Babylon Won’t Be As Lucky This Time (Ezekiel 17)

 
Newly declassified documents reveal how America missed a major nuclear war scare

Marc Ambinder
Bettmann/CORBIS
October 23, 2015

A freshly declassified report confirms that the U.S. intelligence community, in 1983 and 1984, gave insufficient weight to evidence that the leaders of the Soviet Union genuinely feared a surprise nuclear missile attack from the West, misinterpreted Kremlin pronouncements as propaganda, and, most critically, failed to provide warning about significant changes to Soviet military and intelligence postures in the wake of “Able Archer ’83.” That 10-day NATO exercise in November of 1983 is suspected of unintentionally and quietly pushing America and the Soviet Union closer to war. And now, there’s new evidence suggesting those suspicions were right on.

Released last week by FOIA’s de-facto court of appeals, the 109-page report (read it below), prepared in 1990, offers a searing indictment of the American intelligence community. And its publication, long anticipated by Cold War historians, may open old wounds.

For the past few years, I’ve been working on a book about Able Archer for Simon and Schuster. My basic question: Was whatever happened during that exercise real enough to deserve the term “war scare”? Did the U.S. and the Soviet Union move closer to the brink without realizing it?
The President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board report is as official an answer as we can get from the U.S. government : Yes. The Able Archer war scare was real.

 As it turns out, the anxiety level was considerably higher than almost anyone believed was possible. For more than a decade, historians and reporters have debated one major question: Did the Soviets sincerely believe that the U.S. would use a military exercise like Able Archer as cover to launch some sort of first strike on the Soviet Union? Or, was the heightened anxiety part of an elaborate deception to gain concessions when (and if) arms control talks resumed?

The vast intelligence-gathering sensors of the Soviet Union had turned up to indications that the West was planning a nuclear attack. Because the nexus of world events had shifted against the Soviet Union, President Reagan would find a way to exploit their vulnerabilities and undertake some sort of grand empirical adventure — maybe an invasion to save Poland, or even a surgical decapitation attack against the Soviet leadership itself.

Robert Gates, who was deputy director for intelligence at the CIA at the time, told me earlier this year that he regards the downgrading of Soviet war fears as a major intelligence failure. (He has elaborated on this subject in a book). Several Reagan administration officials, including Bud McFarlane, the president’s national security adviser at the time, contend that President Reagan’s response upon learning that there was even a possibility that the Soviet leadership was that paranoid helped convince him to pursue diplomacy more aggressively, and saber-rattling, less so. But the author of early CIA reports, Fritz Ermarth, contends that hindsight bias makes it easy to second-guess the CIA, and insists that it far overstates the case to say that the world moved closer to actual conflict.
But according to the declassified PFIAB report, there was a consistent body of evidence suggesting this fear was widespread, and that the unusual nature of Able Archer magnified it.

The Soviet military put itself on alert status during Able Archer, and ended it as Able Archer ended; the intelligence community missed this at the time.

Air defense brigades in Warsaw Pact countries were placed on alert; the CIA dismissed this at the time as standard counter-exercising.

Nuclear weapons were transported from storage units to their forward deployed positions.

The Soviets conducted a significantly larger number of reconnaissance flights over NATO territory during Able Archer than during any other similarly measured time period.

The Soviets increased their readiness and alert levels force-wide. (This ended as Able Archer ended, too).

Air traffic in the Soviet Union was suspended during the exercise too.

The PFIAB report gives weight to the reports of Oleg Gordievsky, the KGB agent who spied for Britain, and who reported in early 1984 on Soviet fears about the war scare.

Nate Jones of the National Security Archive at George Washington University has written at length about Able Archer, and his primers are worth reading for the full background. Jones also superintended the process to push the document through a mandatory declassification review.

But the upshot of these recently declassified documents is clear: There was a major nuclear war scare in 1983. And American intelligence officials missed it.

Iran’s Breakout Time Down From 1 Year To Half (Rev 16)

 

Former IAEA Deputy Director: Current Deal’s Breakout Time Would Be Seven or Eight Months

by TheTower.org Staff | 03.30.15 6:04 pm
 

Top analysts, including a former top official at the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog, are calling into question basic assumptions about the wisdom of the deal currently being hammered out in Lausanne, Switzerland between the P5+1 global powers and Iran. At stake is whether the administration’s publicly-expressed goal for the talks—that they produce a deal that keeps Iran a year from nuclear breakout for roughly the next decade—is a tenable way to prevent the Iranians from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

In an analysis published Saturday, Olli Heinonen, former deputy director-general for safeguards at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and now at Harvard University, argued that a one-year breakout window is not enough to prevent the Iranians from dashing across the nuclear finish line—even assuming that the rumored terms could achieve such a one-year period, which Heinonen calculated is not at all certain. Instead, it appears that the deal shaping up would put Iran perhaps only seven to eight months from breakout. Assuming that Iran will be able to operate 6,500 centrifuges, Heinonen estimated that using first-generation centrifuges, the breakout time would be nine months; however, given the stockpile of low-enriched uranium the Iranians have on hand, he writes that “a breakout time of between seven and eight months would…be possible.”

Real world constraints on detection mean that even with a one year breakout time, the U.S. might not have sufficient time to prevent the Iranians from constructing a nuclear bomb should the Islamic Republic go down that path. If Iran attempted to conceal its nuclear activities from the IAEA, it would take the organization at least two months to sift through samples and conduct the proper analysis. Further samples would likely be needed, expanding the detection time to three months. Then the IAEA would need time to report to the United Nations Security Council, which would need more time to respond.

Heinonen, along with Michael Hayden, the former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and Ray Takeyh, a former State Department advisor on Iranian affairs in the Obama administration, wrote last week in The Washington Post about additional real-world constraints that make one year an inadequate time to catch Iran cheating and act:

The United States would have to convince the other member states invested in the agreement — including veto-wielding Russia and China — that the accord was being violated and that forceful action was needed. Time would be spent quarrelling over divergent views, with several outcomes possible, including a Security Council presidential statement or a resolution whose content would need to be agreed upon. And only then could new economic sanctions be imposed on Iran.

Either prior to or after the IAEA inspections, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence would need a significant amount of time to build a case of Iranian noncompliance and bring it to the attention of the President. The result would mean that the international community would not have enough time to implement effective economic sanctions in response.

The breakout time could actually be reduced further. If Iran is able to conduct research and development on advanced centrifuges, and make them operational, the enrichment process would speed up significantly. The Associated Press reported on Sunday that Iranian demands to build more advanced centrifuges have emerged as a key hurdle in the talks. In April 2014, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared, “Consent was given to the nuclear talks in order to break up the hostile atmosphere created by the hegemonistic [sic] front against Iran, but all people should be aware that despite the fact that the talks will continue, the Islamic Republic of Iran will not halt its activities with regard to nuclear research and development.”

Five Minutes To The Judgment (1 Peter 4:17)

Doomsday clock, related to nuclear disarmament, is too close to midnight

 

By The Republican Editorials
on January 20, 2015 at 1:54 PM

By Ira Helfand

 

This Thursday, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists will update their famous Doomsday Clock. Since 1947 the Bulletin has used the clock to illustrate the severity of the threat of nuclear war. During the worst years of the Cold War in the early 1980’s, the clock stood at 3 minutes to midnight. When the Cold War ended the clock was set back to 17 minutes to midnight. Despite the widespread inattention to the ongoing threat of nuclear war, the experts at the Bulletin feel the danger has grown substantially since that hopeful moment and the clock now stands at 5 minutes to midnight.

It is not clear how the clock will be reset this year.

Incredibly, In the face of these terrible threats, the nuclear weapons states are all planning major upgrades of their nuclear forces.

 

On the one hand, there have been major increases in the risk of nuclear conflict over the past year. But we have also seen the emergence of a powerful, new international movement pressing for nuclear disarmament.

On the negative side, the most ominous development is the rise of tension between Russia and the West over the crisis in Ukraine, best summed up by President Putin’s warning to the world not to mess with Russia because it has a powerful nuclear arsenal. The crisis has underlined the fact that the US and Russia still confront each other with a combined total of more than 14,000 nuclear weapons, more than 1500 of which are on hair trigger alert, able to be launched in less than 15 minutes.

A war involving the current nuclear forces of the US and Russia would kill hundreds of millions of people in the first 30 minutes and cause a full blown nuclear winter. The soot from the fires started by more than a thousand nuclear explosions would blot out the sun dropping temperatures around the globe to Ice Age levels. Ecosystems would collapse, food production would plummet, and the vast majority of the human race would starve.

But even a much smaller war would have catastrophic global consequences, and the possibility of limited nuclear war also grew this past year. There was a significant increase in fighting between India and Pakistan along their tense border in Kashmir. A war between India and Pakistan, involving just 100 small nuclear weapons, would not cause a full nuclear winter, but it would disrupt climate and food production enough to put 2 billion people across the globe at risk of starvation.

Incredibly, In the face of these terrible threats, the nuclear weapons states are all planning major upgrades of their nuclear forces. Here in the US the administration is considering a modernization plan that will cost over 300 billion dollars in the next 10 years, and nearly a trillion dollars over the next three decades.

On the positive side, a dynamic new movement for nuclear disarmament is forming around the world. In December 158 countries gathered in Vienna for the 3rd International Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons and affirmed the need to base nuclear weapons policy on the evolving data about the medical consequences of nuclear war. The Pope, the President of the International Committee of the Red Cross, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, and 44 countries called for a new treaty to ban nuclear weapons. The Austrian government issued a pledge to build support for such a treaty in the New Year, and to lead efforts to pressure the nuclear weapons states to honor their existing commitments to negotiate the elimination of their nuclear arsenals.

A few days later, the Nobel Peace Laureates, meeting at their annual Summit, called on all nations to “commence negotiations on a treaty to ban nuclear weapons at the earliest possible time, and subsequently to conclude the negotiations within two years.”

In the realm of civil society, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons now involves more than 350 organizations around the world working to ban nuclear weapons.

Whatever the Bulletin decides to do about the time on the Doomsday Clock, we are clearly much too close to midnight.

For decades the nuclear weapons states have said that they are wise enough, and their technology perfect enough, for us to trust them with weapons that can destroy the world. When we say that they are wrong we are only stating the obvious: no human is wise enough, no human technology perfect enough to hold this power. The time has come to eliminate these weapons once and for all.

Ira Helfand, M.D., is co-president of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War. He lives in Northampton and practices at Family Care Medical Center in Springfield.

Signs that This IS the End Time (Matthew 24)

End Times Prophecy Lurking W/ WW3 Nuclear Threat, Iraq Crisis And Ebola

 

ISIS Crucifying Eight Christians

By Athena Yenko | September 18, 2014 5:26 PM EST

The signs of End Times as mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 24 are becoming more apparent with how the news of chaos in different parts of the world are developing by the day.  Rev Franklin Graham, president and CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan’s Purse, could not help but wonder if the end is near.

 

Graham points out that Matthew 24 speaks of Jesus warning His disciples about the signs of the end of age – rumours of wars, famines, earthquakes and deadly diseases. “Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake” (Matthew 24:9, KJV),” as quoted by Graham in his blog.

All these signs are now apparent with the ISIS’ killing, torturing, beheading and crucifying of Christians. Such horrible plights are also happening from Indonesia to Bangladesh and Pakistan, Graham said. In China, there had been destruction of places of worships. Similar chaotic events are also happening in Syria, Graham points out.

The Rumours of War

Several reports had already spoken of a looming World War 3 as Russian President Vladimir Putin had for several occasions dangled nuclear threat. Early September, Mr Putin was quoted when he reminded a youth forum that “Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear nations. This is a reality, not just words.” He was later quoted telling a NATO official that “If I want, I take Kiev in two weeks.”
In June, Bruce Gagnon of the Global Network Against Weapons in Space, claimed that the “US Space Command is planning a nuclear first strike on Russia, as well as one on China in 2016.”

Deadly Disease

The World Health Organisation or WHO had described the current Ebola virus outbreak as “unparalleled in modern times” as the death toll in West Africa reached 2,500 with 5,000 others infected. Bruce Aylward, assistant director-general of the WHO, said that the gravity of the situation is difficult to get across. He called for immediate and escalated international intervention to keep the count within the “tens of thousands” level.

Famine

In the wake of the Ebola outbreak, Valerie Amos, undersecretary-general for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency, said that the food security situation in regions affected by the disease is of grave concern. The United States had reportedly send 3,000 troops to help with the gravity of the situation.

Meanwhile, a report released on Sept 16 by the United Nations found 800 million people or one in every nine across the world are starving – Botswana, Cote d’Ivoire, Madagascar, Malawi, Namibia, Uganda, Tanzania and Zambia; Democratic Republic of Korea, Iraq, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan; El Salvador and Guatemala. In Sub-Saharan Africa for instance, more than one in four people remain chronically undernourished; in Asia, 526 million people are starving, the report found.

To contact the editor, e-mail: editor@ibtimes.com

Iran A Master With Time

PROCRASTINATION AND HAGGLING IN NUCLEAR NEGOTIATIONS IS THE ROUTINE FOR THE MULLAHS, WHO UNDERSTAND NOTHING BUT FIRMNESS

Nuclear Time

19 July 2014

Iranian resistance takes position on extension of nuclear talks.

Procrastination and haggling in nuclear negotiations is the routine for the mullahs, who understand nothing but firmness.

•In light of the regional situation, Khamenei wants to maintain the nuclear structure and capability to acquire the bomb

•The international community must pursue the full implementation of the UN Security Council’s resolutions by the clerical regime

Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, the President-elect of the Iranian Resistance described the Vienna negotiations that did bear no result, and the obstinacy of the mullahs’ regime to a comprehensive agreement that would permanently prevent its manufacturing the nuclear bomb, as the failure of the appeasement policy and leniency towards this regime.

Mrs. Rajavi reiterated: The religious dictatorship, has been forced to retreat one step due to domestic isolation, the international rejection, and sanctions. However the “weakness, indecision, and offering concessions by the international community” will result in Khamenei resorting to deception and concealment again. Thus, in the future like in the past, the scope of the regime’s retreat and giving up its drive to acquire nuclear weapon, and complying with its international obligations will solely depend on the firmness and determination of the International community in the face of the regime’s sinister desires and its deceptions. The complete implementation of the Security Council resolutions, particularly a total halt of uranium enrichment, accepting the Additional Protocol, and free access of IAEA inspectors to the regime’s suspicious installations and centers are the requirements to prevent the mullahs to acquire a nuclear bomb.

Mrs. Rajavi, described the clerical regime’s refraining from accepting a comprehensive agreement as an indicative of the regime’s strategic impasse and its fear of the devastating consequences of giving up its nuclear projects. Mrs. Rajavi added: If the mullahs had the will, six months was a long period for achieving a comprehensive agreement. The clerical regime has constantly used negotiations as a stalling tactic. Stalling and non-ending haggling in negotiations of attrition is the routine for the mullahs who realize no language but the language of firmness and strength.

In light of the regional situation, Khamenei wants to maintain the nuclear structure and capability to acquire the bomb. The international community must pursue the full implementation of the UN Security Council’s resolutions by the clerical regime. Extending the negotiations will result in nothing but providing time to the mullahs for further deception. The mullahs should absolutely not be allowed to play with time. In addition, the nuclear negotiations should be coupled with holding the religious fascism ruling Iran accountable for flagrant human rights violations in Iran and genocide in Syria and Iraq. Attempt to obtain nuclear weapon, violations of human rights, and exporting terrorism and fundamentalism, are three indispensible aspects of the velayat-e faqih (absolute rule of the clergy).

Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran