved nuclear parity with the US in the wake of the Cold War. Those missiles are now approaching the end of their service lives. US and Russia both signed treaties in 2010 restricting the number of intercontinental ballistic missiles the countries would keep in reserve, but despite the truce, Russia said it must maintain a strong nuclear deterrent because of the US military involvement in Europe. The Satan 2 will be put into service in late 2018, and Russian officials say it will fully replace the old Satan missiles by 2020.

Russia’s decision to suddenly reveal the new missile is especially troubling as tensions between the country and US are flaring up over hacking allegations and conflict in Syria. While we don’t expect any immediate military conflicts with our NATO allies, it is certainly upsetting to know that people are actually spending time building such catastrophic weapons.

Russia’s New “Satanic” Nuclear Bomb (Daniel 7:7)

Russia’s new “Satan 2″ nuclear missile system can’t be stopped, but can destroy an entire nation in a flash

By: JD Heyes

Date: May 26, 2016

Is the world about to enter a dangerous new nuclear phase that will once again heighten global tensions between superpowers? Yes, if one recent report is to be believed.
As noted by the UK’s Mirror, Russia is gearing up to test-fire a nuclear weapon which supposedly is powerful enough to wipe out entire countries in a single massive strike. The “Satan 2” is rumored to be the most powerful nuclear design ever, and what’s more, it is believed to be equipped with new stealth technology to make it invisible to enemy radar systems.
In what some will surely call a doomsday weapon, when fully developed and deployed it may never have to be used in order to put Moscow at the head of every negotiating table for the foreseeable future. And it is most likely keeping U.S. military and intelligence officials up at night, if it exists, as current missile defenses are quite probably ineffective against such a weapon.
The weapon’s official name is the RS-28 Sarmat, and it is slated to replace existing but aging Soviet-era R-36M missiles, which NATO code-named “Satan” back in the days of the [first] Cold War.
“In this sense, the Sarmat missile will not only become the R-36M’s successor, but also to some extent it will determine in which direction nuclear deterrence in the world will develop,” the Russian news network Zvezda reported.
As noted by The National Interest:

The first prototype missiles have already been built. The first test launches are scheduled for later this year. Should the tests prove successful, the Sarmat will enter into full production so that it enters operational service in 2018.

“The development of the Sarmat silo-based missile system with a heavy missile is nearing completion,” Col. Gen. Sergei Karakayev, commander of Russia’s Strategic Missile Forces told the Moscow-based TASS News agency. “It will replace the Voyevoda missile system in the Uzhur missile division and the Dombarovsky position area.”
There is not much hard data available on the massive missile, but what information is publicly known suggests a system that is extremely formidable, like the appropriately named “Satan” system it will replace. That said, Russia did not develop the Sarmat completely from scratch, The National Interest (TNI) reported. The new missile uses a modernized variant of the Voyevoda’s liquid-fueled rocket motors; it will be equipped with four RD-274 engines to power it through its first phase.
The Mirror noted that some believe the 100-ton missile, which has a 10-ton payload, packs enough nuclear explosive power to destroy a country the size of France (or a U.S. state the size of Texas, where a sizable portion of U.S. military power is based).
TNI noted further that U.S. and Western intelligence estimate that the Sarmat may carry as many as 15 independently targeted nuclear warheads, and has a range of 6,000 miles. Once it is deployed it will become the largest ICBM ever built.
“Like other modern Russian ICBMs such as the Yars, Topol-M and the Bulava, the Sarmat is being designed specifically to overcome ballistic missile defenses using a combination of decoys, a host of countermeasures and sheer speed. It might also be equipped with maneuvering warheads—which would make it much more difficult to intercept,” The National Interest reported.
As for the U.S., the Air Force has launched preliminary development on a new Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent system which includes a new bomber, the B-21, to replace existing Minuteman III ICBMs. Currently, the service is upgrading the missiles, but Air Force officials have testified before Congress that they don’t believe it will provide assured deterrence as enemy missile defenses rapidly improve.
In the nuclear age, global conflict on the scale of the world wars is viewed as impossible to fathom, not just unlikely to occur. But if you remove the nuclear-deterrent factor – if somehow, someday, they are taken out of the response equation and not replaced with a weapon equally destructive – we will see war on a global scale once again.

Iranian Satan Calls The Kettle Black (Ezekiel 17)

 

Khamenei calls US ”great Satan”

IANS

Posted at: May 18 2016 3:37PM

Iran’s top cleric Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei on Wednesday called the US an “arch-tyrant and the great Satan”.

“The US is the arch-tyrant and the great Satan. Those who implement US policies in the region are adherents of tyranny,” Press TV quoted Khamenei as saying.

He also accused some Muslim countries of betraying their people by helping the US implement its policies in the region.

“Some Islamic governments are betraying their people and the Islamic Ummah and paving the way for the American influence,” Khamenei told participants at an international Quran competition.

Read more at http://www.thestatesman.com/mobi/news/world/khamenei-calls-us-great-satan/143162.html#smmiYOf2Yhtio8rZ.99

The Hellacious Iranian Horn Is Correct (Dan 8:4)

Iran leader predicts Israel gone within 25 years

Sep 21 2015

“I say that you (Israelis) will not see the coming 25 years and, God willing, there will not be something named the Zionist regime in next 25 years“, he said. “With Allah’s help, there will be no such thing as a Zionist regime in 25 years”. “Secondly, until then, struggling, heroic and Jihadi morale will leave no moment of serenity for Zionists”, Khamenei said. The statements, made in front of hundreds of Iranians in Tehran, appear to contrast the more conciliatory tone of President Hassan Rouhani.

According to columnist Aaron David Miller of The Wall Street Journal, the success of the Ira
n nuclear deal this 2015 is not so much reliant on how promising the proposal is. News reports suggest that the United States and our negotiating partners are poised to make concessions that would undermine our ability to ensure that Iran remains without the uranium enrichment capacity and technology necessary to develop nuclear weapons. Wyden said his parents escaped Germany in the 1930s, but not before both of his grandfathers lost their livelihoods and his father was kicked out of school for being Jewish. We can always think of ways of making a deal better. The Islamic Republic supports Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Lebanon’s Hezbollah militants. His latest remarks are likely to be seized upon by critics of the agreement as proof that Iran can not be trusted.

We also have to consider the feelings of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and other friends in the area. Cicilline said the agreement “forces Iran to relinquish its nuclear weapons ambitions and reaffirms, by its own language, that ‘under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop, or acquire any nuclear weapons”. “The mullahs are not part of any regional solution, they are indeed the main source of the problem”, said Ali Safavi of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the main Iranian dissident group. Republicans have long criticized the agreement citing reasons that include it being an existential “threat to Israel”, one of the U.S.’s closest allies in the region. The comments from Khamenei, who has the final say on all matters of state in Iran, came after the US Congress began debate on Tuesday on the nuclear agreement reached with Iran. Even if the GOP could muster the bipartisan support needed to override a veto, the other nations involved in the talks have signaled they will go ahead with the lifting of sanctions against Iran. “There are those [in Iran] who insist to dress the Big Satan America in costumes, and paint it as an angel”, he said. NYSE

Post http://nysepost.com/iran-leader-predicts-israel-gone-within-25-years-1548

Iran Ready To Seal The Deal (Revelation 6:1)

Iran’s Khamenei says could accept fair nuclear compromise

By Mehrdad Balali and Shadia Nasralla

DUBAI/MUNICH

Iraqi women walk past a poster depicting images of Shi’ite Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei at al-Firdous Square in Baghdad February 12, 2014.

(Reuters) – Iran’s supreme leader said on Sunday he could accept a compromise in nuclear talks and gave his strongest defense yet of President Hassan Rouhani’s decision to negotiate with the West, a policy opposed by powerful hardliners at home.

As his foreign minister met counterparties in the talks at a conference in Munich, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said he “firmly” backed a fair nuclear deal.

“I would go along with any agreement that could be made. Of course, if it is not a bad deal. No agreement is better than an agreement which runs contrary to our nation’s interests,” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told Iranian air force personnel, according to official news agencies.

In a speech that still underlined his suspicions about Western nations that he characterized as “bullies”, Khamenei backed Rouhani’s negotiations with them and said any workable deal would mean both sides easing their demands.

“As the president said, negotiations mean reaching a common point. Therefore, the other party … should not expect its illogical expectations to be materialized. This means that one side would not end up getting all it wants.”

“I am for reaching a good settlement and the Iranian nation too will certainly not oppose any deal to uphold its dignity and integrity,” Khamenei said, an apparent warning to hardliners that they might have to accept a deal with powers including the United States, commonly known in Iran as “the Great Satan”.

Negotiators have set a June 30 final deadline for an accord, and Western officials have said they aim to agree on the substance of such a deal by March.

In Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who will address the U.S. Congress on Iran on March 3 — to the annoyance of the Obama administration — said: “We will do everything and will take any action to foil this bad and dangerous agreement.”

“World powers and Iran are charging ahead to an agreement that would allow Iran to arm itself with nuclear weaponry, something that would imperil the existence of the State of Israel,” Netanyahu told his weekly cabinet meeting.

“IRANIANS KNOW”

The nuclear talks with the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and France are aimed at clinching an accord that would ease Western concerns that Tehran could pursue a convert nuclear weapons program, in return for the lifting of sanctions that have ravaged the Iranian economy.

Major sticking points are the pace at which sanctions would be removed, the size of Iran’s nuclear fuel-producing capacity — a key consideration in preventing any output of bomb material — and the length of any agreement.

“Our (nuclear) negotiators are trying to take the weapon of sanctions away from the enemy. If they can, so much the better. If they fail, everyone should know there are many ways at our disposal to dull this weapon,” Khamenei said.

Any deal “must be concluded in one stage and consist of clear and detailed specifications, and not subject to (various) interpretations,” he said.

“Given our past experience in dealing with the (West), a final draft must not leave any room for the other side to repeatedly extract concessions.”

Separately, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif denied on Sunday a Reuters report quoting unidentified senior Iranian officials saying he had told the United States during the talks that Rouhani’s political clout would be heavily damaged if negotiations failed.

“I believe the entire Iranian population understands that this government, that Dr Rouhani, his administration and the government in its entirety supported our efforts in the negotiations,” Zarif told a security conference in Munich where he met counterparties in the negotiations, in what he called a “very serious discussion”.

“Everybody has taken every necessary measure to make sure we succeed. All Iranians know this. If we fail, and I hope we won’t, they (Iranians) will not consider us responsible for that failure. They will consider attempts (to ask) too much from Iran as a reason for failure.”

Zarif said it was in everyone’s interest to seal an agreement by the June 30 deadline, but added: “I don’t think if we don’t have an agreement it will be the end of the world.”

U.S. Senator John McCain, a hawkish Republican, warned in Munich that while Iran was negotiating now, its underlying goal was “to drive Western influence out of the Middle East”.

(Additional reporting by Stephen Brown and Noah Barkin in Munich, Dan Williams in Jerusalem and Parisa Hafezi in Ankara; Writing by Stephen Brown; Editing by Mark Heinrich and Robin Pomeroy)

The Iran Revolutionary Guard Threatens Israel (Daniel 8:4)

Iranian IRGC chief vows ‘devastating thunderbolts’ on Israel

Tehran threatens Israel after strike attributed to the IAF killed six Hezbollah fighters and six Iranian military men, including a general.

Roi Kais
Published: 01.20.15, 14:45 / Israel News

After confirming one of its generals was among those killed in an airstrike attributed to Israel in the Syrian Golan on Sunday, the commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) said Tuesday that Israel should expect “devastating thunderbolts” in response to the attack.

This, Mohammad Ali Jafari said, will be “a new beginning point for the imminent collapse of the Zionist Regime.”

Tensions in the Golan Heights have been high since Sunday, when a helicopter fired two missiles, killing Jihad Mughniyeh, Hezbollah’s commander of the Syrian Golan sector and the son of master terrorist Imad Mughniyeh, along with five other Hezbollah fighters and six Iranian military personnel – including Iranian General Mohammed Ali Allah Dadi of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. The attack was largely attributed to Israel, but so the IDF has neither confirmed nor denied the reports.

Meanwhile, Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehqan said Tuesday in a meeting with his Russian counterpart Sergei Shoigu that “the terrorist act by the Zionist regime in the Golan Heights was the continuation of the regime’s crimes in Palestine, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon and their open support for Takfiri terrorists.”

The IDF raised its alert level on the northern front on Monday, in positions along the border with Syrian and Lebanon, as foreign media outlets reported that Iron Dome batteries were being deployed in the North.

Apart from the deployment of the missile interceptor batteries on the northern front – reported by Sky News in Arabic – there has not been a significant reinforcement of the forces on the border.
Yet, there are concerns in the security establishment that Hezbollah will attempt a retaliatory terror attack against Israeli forces which operate along the border. Thus, the soldiers were ordered to increase their level of alert and preparedness.

The international community is also concerned of a retalitory attack – France and the United States were working together on the diplomatic level in an attempt to keep restraint among all sides, Lebanese newspaper An-Nahar reported.

Hezbollah sources told the paper the organization’s response to the attack will likely happen outside of Lebanon.

Newspapers affiliated with Hezbollah estimated that organization chief Hassan Nasrallah will make a speech soon to respond to the attack. Nasrallah was scheduled to speak on February 16 on the 7th anniversary of Imad Mughniyeh’s death, as he does every year, but some believe he will speak as early as next week.

Iran Calls For Unity Against “Little Satan”

Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Calls on World Muslims to Unite against Israel over Gaza Crisis

The Israel Gaza Crisis

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has called on Muslims across the world to unite against Israel over the ongoing crisis in Gaza.

Stating that Israel is benefiting from the “Islamic world’s negligence”, Khamenei hailed Iran’s standpoint on the conflict.

“Zionists are committing these crimes taking advantage of the Islamic world’s negligence. The massacre in Gaza by Zionists should awaken Muslim governments and nations to leave any discord and get united,” he said at a meeting, which was also attended by Iran’s President Hassan Rohani and other cabinet members.

The Iranian administration has also been condemning Israeli forces for their deadly attacks that have claimed a number Palestinian civilians.

Ali Akbar Velayati, a top aide of Khamenei on international affairs, said in a statement: “The horrifying and savage crimes of the Zionist regime against the defenceless people of Gaza once again unveiled the savagery, war-mongering and aggressive nature of this regime to the people of the world.”

“All Muslims are duty-bound to maintain their vigilance in order not to be entangled in the pre-planned scenario of the Zionist enemy and make growing efforts, more than ever, to defuse the Zionist enemy’s objectives through a proper understanding of the realities and the regional developments as well as maintaining their unity, solidarity and consensus.”

The latest remarks follow the promise of Hossein Sheikholeslam, Iran’s director general of the parliament of international affairs, to support the cause of Palestinians “with all its might”.

In the week-long confrontation, at least 178 Palestinians have been killed and more than 1,000 injured. So far there have been no casualties on the Israeli side.

The Enmity of the Great Satan

Khamenei: Nuclear Talks Expose “Enmity” of U.S. “Satan”

by TheTower.org Staff | 01.10.14 10:39 am

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei lashed out against the United States on Thursday.

“We had announced previously that on certain issues, if we feel it is expedient, we would negotiate with the Satan (the United States) to deter its evil,” Khamenei told a gathering, reported by the official IRNA news agency. “The nuclear talks showed the enmity of America against Iran, Iranians, Islam and Muslims.”

The statements came amid growing concerns - including from largely sympathetic outlets corners – that Iranian president Hassan Rouhani lacks the will or ability to substantially change Iranian domestic and foreign policy. By law and assisted by raw political power, the Supreme Leader controls among other things Iran’s foreign policy. For his part Rouhani used to be openly acknowledged as close to Khamenei - a Reuters article from 2008 is to the point, and the characterization seems straightforwardly accurate - but since his election he has been framed by Western media outlets as a moderate opponent of the regime. It is not yet clear to what extent the White House will condemn Khamenei’s remarks. The administration was markedly slow in condemning past inflamatory statements by Khamenei.