Yikes: CDC to hold briefing on how public can prepare for nuclear war
Remember the NWO is using the threat of war to buildup a "united humanity".
INCLUDES: 2018 WAR OR NO?
The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has scheduled a
briefing for later this month to outline how the public can prepare for
nuclear war.
"While a nuclear detonation is unlikely, it would have devastating results and there would be limited time to take critical protection steps. Despite the fear surrounding such an event, planning and preparation can lessen deaths and illness," the notice about the Jan. 16 briefing says on the CDC's website, which features a photo of a mushroom cloud.
The notice went on to say that most people don't know that sheltering in place for at least 24 hours is "crucial to saving lives and reducing exposure to radiation."
Two of the people presenting at the briefing specialize in radiation studies. Robert Whitcomb is the chief of the radiation studies branch at the CDC's National Center for Environment Health and Capt. Michael Noska is the radiation safety officer and senior advisor for health physics at the Food and Drug Administration.
This comes amid rising tensions between the U.S. and North Korea. President Trump tweeted Tuesday night, boasting about the size of his "nuclear button" and how it's "much bigger & more powerful" than North Korea's.
"North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.' Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!" Mr. Trump tweeted.
Both former Vice President Joe Biden and Admiral Mike Mullen have said in recent days that they worry the U.S. has never been closer to nuclear war with North Korea.
"While a nuclear detonation is unlikely, it would have devastating results and there would be limited time to take critical protection steps. Despite the fear surrounding such an event, planning and preparation can lessen deaths and illness," the notice about the Jan. 16 briefing says on the CDC's website, which features a photo of a mushroom cloud.
The notice went on to say that most people don't know that sheltering in place for at least 24 hours is "crucial to saving lives and reducing exposure to radiation."
Two of the people presenting at the briefing specialize in radiation studies. Robert Whitcomb is the chief of the radiation studies branch at the CDC's National Center for Environment Health and Capt. Michael Noska is the radiation safety officer and senior advisor for health physics at the Food and Drug Administration.
This comes amid rising tensions between the U.S. and North Korea. President Trump tweeted Tuesday night, boasting about the size of his "nuclear button" and how it's "much bigger & more powerful" than North Korea's.
"North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.' Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!" Mr. Trump tweeted.
Both former Vice President Joe Biden and Admiral Mike Mullen have said in recent days that they worry the U.S. has never been closer to nuclear war with North Korea.
2018 – War or No War? The Saker
Imbeciles and cowards. I also happen to think that they are traitors to their country and their people. Patriots they are not.
If the
first months of 2017 were a time of great hopes following the historical
defeat of Hillary Clinton, the year is ending in a sombre, almost
menacing manner.
Not only has the swamp
easily, quickly and totally drowned Trump, but the AngloZionist Empire
is reeling from its humiliating defeat in Syria and the Neocons are now
treating our entire planet to a never ending barrage of threats.
Furthermore, the Trump Administration now has released a National Security Strategy which clearly show that the Empire is in “full paranoid”
mode. It is plainly obvious that the Neocons are now back in total
control of the White House, Congress and the US corporate media. Okay,
maybe things are still not quite as bad as if Hillary had been elected,
but they are bad enough to ask whether a major war is now inevitable
next year.
If we go by their rhetoric, the Neocons have all the following countries in their sights:
- Afghanistan (massive surge already promised)
- Syria (threats of a US-Israeli-KSA attack; attack on Iranian and Hezbollah forces in Syria)
- Russia (disconnecting from SWIFT; stealing Russian assets in the US; attack on Russian forces in Syria)
- Iran (renege on nuclear deal, attack Iranian forces in Syria)
- The Donbass (support for a full scale Ukronazi attack against Novorussia)
- DPRK (direct and overt military aggression; aerial and naval blockade)
- Venezuela (military intervention “in defense of democracy, human rights, freedom and civilization”)
There are, of
course, many more countries currently threatened by the US to various
degrees, but the seven above are all good candidates for US aggression.
Let me
immediately say here that listing pragmatic arguments against such
aggression is, at this point in time, probably futile. If anything, the
recent disaster triggered by the US recognition of Jerusalem clearly
proves that the US is run by people as least as stupid and ignorant as
they are evil and arrogant, possibly even more so. The sad reality we
now live in is one where a nuclear superpower lack the minimal
intelligence needed to act in defense of its own national security
interests, and that is really frightening.
Last week I took a look at the mindset of what I called the “ideological drone“.
If we now look at the mindset of the US national security establishment
we will immediately notice that it is almost exactly the same as that
of the ideological drone. The biggest difference between them might be
that the ideological drone assumes that his/her leaders are sane and
mostly honest people, whereas those in the elites not only know that
they are total hypocrites and liars, but they actually see this as a
sign superiority: the drones believes in his/her ideology, but his
rulers believe in absolutely nothing.
Take the example of Syria. All the US decision makers are fully aware of the following facts:
- Daesh/ISIS/al-Nusra/etc is their creation and they tried everything to save these terrorists.
- The joint Russian-Iranian-Hezbollah effort defeated Daesh/ISIS/al-Nusra/etc in-spite of AngloZionist support and attacks on Syrian forces.
- The AngloZionist forces are in Syria completely illegally.
Yet none of that prevents them from claiming that they, not Russia, defeated Daesh/ISIS/al-Nusra/etc.
This is absolutely amazing, think of it – the entire planet knows full
well what really took place in Syria, but Uncle Sam decrees that black
is white, water is dry and what is true is false. And the most amazing
thing is that they know that everybody knows, yet they don’t care one bit. Why? Because they profoundly believe in four fundamental things:
- We can buy anybody
- Those we cannot buy, we bully
- Those we cannot bully we kill
- Nothing can happen to us, we live in total impunity not matter what we do
Besides people
with intelligence there is another type of person who has completely
disappeared from the US national security establishment: someone with
honor/courage/integrity. Let’s take a perfect example: Tillerson.
There is no way we can make the argument that Tillerson is an idiot.
The man has proven many times over that he is intelligent and quite
talented. And yet, he is Nikki Haley’s doormat. Nikki Haley – there is
the real imbecile! But not Tillerson. Yet Tillerson lacks the basic
honor/courage/integrity to demand that this terminal imbecile be
immediately fired or, if that does not happen, to leave and slam the
door really loud.
Nope, the man just sits there and takes humiliation after humiliation.
Oh sure, he will probably resign soon, but when his resignation comes
it will have no value, it will be a non-event, just the sad and pathetic
conclusion to a completely failed stint as Secretary of State.
The same goes
for the US military: not one single officer has found in himself/herself
to resign to protest the fact that the US is deeply in bed with those
who are responsible, at least according to the official conspiracy
theory, for 9/11. Nope, in fact US special forces are working with
al-Qaeda types day in and day out and not a single one of these
“patriots” has the honor/courage/integrity to go public about it.
Imbeciles and cowards. I also happen to think that they are traitors to their country and their people. Patriots they are not.
Delusional imbeciles giving orders and dishonorable cowards mindlessly executing them. That is the setup we are dealing with. As Trump would tweet “not good”.
Alas, this is also a very hard combo to deter or to try to reason with.
And yet,
somewhere, to some degree, these guys must know that the odds are not
in their favor. For one thing, an endless stream of military defeats and
political embarrassments ought to strongly suggest to them that
inaction is generally preferable to action, especially for clueless
people. Furthermore, one simple way to look at risks is to say that
risks are a factor of probability times consequences: R = P x C.
I don’t think
that US decision-makers actually formally think that way, but on a gut
level this is rather straightforward, even for ideological drone types.
If we assume that this is the case, we can now revisit our 7 countries
listed above as seen by Neocon decision makers (not me! I already outlined how I saw the risks of attacking these countries in this article written this summer):
Possible/likely consequences | Probability | Risk | |
Afghanistan (surge) | more body bags | high | low |
Syria (military intervention & attack on Iranian and Hezbollah forces in Syria) | Iranian & Hezbollah counter-attacks | high | high |
Russia 1 (economic attack: SWIFT & theft of assets)Russia 2 (shooting of Russian aircraft in Syria) | non-military responsemilitary response | highmedium | unknownfor memedium |
Iran (renege on nuclear deal) | non-military response | high | low |
Donbass (US backed attack on Novorussia) | Russian intervention | medium | low |
DPRK (attack; blockade) | Nuclear war in Asia | unknown | unknown |
Venezuela (direct military intervention) | quagmire | high | high |
A couple of points here:
Afghanistan:
is rather straightforward and least controversial: there will be a
surge in Afghanistan, it will result in more body bags, it will achieve
nothing, cost a shitload and nobody cares.
Syria:
very tempting, but the big risk is this: that US forces will find
themselves face to face with Iranian and Hezbollah forces who have been
dreaming about this day for decades and who will make maximal political
use of the US forces they will capture or kill. Frankly, to engage
either the Iranians or Hezbollah is a very scary option. Ask the
Israelis
Russia option 1:
rumors that the US would disconnect Russia from SWIFT or steal (that is
politely called “freeze”) Russian assets and funds in the US have been
going in for a long time already. And the Russians have been making all
sorts of menacing noises about this, but all of them very vague which
tells me that Russia might not have any good retaliatory options and
that this time around the hot air is blowing from Moscow. Of course,
Putin is a unpredictable master strategist and the folks around him are
very, very smart. They might hold something up their sleeve which I am
not aware of but I strongly suspect that, unlike me, the US intelligence
community must be fully aware of what this might be. I am not an
economist and there is much I don’t know here, I therefore assessed the
risk as “unknown” for me.
Russia option 2:
the reaction of Russia to the shooting down by Turkey of a SU-24 in
2015 might well have given the US politicians and commanders a feeling
that they could do the same and get away with it. In truth, they might
be right. But they might also be wrong. The big difference with the case
of the SU-24 is that Russia has formidable air-defenses deployed in
Syria which present a major threat for US forces. Furthermore, if a
Russian aircraft is under attack and the Russians reply by firing a
volley of ground-to-air missiles, what would the US do – attack a
Russian S-400 battery? The US is also in a tricky situation in an
air-to-air confrontation. While the F-22 is an excellent air superiority
fighter it has one huge weakness: it is designed to engage its
adversaries from a long range and to shoot first, before it is detected
(I mention only the F-22 here because it is the only US aircraft capable
of challenging the Su-30SM/Su-35). But if the rules of engagement say
that before firing at a Russian aircraft the F-22 has to issue a clear
warning or if the engagement happens at medium to short range distances,
then the F-22 is at a big disadvantage, especially against a Su-30SM or
Su-35. Another major weakness of the F-22 is that, unlike the
Su-30/Su-35, it does not have a real electronic warfare suite (the
F-22’s INEWS does not really qualify). In plain English this means that
the F-22 was designed to maximize its low radar cross section but at a
cost of all other aspects of aerial warfare (radar power,
hypermaneuverability, electronic warfare, passive engagement, etc.).
This all gets very technical and complicated very fast, but I think that
we can agree that the Neocons are unlikely to be very impressed by the
risks posed by Russian forces in Syria and that they will likely feel
that they can punch the russkies in the nose and that these russkies
will have to take it. Local US commanders might feel otherwise, but that
is also entirely irrelevant. Still, I place the risk here at ‘medium’
even if, potentially, this could lead to a catastrophic thermonuclear
war because I don’t think that the Neocons believe that the Russians
will escalate too much (who starts WWIII over one shot down aircraft
anyway, right?!). Think of it: if you were the commander of the Russian
task force in Syria, what would you do if the US shot down on of your
aircraft (remember, you assume that you are a responsible and
intelligent commander, not a flag-waving delusional maniac)?
Iran:
Trump has announced that he wants out of the deal and while technically
and legally he cannot do that, it’s not like he will care one bit. The
US has long given up any pretense at respecting any kind of law,
including international law. Also, since Trump is clearly Israel’s shabbos-goy I
think that we can safely assume that this will happen.What will not
stop is the full-spectrum demonization of Russia, thus the relationship
between the two countries will further deteriorate. Putin’s Russia is a
kind of Mordor which
represents all evil and stands behind all evil. Denouncing and openly
hating Russia has now become a form of virtue-signaling. Since the
entire US political elites have endorsed this phobia, it is exceedingly
unlikely to change in the foreseeable future.
Donbass:
will the Ukronazis finally attack? Well, they have been for many months
already! Not only did they never stop shelling the Donbass, but they
have this new “frog-jump” (pseudo) strategy which consists of moving in
military forces in the neutral zone, seize an undefended town and then
declare a major victory against Russia. They have also been re-arming,
re-organizing, re-grouping and otherwise bolstering their forces in the
East. As a result, the Urkonazis have at least 3:1 advantage against the
Novorussians. However, we should not look at this from the Ukronazi or
Novorussian point of view. Instead we should look at it from the Neocon
point of view:
Possible outcomes | US reactions |
Option one: Ukronazis win | Russia is defeated, US proves its power |
Option two: Novorussians win | Russia is accused of invading the Ukraine |
Option three: Novorussians lose and Russia openly intervenes | A Neocon dream come true: the NATO has a purpose again:decades of Cold War v2 in Europe. |
The way I see
it, in all three cases the AngloZionist prevail though clearly option #2
is the worst possible outcome and option #3 is the best one. In truth,
the AngloZionists have very little to lose in a Ukronazi attack on
Novorussia. Not so the Ukrainian people, of course. Right now the US and
several European countries are shipping various types of weapons to the
Ukronazis. That is really a non-news since they have been doing that
for years already. Furthermore, western made weapons won’t make any
difference, at least from a military point of view, if only because it
will always be much easier for Russia to send more weapons in any
category. The real difference is a political one: shipping “lethal
weapons” (as if some weapons were not lethal!) is simply a green light
to go on the attack. Let’s hope that the Urkonazis will be busy fighting
each other and that their previous humiliating defeat will deter them
from trying again, but I consider a full-scale Urkonazi attack on the
Donbass as quite likely.
DPRK:
that is the big unknown here. With some opponents, you know for an
absolute fact that their people will fight down to the very last man if
needed (Iranians, Russians, Hezbollah). But authoritarian regimes tend
to have a pretty low breaking point unless, of course, they convince
their own people that they are not fighting for a specific political
regime, but for their country. I think that nobody knows for sure what
the North Koreans will do if attacked, but I see no sign to simply
assume that the North Koreans won’t fight. From what I hear, the
memories of the ruthless attacks against North Koreans by US forces
during the previous war on the Korean Peninsula are still very very
real. Here is what an intelligence officer in the region wrote to me
recently:
The Trump Administration’s bluster is pathetic. If this were a movie, and not real life, it would be funny (it’s still funny, but being in *******, I don’t fully appreciate it). The sad thing is that central casting couldn’t create a better foil for NK propaganda: in every way, including physically, he fits their caricature of the evil, imperial arch-capitalist Yankee businessman. It’d be like if Hitler came back to life and off-handedly threatened to destroy the US every other day (and had the capability to do so).
If this
specialist is correct, and I have no reason to believe that he is not,
then it is quite reasonable to assume that the possible dislike the
North Korean people might have for their ruling elites is dwarfed by
their hatred for the United States.
[Sidebar: he
also had some interesting comments about my own assessment of the
consequences of a war on the Korean Peninsula. Here is what he wrote to
me:
Japan is a major target, for a number of reasons. The biggest is that there are a lot of US bases there that would be used to bring-in additional US troops/direct the war, but there’s also the fact that North Korea (and most South Koreans, actually), straight-up hates Japan. I won’t go into a history lesson (which you probably already know), but there is no love lost. Even if the war was confined to the Peninsula, which it won’t be, the global economy would take a major hit, because a ridiculous amount of global supply chain runs through South Korea (which on its own, bounces between the 15th and 10th largest economy in the world). Off the top of my head, I think Incheon (just west of Seoul) is the busiest airport in at least the region – it’s a major international hub, and Busan and Incheon are some of the busiest ports in the world – I want to say Busan is top 5, even busier than the Japanese ports. All the Chinese goods that go to America flow through the Sea of Japan – those will have to be re-routed. And a lot of the components that go in fancy electronics are actually made in SK, prior to final assembly in China – so that will be an issue. So even if we’re the only ones to go down, it’ll be bad news for the global economy. Your assessment of the artillery and special forces threat mirrors mine. One of the things I always thought was funny was how people disparage “World War 2 artillery.” As a whole, “World War 2 artillery” has probably killed more people than any weapon system in modern history (unless you say something really general like “knife” or “gun”). It’s not like you’ll be any less dead if your house is hit with a 152 as opposed to a J-DAM.]
And here is the
deal, if you attack a small and defenseless country you can basically
ignore the consequences of making the wrong guess, but when dealing with
a country like the DPRK this is a miscalculation which no sane
politician or military commander would ever take the risk of making. But
delusional imbeciles giving and dishonorable cowards – would either one
of them show the kind of caution needed when dealing with such a major
threat?! I frankly don’t think so. In fact, I see no reason to believe
that at all. Remember the “cakewalk in Iraq”? This term, coined by one
of my former teachers at SAIS, Ken Adelman, is a wonderful illustration
of the Neocon mindest: pure ideology and to hell with caution. We all
know that this “cakewalk” ended up costing the Iraqi and American
people: well over one million deaths for the former, well over five trillion dollars for the latter. Some cakewalk indeed… The truth is that at this point nobody knows
what the outcome of a US attack on the DPRK might be, not even the
North Koreans. Will that be enough to deter the delusional imbeciles
giving and dishonorable cowards currently at the helm of the Empire? You
tell me!
Venezuela:
as much hatred as there is for Venezuela in the US elites, this country
is not a lucrative target or, let me rephrase that, it is a great
target to subvert but probably not a good one to intervene in. Violence
in Venezuela is directly in the US interests but a direct military
intervention is probably not. My contacts tell me that the Venezuelan
military is an unholy (and rather corrupt) mess, but they also tell me
that the popular will to resist the “Yankees” is so strong that a any
military intervention will immediately trigger an ugly guerrilla war
(not to mention a political backlash in the rest of Latin America). The
truth is the US probably has the means to militarily intervene in
Venezuela, but they also have much better options.
Now let’s sum this all up.
The chances are high that in 2018 the US will
- Escalate the war in Afghanistan
- Renege on the nuclear deal with Iran
- Back an Ukronazi attack on Novorussia
It is quite possible that the US will also
- Shoot down a Russian aircraft over Syria
I find it unlikely that the US will
- Invade Syria
- Invade Venezuela
I am unable to evaluate whether the US will:
- Disconnect Russia from SWIFT or seize Russian assets
- Attack the DPRK
Frankly, I am
not very confident about this attempt as analyzing the possible
developments in 2018. All my education has always been based on a
crucial central assumption: the other guy is rational. That is a huge
assumption to make, but one which was fundamentally true during the Cold
War. Today I find myself inclined to think that psychologists are
probably better suited to make predictions about the actions of the
rulers of the AngloZionist Empire than military analysts. Furthermore,
history shows us that the combination of delusional imbeciles and
dishonorable cowards is what typically brings down empires, we saw a
very good example of that with the collapse of the Soviet Empire.
With the latest
Trump fiasco I have personally given up any hope of ever seeing a US
President capable of making a positive contribution to the welfare of
the people of the US or the rest of the planet. The burden now is
clearly on Russia and China to do everything they can to try to stop the
US from launching even more catastrophic and deeply immoral wars. That
is a very, very difficult task and I frankly don’t know if they can do
it. I hope so. That is the best I can say.
SOURCE
Isn't there supposed to be a six day war sometime before the endtimes and what our Lady said at Fatima? Start praying because it doesn't sound good no matter what happens
ReplyDelete