Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

Today: Australia’s Defence Establishment joy – small nuclear reactors, (dud for energy, climate action) but great for war!

It’s not often that for Australia, the essential connection between ”peaceful” nuclear energy and nuclear weapons is  set out so blatantly, as Defence Connect just did..  For many decades, we have been beguiled by the nuclear industry’s propaganda with the myth of the ”peaceful atom”. 

And more lately. Australians have been sold, by ANSTO’s marketing men, the story of how ANSTO’s goal is the medical benefit to all Australians,  from its nuclear reactor. What a load of poppycock that was!  

We must be grateful to Defence Connect, for setting it out so clearly.  Now that nuclear energy  has turned out to be unaffordable and irrelevant to climate change, and now that cyclotrons have proved better that nuclear reactors, for producing medical radioisotopes.  The truth is clearly out –    the only use for the nuclear industry is warfare!

April 14, 2022 Posted by | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

Defence expert spills the beans – small nuclear reactors for Australia are all about militarism, not ”peaceful energy”

A Milestones Approach to introduction of small nuclear reactors in Australia, Defence Connect 13 Apr 22, Navy veteran and defence industry analyst Christopher Skinner examines whether the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Milestones Approach should be adopted in Australia in light of the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarine program.

Last Friday the Australian Nuclear Association (ANA) ran a very successful conference in the Aerial Centre of the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) which brought together members and interested people face-to-face for the first time in more than two years.

Significant information and viewpoints emerged, and among these, perhaps the most positive was the clear message from international expert on nuclear legal and regulatory matters Helen Cook that the International Atomic Energy Agency Milestones Approach for introduction of nuclear power, as proven in international use by many countries, is able to be progressed even within all the legislative constraints at federal and state level within Australia.

Passage through the full three phases takes 10 to 15 years which sounds realistic for Australia.

The IAEA Milestone Approach is very well explained in webpages, documents and videos all readily available from IAEA in several languages. This approach has three phases and the first of these, called the pre-project activities phase covers all 19 of listed nuclear infrastructure issues that Australia will face both for the AUKUS submarine acquisition program and any future consideration of small modular (nuclear) reactors (SMR) which unsurprisingly are remarkedly similar to nuclear attack submarine (SSN) reactors except for some additional criteria for military use, such as shock proofing and platform motion in six dimensions.

Applying the Pareto Principle, 80 per cent of the criteria for SSNs also apply to SMRs so why not progress those 80 per cent to save time later.

The suggestion was made that the IAEA Milestones Approach should be adopted right now for the AUKUS program with the expectation that most of the work could be applied to a future SMR program if and when that is approved as an optional carbon-free energy source to be included in Australia’s energy roadmap………….

It is encouraging that Defence has announced 300 scholarships for graduate and technical education in nuclear science, technology and engineering, and some of the recipients were attending the conference.

The AUKUS SSN program will be the largest technically complex program ever undertaken in Australia and it behoves all scientific, technical and engineering institutions to contribute to its success. Similarly for the workforce development institutions to create the courses and contribute to the more general knowledge of nuclear science, technology and engineering.

However there is still a level of fear and apprehension in the community about anything nuclear as was shown in the recent University of Queensland study report What would be required for nuclear energy plants to be operating in Australia from the 2030’s?, a timeframe not dissimilar to the AUKUS submarine program. At the end of the study, the team concluded there were only two main issues to be addressed to build public trust through:

  • more detailed explanations of the processes involved over the entire nuclear fuel cycle to ensure safety, and long-term sustainability of radioactive waste; and
  • greater assurance of the risks involved and especially the measures to be taken to minimise the risk of accidents and to mitigate the effects of such accidents when they did occur.

As the ANA conference clearly showed, there are parallel development paths being considered for SMRs and nuclear submarines for Australia, and there are many points of common interest that will benefit from a complementary approach.

The encouraging news from the conference was that the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) is working closely with Defence’s Nuclear Powered Submarine Task Force in several working groups that were recently announced in the AUKUS progress report.  https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/key-enablers/9855-a-milestone-approach-to-introduction-of-small-nuclear-reactors-in-australia

April 14, 2022 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Why the ABC cannot rely on the coalition

April 14, 2022 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, media, politics | Leave a comment

This should be a climate change election

This should be a climate change election

Bob Douglas

Anthony Albanese and his colleagues could surely storm to victory if they enthusiastically acted on the arguments presented by climate experts. They would certainly attract the support of the millions of Australians who understandably fear the consequences of our current, disastrously inadequate approach to this topic.

April 14, 2022 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Kyiv Independent news is anything but. It’s a mouthpiece for NATO-USA-Azov-nazi propaganda and unverified atrocity stories

NED Finances Key Ukrainian Propaganda Organ, the Kyiv Independent, Covert Action Magazine, By Evan Reif, April 13, 2022  One NED-sponsored journalist even fights with the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion and openly advocates for the commission of war crimes.

hroughout this war, one of the most prolific voices has been the Kyiv Independent. Through both its website and its Twitter account, it has been posting a nearly endless stream of unconfirmed and often fantastical pro-Ukrainian propaganda along with unverified, and often unattributed tales of the latest Russian atrocities.

Despite never offering even a scrap of evidence, however, it exploded from a few thousand followers before the war to several million now, with millions more following its individual reporters. It is routinely promoted by some of the biggest names in media, such as CNN and Fox News.

Let’s take a look at one tweet in particular, as an example of this. On March 30, the Kyiv Independent tweeted this:

We can see here a blending between truth and lies. While strikes would hit the warehouse, and the Red Cross would confirm that (and also, that it had been abandoned for more than two weeks by that time and all aid was distributed), no evidence was given that the strikes were Russian and the Red Cross did not comment on it.

The only source for the claim that the attacks were Russian is the Azov Battalion, putting the credibility of the statement into serious doubt. Kyiv Independent does not tell you this.

Despite this being posted with no evidence in the first place, the tweet was re-tweeted 12,000 times. How many people could this piece of literal Nazi propaganda have reached?

This outfit is well-funded and well-run. They can and do produce large amounts of good-quality English-language content very quickly. The market for this content, obviously, is not Ukrainians, but the West.

It is important to understand just how a propaganda network like this works. This blending of truth and lie is very common. The terrible realities of war mean that there is always plenty of information to report. Attacks and counterattacks. Bombs falling here. Shells there. Deaths and fires.

It is important to understand just how a propaganda network like this works. This blending of truth and lie is very common. The terrible realities of war mean that there is always plenty of information to report. Attacks and counterattacks. Bombs falling here. Shells there. Deaths and fires.

Much of this is probably accurate information. The sheer volume of it, combined with all the promotion, paid or otherwise, means that soon you will see Kyiv Independent reports on every screen, every day.

However, you only get one side of the issue. It is illegal to report on Ukrainian military casualties. This means that all you will see is dead Russians, burning Russian tanks and the wreckage of Russian aircraft. This creates an image of an invincible Ukrainian Army, killing Russians by the thousands with no losses of their own…………..

Meanwhile, every shell and bomb that hits a Ukrainian city is relentlessly covered. This means that the Russians are simultaneously portrayed as an omnipresent bogeyman, but also as incompetent cowards. Umberto Eco’s words about shifting rhetorical focus are relevant here.

Peppered in the endless streams of more mundane reporting, however, are the increasingly unhinged calls for escalation. Worse yet, at some points the mask comes off entirely, such as in this bizarre article which seems to both downplay nuclear war, and cast it as an acceptable price to pay for Ukrainian victory, all while accusing Putin of being the nuclear threat.

It is clear that the editorial position of this paper is that the war should escalate, more people should die and, if necessary, Russia, and therefore the Russian people, should be annihilated with nuclear weapons. More than that, their position seems to be that we cannot afford NOT to do so.

No one would win World War III. Not even the reporters at Kyiv Independent. No one except the arms dealers. This outfit has greatly outsized reach with which to spread these ideas…….

Foreign Funding

The paper was founded in 2021 after the staff of the Kyiv Post walked out en masse after the paper came under new ownership. While it is presented as a valiant attempt to retain editorial control, the seed funding the Post received from the Canadian Government and European Endowment for Democracy (the EU equivalent of the NED) tells another tale.

Indeed, if you look more closely at the staff, a pattern of collaboration with NATO regime-change operations becomes very clear.

Meet the team:………………………………………………………………….

In later articles, I will elaborate on this, but the network is quite extensive. As you can see from their documents, they are in up to their heads in NATO regime-change cash.…………………….

(Article also shows links of the journalists to USA militaristic think tanks, and to uKraine’s AZOV brigade and NAZI groups…..

In a new low even for him, journalist Illia Pomonarenko, on March 27, 2022, in response to widely circulated videos of Ukrainian fascists torturing and kneecapping Russian prisoners, Illia not only made no apologies for their crimes, but called for further atrocities……………………………………… https://covertactionmagazine.com/2022/04/13/ned-finances-key-ukrainian-propaganda-organ-the-kyiv-independent/#comment-4881

April 14, 2022 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Glenn Greenwald: The Censorship Campaign Against Western Criticism of NATO’s Ukraine Policy Is Extreme

This war has been very good indeed for the permanent Washington political and media class. And although it was taboo for weeks to say so, it is now beyond clear that the only goal that the U.S. and its allies have when it comes to the war in Ukraine is to keep it dragging on for as long as possible.

One can spread as many lies and as much disinformation as one wants provided that it is designed to advance the NATO agenda in Ukraine

It is not a mystery who is benefiting from this orgy of military spending. On Tuesday, Reuters reported that “the Pentagon will host leaders from the top eight U.S. weapons manufacturers on Wednesday to discuss the industry’s capacity to meet Ukraine’s weapons needs if the war with Russia lasts years.” Among those participating in this meeting about the need to increase weapons manufacturing to feed the proxy war in Ukraine is Raytheon, which is fortunate to have retired General Lloyd Austin as Defense Secretary, a position to which he ascended from the Raytheon Board of Directors. It is virtually impossible to imagine an event more favorable to the weapons manufacturer industry than this war in Ukraine:

https://scheerpost.com/2022/04/13/glenn-greenwald-the-censorship-campaign-against-western-criticism-of-natos-ukraine-policy-is-extreme/by April 13, 2022 Preventing populations from asking who benefits from a protracted proxy war, and who pays the price, is paramount. A closed propaganda system achieves that. By Glenn Greenwald

If one wishes to be exposed to news, information or perspective that contravenes the prevailing US/NATO view on the war in Ukraine, a rigorous search is required. And there is no guarantee that search will succeed. That is because the state/corporate censorship regime that has been imposed in the West with regard to this war is stunningly aggressive, rapid and comprehensive.

On a virtually daily basis, any off-key news agency, independent platform or individual citizen is liable to be banished from the internet. In early March, barely a week after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the twenty-seven nation European Union — citing “disinformation” and “public order and security” — officially banned the Russian state-news outlets RT and Sputnik from being heard anywhere in Europe. In what Reuters called “an unprecedented move,” all television and online platforms were barred by force of law from airing content from those two outlets. Even prior to that censorship order from the state, Facebook and Google were already banning those outlets, and Twitter immediately announced they would as well, in compliance with the new EU law.

But what was “unprecedented” just six weeks ago has now become commonplace, even normalized. Any platform devoted to offering inconvenient-to-NATO news or alternative perspectives is guaranteed a very short lifespan. Less than two weeks after the EU’s decree, Google announced that it was voluntarily banning all Russian-affiliated media worldwide, meaning Americans and all other non-Europeans were now blocked from viewing those channels on YouTube if they wished to. As so often happens with Big Tech censorship, much of the pressure on Google to more aggressively censor content about the war in Ukraine came from its own workforce: “Workers across Google had been urging YouTube to take additional punitive measures against Russian channels.”

So prolific and fast-moving is this censorship regime that it is virtually impossible to count how many platforms, agencies and individuals have been banished for the crime of expressing views deemed “pro-Russian.” On Tuesday, Twitter, with no explanation as usual, suddenly banned one of the most informative, reliable and careful dissident accounts, named “Russians With Attitude.” Created in late 2020 by two English-speaking Russians, the account exploded in popularity since the start of the war, from roughly 20,000 followers before the invasion to more than 125,000 followers at the time Twitter banned it. An accompanying podcast with the same name also exploded in popularity and, at least as of now, can still be heard on Patreon.

What makes this outburst of Western censorship so notable — and what is at least partially driving it — is that there is a clear, demonstrable hunger in the West for news and information that is banished by Western news sources, ones which loyally and unquestioningly mimic claims from the U.S. government, NATO, and Ukrainian officials. As The Washington Post acknowledged when reporting Big Tech’s “unprecedented” banning of RT, Sputnik and other Russian sources of news: “In the first four days of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, viewership of more than a dozen Russian state-backed propaganda channels on YouTube spiked to unusually high levels.”

Note that this censorship regime is completely one-sided and, as usual, entirely aligned with U.S. foreign policy. Western news outlets and social media platforms have been flooded with pro-Ukrainian propaganda and outright lies from the start of the war. A New York Times article from early March put it very delicately in its headline: “Fact and Mythmaking Blend in Ukraine’s Information War.” Axios was similarly understated in recognizing this fact

Ukraine misinformation is spreading — and not just from Russia.” Members of the U.S. Congress have gleefully spread fabrications that went viral to millions of people, with no action from censorship-happy Silicon Valley corporations. That is not a surprise: all participants in war use disinformation and propaganda to manipulate public opinion in their favor, and that certainly includes all direct and proxy-war belligerents in the war in Ukraine.

Yet there is little to no censorship — either by Western states or by Silicon Valley monopolies — of pro-Ukrainian disinformation, propaganda and lies. The censorship goes only in one direction: to silence any voices deemed “pro-Russian,” regardless of whether they spread disinformation. The “Russians With Attitude” Twitter account became popular in part because they sometimes criticized Russia, in part because they were more careful with facts and viral claims that most U.S. corporate media outlets, and in part because there is such a paucity of outlets that are willing to offer any information that undercuts what the U.S. Government and NATO want you to believe about the war.

Their crime, like the crime of so many other banished accounts, was not disinformation but skepticism about the US/NATO propaganda campaign. Put another way, it is not “disinformation” but rather viewpoint-error that is targeted for silencing. One can spread as many lies and as much disinformation as one wants provided that it is designed to advance the NATO agenda in Ukraine (just as one is free to spread disinformation provided that its purpose is to strengthen the Democratic Party, which wields its majoritarian power in Washington to demand greater censorship and commands the support of most of Silicon Valley). But what one cannot do is question the NATO/Ukrainian propaganda framework without running a very substantial risk of banishment.

It is unsurprising that Silicon Valley monopolies exercise their censorship power in full alignment with the foreign policy interests of the U.S. Government. Many of the key tech monopolies — such as Google and Amazon — routinely seek and obtain highly lucrative contracts with the U.S. security state, including both the CIA and NSA. Their top executives enjoy very close relationships with top Democratic Party officials. And Congressional Democrats have repeatedly hauled tech executives before their various Committees to explicitly threaten them with legal and regulatory reprisals if they do not censor more in accordance with the policy goals and political interests of that party.

But one question lingers: why is there so much urgency about silencing the small pockets of dissenting voices about the war in Ukraine? This war has united the establishment wings of both parties and virtually the entire corporate media with a lockstep consensus not seen since the days and weeks after the 9/11 attack. One can count on both hands the number of prominent political and media figures who have been willing to dissent even minimally from that bipartisan Washington consensus — dissent that instantly provokes vilification in the form of attacks on one’s patriotism and loyalties. Why is there such fear of allowing these isolated and demonized voices to be heard at all?

The answer seems clear. The benefits from this war for multiple key Washington power centers cannot be overstated. The billions of dollars in aid and weapons being sent by the U.S. to Ukraine are flying so fast and with such seeming randomness that it is difficult to track. “Biden approves $350 million in military aid for Ukraine,” Reuters said on February 26; “Biden announces $800 million in military aid for Ukraine,” announced The New York Times on March 16; on March 30, NBC’s headline read: “Ukraine to receive additional $500 million in aid from U.S., Biden announces”; on Tuesday, Reuters announced: “U.S. to announce $750 million more in weapons for Ukraine, officials say.” By design, these gigantic numbers have long ago lost any meaning and provoke barely a peep of questioning let alone objection.

It is not a mystery who is benefiting from this orgy of military spending. On Tuesday, Reuters reported that “the Pentagon will host leaders from the top eight U.S. weapons manufacturers on Wednesday to discuss the industry’s capacity to meet Ukraine’s weapons needs if the war with Russia lasts years.” Among those participating in this meeting about the need to increase weapons manufacturing to feed the proxy war in Ukraine is Raytheon, which is fortunate to have retired General Lloyd Austin as Defense Secretary, a position to which he ascended from the Raytheon Board of Directors. It is virtually impossible to imagine an event more favorable to the weapons manufacturer industry than this war in Ukraine:

Demand for weapons has shot up after Russia’s invasion on Feb. 24 spurred U.S. and allied weapons transfers to Ukraine. Resupplying as well as planning for a longer war is expected to be discussed at the meeting, the sources told Reuters on condition of anonymity. . .

Resupplying as well as planning for a longer war is expected to be discussed at the meeting. . . . The White House said last week that it has provided more than $1.7 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since the invasion, including over 5,000 Javelins and more than 1,400 Stingers.

This permanent power faction is far from the only one to be reaping benefits from the war in Ukraine and to have its fortunes depend upon prolonging the war as long as possible. The union of the U.S. security state, Democratic Party neocons, and their media allies has not been riding this high since the glory days of 2002. One of MSNBC’s most vocal DNC boosters, Chris Hayes, gushed that the war in Ukraine has revitalized faith and trust in the CIA and intelligence community more than any event in recent memory — deservedly so, he said: “The last few weeks have been like the Iraq War in reverse for US intelligence.” One can barely read a mainstream newspaper or watch a corporate news outlet without seeing the nation’s most bloodthirsty warmongering band of neocons — David Frum, Bill Kristol, Liz Cheney, Wesley Clark, Anne Applebaum, Adam Kinzinger — being celebrated as wise experts and heroic warriors for freedom.

This war has been very good indeed for the permanent Washington political and media class. And although it was taboo for weeks to say so, it is now beyond clear that the only goal that the U.S. and its allies have when it comes to the war in Ukraine is to keep it dragging on for as long as possible. Not only are there no serious American diplomatic efforts to end the war, but the goal is to ensure that does not happen. They are now saying that explicitly, and it is not hard to understand why.

The benefits from endless quagmire in Ukraine are as immense as they are obvious. The military budget skyrockets. Punishment is imposed on the arch-nemesis of the Democratic Party — Russia and Putin — while they are bogged down in a war from which Ukrainians suffer most. The citizenry unites behind their leaders and is distracted

from their collective deprivations. The emotions provoked by the horrors of this war — unprecedentedly shown to the public by the Western media which typically ignores carnage and victims of wars waged by Western countries and their allies — is a very potent tool to maintain unity and demonize domestic adversaries. The pundit class finds strength, purpose and resolve, able to feign a Churchillian posture without any of the risks. Prior sins and crimes of American elites are absolved and forgotten at the altar of maximalist claims about Putin’s unprecedented evils — just as they were absolved and forgotten through the script which maintained that the U.S. had never encountered a threat as grave or malignant as Trump. After all, if Putin and Trump are Hitler or even worse, then anyone who opposes them is heroic and noble regardless of all their prior malignant acts.

And that is why even small pockets of dissent cannot be tolerated. It is vital that Americans and Europeans remain entrapped inside a completely closed system of propaganda about the war, just as Russians are kept entrapped inside their own. Keeping these populations united in support of fighting a proxy war against Russia is far too valuable on too many levels to permit any questioning or alternative perspectives. Preventing people from asking who this war benefits, and who is paying the price for it, is paramount.

Big Tech has long proven to be a reliable instrument of censorship and dissent-quashing for the U.S. Government (much to the chagrin of corporate media employees, Russian outlets still remain available on free speech alternatives such as Rumble and Telegram, which is why so much ire is now directed at them). A rapid series of ostensible “crises” — Russiagate, 1/6, the COVID pandemic — were all exploited to condition Westerners to believe that censorship was not only justified but necessary for their own good. In the West, censorship now provokes not anger but gratitude. All of that laid the perfect foundation for this new escalation of a censorship regime in which dissent, on a virtually daily basis, is increasingly more difficult to locate.

No matter one’s views on Russia, Ukraine, the U.S. and the war, it should be deeply alarming to watch such a concerted, united campaign on the part of the most powerful public and private entities to stomp out any and all dissent, while so aggressively demonizing what little manages to slip by. No matter how smart or critically minded or sophisticated we fancy ourselves to be, none of us is immune to official propaganda campaigns, studied and perfected over decades. Nor is any of us immune to the pressures of group-think and herd behavior and hive minds: these are embedded in our psyches and thus easily exploitable.

That is precisely the objective of restricting and closing the information system available to us. It makes it extremely difficult to remain skeptical or critical of the bombardment of approved messaging we receive every day from every direction in every form. And that is precisely the reason to oppose such censorship regimes. An opinion or belief adopted due to propaganda and reflex rather than autonomy and critical evaluation has no value.

April 14, 2022 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Nuclear and gas in EU taxonomy slammed as ‘greenwashing’, 


Nuclear and gas in EU taxonomy slammed as ‘greenwashing’,   

  • The controversial decision to include gas and nuclear in the EU’s taxonomy was the outcome of a lengthy and highly-politicised process    EU Observer By ELENA SÁNCHEZ NICOLÁS BRUSSELS, 14 Apr 22,  Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and EU plans to reduce its reliance on Russian fossil-fuel imports, have raised more questions over the fate of the European Commission’s controversial taxonomy proposal.

EU member states were already split over the role of gas and nuclear in the energy transition and, thus, in green finance — even before the war in Ukraine……….

Critics say the proposal undermines the credibility of the EU taxonomy as a science-based investment tool, gives credence to claims of greenwashing, creates confusion in financial markets, and will cause major delays in the much-needed transition away from fossil fuels.

The taxonomy does not ban outright investment in activities not included in the guidelines — but it is designed to steer investments away from companies and investors which falsely claim to be environmentally sustainable.

‘Gold standard’ gone

Experts have warned that including natural gas (with a higher threshold than the one recommended by experts) and nuclear power in the EU’s sustainable finance rules may lead to further greenwashing in financial markets.

University College Dublin professor Andreas Hoepner, who has been one of those leading academic opposition on the taxonomy, describes it as probably “the biggest greenwash ever.”

The proposal, he said, ignores rigorous scientific analysis and weakens the credibility of the whole EU sustainable finance agenda. And it may even lead to an increase in emissions incompatible with the Fit-for-55 package and the EU’s climate targets.

The rules were meant to create common standards for classifying taxonomy-aligned economic activities as environmentally sustainable.

But Laurence Tubiana, one of the key architects of the 2015 Paris Agreement, has warned that investors may go elsewhere to seek more “more reliable science-based criteria” to classify their investments.

“The whole idea of creating a ‘gold standard’ is gone” with gas and nuclear power included in the EU taxonomy, Dutch MEP Bas Eickhout told EUobserver in an interview.

With the credibility of the whole taxonomy hanging by a thread, Eickhout warned of the impact on green bonds, given that funds raised from these bonds could be used for gas and nuclear projects. The transition towards net-zero emissions will require massive investment, but not enough money is currently going into projects delivering climate neutrality, he said.

“If we now lower the standard in order to mobilise the money, then we are still fooling ourselves,” he said, because the taxonomy must be “a credible standard” to fulfil its goal…………………..

“The EU should rapidly transition away from fossil fuels, fossil-fuel investments and subsidies to deliver climate stability,” added Ursula Woodburn from the UK’s cross-sector group of business leaders, CLG Europe,

The decision to include gas and nuclear in the taxonomy was slammed as the outcome of a both lengthy and highly-politicised process.

But the European Commission has also come under fire for looking at this tool purely through a domestic prism — despite its impact beyond EU borders.  https://euobserver.com/war-peace-green-economy/154585

April 14, 2022 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Former U.S. Secretary of Defense  Gates says it’s most unlikely that Russia would use chemical weapons in Ukraine

Gates says chances of Russia using chemical or nuclear weapons ‘pretty low’, The Hill, 13 Apr 22

…………………………………..   Gates said there are also no military reasons for Putin to use targeted nuclear weapons in Ukraine. 

“Again, what’s the military value of it? It’s really more of a terror weapon, at this point and the consequences of crossing that threshold are, I think, pretty consequential,” he said, also noting the geographical risk of such weapons. 

“The winds there blow from the west.  So radiation from the use of a tactical nuclear weapons in eastern Ukraine is going to end up in Russia,” Gates said……… https://thehill.com/policy/international/3266833-gates-says-chances-of-russia-using-chemical-or-nuclear-weapons-pretty-low/

April 14, 2022 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Zelensky adviser: Ukraine war can last till 2035, best option is for Russia to be broken — Anti-bellum

Ukrainian News AgencyApril 12, 2022 Arestovych Explains Why Putin’s Death Not Beneficial For Ukraine See: NATO gloats over second, bloodier phase of Ukraine war Oleksii Arestovych, an adviser to the head of the Presidential Office, believes that the death of Russian President Putin is not beneficial for Ukraine, it is necessary to “break Russia with […]

Zelensky adviser: Ukraine war can last till 2035, best option is for Russia to be broken — Anti-bellum

April 14, 2022 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

NATO’s shift to Asia-Pacific: Biden trip to Japan designed to rally Asia against Russia, China — Anti-bellum

Global TimesApril 12, 2022 Biden plans Japan visit to coordinate Indo-Pacific, but ‘India’s reluctance to sway on Ukraine weakens QUAD’By Zhang Han and Xu Keyue US President Joe Biden is expected to visit Japan for the QUAD summit in late May, a move which experts see as a further attempt to showcase US leadership in […]

NATO’s shift to Asia-Pacific: Biden trip to Japan designed to rally Asia against Russia, China — Anti-bellum

April 14, 2022 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

April 13 Energy News — geoharvey

Opinion:  ¶ “Nuclear Energy Should Not Be Part Of The Global Solution To Climate Change” • Nuclear culture, skills, vendors, and prospects are shriveling, mostly due to bad economics. Sun and wind are now the cheapest bulk source for at least 91% of world electricity, says Bloomberg New Energy Finance, so they’re winning about 10–20 […]

April 13 Energy News — geoharvey

April 14, 2022 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment