WAR 10-01-2016-to-10-07-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
The threat from CHINA: Xi warns Obama against threatening China’s sovereignty
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...ainst-threatening-China%92s-sovereignty/page9

Hummm.....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/05/world/asia/china-president-xi-jinping-successor.html?_r=0

ASIA PACIFIC

Xi Jinping May Delay Picking China’s Next Leader, Stoking Speculation

By CHRIS BUCKLEY
OCT. 4, 2016

BEIJING — The Chinese president, Xi Jinping, appears prepared to defy the Communist Party’s established script for transferring power and delay the designation of his successor until after a party congress next year, unsettling the party elite and stirring speculation that he wants to prolong his tenure.

The delay would buy Mr. Xi more time to promote and test favored candidates and prevent his influence from ebbing away to a leader-in-waiting, experts and political insiders said. But the price could be years of friction while a pack of aspiring cadres vie for the top job, as well as unnerving uncertainty over whether Mr. Xi wants to stay in power beyond the usual two terms as party leader.

Although Mr. Xi’s decision will not be known until late 2017, the suggestion that he intends to break with precedent and begin his second term without a probable successor is magnifying uncertainties about who will rise and who will fall in the expected shake-up, including questions about the fate of the premier, Li Keqiang.

“It’s a very delicate issue,” said a member of the party establishment who regularly speaks with senior officials. He spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the party’s ban on discussing sensitive internal decisions.

“I don’t think Xi wants to decide until the people he favors have more experience, more testing,” he said.

In interviews, three other party insiders close to senior officials and their families said Mr. Xi appeared likely to delay picking a successor.

The succession quandary is shaping up as a defining test of the power and ambition of Mr. Xi, already China’s most dominant leader in decades. When and how his heir is chosen, and who is picked, will offer a measure of how much further Mr. Xi can bend the party’s ideas of collective rule that evolved after the upheavals of Mao Zedong’s last years.

The system for succession, developed after a long period of political turmoil, was devised to help ensure a predictable, stable transition of power in the one-party state. Any effort by Mr. Xi to alter that compact might increase his considerable authority, but it could also inject instability into the delicately balanced system.

Making predictions about Chinese leadership handovers is always perilous. The discussions are secret. Key decisions often come together late in the deliberations. And the ascendancy of Mr. Xi, opaque even by the standards of party leaders, makes forecasts even harder.

“Xi Jinping has unleashed forces that open up a wide range of political futures, and each has its dangers,” David M. Lampton, a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, said by email. “The central policy reality is that the United States, and the next president, must be prepared to deal with a wider range of possibilities in China.”

The drama will probably begin in earnest this month, when the Central Committee, about 200 senior officials who sign off on major decisions, meets in Beijing. That meeting is likely to set in motion plans for the congress, which will meet in late 2017 to endorse a new top lineup.

While it is a given that the congress will back Mr. Xi for another five-year term as party leader, nearly everything else is up for grabs, giving Mr. Xi great sway to shape the new leadership.

Five of the seven members of the powerful Politburo Standing Committee must step down because of age, assuming the informal retirement age of 68 holds. That leaves only Mr. Xi, 63, and Mr. Li, 61, to return.

In the broader Politburo, the second tier of party authority, nearly half the 25 members are likely to retire.

Two terms as party leader has evolved as the standard since the 1990s, and an heir apparent is usually clear by the start of the second. The selection requires a consensus of the party elite, the product of behind-the-scenes wrangling. The previous two presidents had to accept successors who were not their picks.

But Mr. Xi’s blistering anticorruption campaign and amassing of power have shaken the idea that Chinese elite politics has settled into a stolid routine under collective control. If China’s party leaders function like a corporate board, Mr. Xi is akin to the celebrity chairman who may have the power to stare down opposition to his succession plan.

“Having played the strongman politics since coming to power, Xi would be the least likely person to feel constrained by these unspoken rules” of succession, said Warren Sun, a researcher on Chinese Communist Party history at Monash University in Australia.

Delaying the choice of a successor would allow time for Mr. Xi’s favorites to prove their ability and loyalty, experts said. The latter could allow Mr. Xi to continue to wield power behind the scenes after he retires.

But it could also create “severe friction” in the next five years, said Sebastian Heilmann, the president of the Mercator Institute for China Studies in Berlin. “Not designating a successor could be seen as a trick by Xi to grab a third term,” he said.

The risk of elite infighting, as well as demands from other senior officials and retired leaders, could still force Mr. Xi to signal his successor next year, several experts said.

“Even the amount of consolidation of power so far may have raised hackles,” said Susan Shirk, the chairwoman of the 21st Century China Program at the University of California, San Diego. “I don’t think Xi will want to further raise alarms about Putinesque intentions.”

If he is pressed to name someone, a younger Politburo member like Sun Zhengcai, the party secretary of Chongqing, could gain support.

The world may not know who has won and lost until Mr. Xi introduces his new team after the congress ends late next year.

But some officials and analysts are already saying that he wants to shunt Mr. Li, the premier, into a lesser job. There are whispers that Mr. Xi wants to raise the retirement age for the Standing Committee so that Wang Qishan, the powerful head of the party’s anticorruption agency, can stay on, possibly to replace Mr. Li.

Mr. Wang, a longtime friend of Mr. Xi’s, spent a career as an economic firefighter before taking his current job, in which he has helped Mr. Xi oust potential opponents.

Mr. Wang will be 69 by the time of the next congress, but changing the retirement age for political expediency is not unheard-of. It was 70 before Jiang Zemin lowered it so he could force out a political rival in 2002.

Predicting what happens depends on “whether or not you think the de facto rules and norms of elite succession will hold,” said Evan S. Medeiros, the former senior director for Asian affairs in the National Security Council under President Obama. “If not, predicting outcomes is a crapshoot.”

Mao and Deng Xiaoping chose favored successors only to dump them later, creating instability and bad blood in the party. On the other hand, Mr. Xi’s predecessor Hu Jintao spent a decade in preparation as heir apparent but still struggled as leader to run a team dominated by men installed by his predecessor, Mr. Jiang.

Mr. Xi and other Chinese leaders hold that it was the poor choice of Mikhail S. Gorbachev to lead the Soviet Union that precipitated its demise.

“Finally, all it took was one quiet word from Gorbachev to declare the dissolution of the Soviet Communist Party, and a great party was gone,” Mr. Xi said after he was appointed Chinese leader in 2012. “In the end nobody was a real man.”

The dilemma for Mr. Xi is that the politicians who will remain in the top echelons after next year’s retirements do not have long experience working with Mr. Xi or the right set of postings in provincial and central government, according to several experts and people who speak to senior officials. But the rising provincial leaders considered closest to him lack the experience to be taken seriously as the next national leader in waiting.

Perhaps the biggest subject of speculation is that Mr. Xi is bent on staying in power after his second term ends in 2022. The Constitution requires that he retire after two terms as president, but there is no limit on the more powerful job, general secretary of the party.

There is, however, an informal limit, which, like collective rule by the party elite, was instituted by Deng to prevent another dictator-for-life like Mao.

Even if he delays picking a successor, that does not mean he is determined to stay on as leader past 2022, when he will be 69, said Christopher K. Johnson, a senior China analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

“The only thing he’s focused on right now is next fall,” Mr. Johnson said. “If he gets his way next fall, which I think would mean they don’t signal the successor, that doesn’t then mean he’s already decided to stay on forever.”

Follow Chris Buckley on Twitter @ChuBailiang.

A version of this article appears in print on October 5, 2016, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Defying Script, Chinese Leader May Delay Call on a Successor.
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Conflict News ‏@Conflicts 40m40 minutes ago

IRAQ: Iraq warns Turkey of 'regional war' if doesn't withdraw troops - Reuterd


posted for fair use and discussion
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-m...=Feed:+Reuters/worldNews+(Reuters+World+News)

Wed Oct 5, 2016 | 3:22am EDT
Iraq warns Turkey of 'regional war' if doesn't withdraw troops


Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi of Iraq addresses the United Nations General Assembly in the Manhattan borough of New York, U.S., September 22, 2016. REUTERS/Carlo Allegri

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi warned Turkey that keeping troops in northern Iraq could lead to a "regional war," according to comments broadcast on state TV on Wednesday.

Abadi, who spoke at news conference Tuesday evening, was reacting to the Turkish parliament's decision last week to extend a mandate that allows military operations against terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria for another year.

"We have asked more than once the Turkish side not to intervene in Iraqi matters and I fear that the Turkish adventure could turn into a regional war," Abadi said.

"The Turkish leadership's behavior is not acceptable and we don’t want to get into a military confrontation with Turkey."

The Iraqi parliament also voted on Tuesday a text that condemns the Turkish parliament's decision.

Turkey says it deployed troops at a base in northern Iraq late last year as part of an international mission to train and equip Iraqi forces to fight against Islamic State which controls vast territory south of the border region, around the city of Mosul, and also in neighboring Syria. [nL8N14L06V]

The Iraqi government says it never invited such a force and considers the Turkish troops as occupiers.

(Reporting by Maher Chmaytelli; Editing by Toby Chopra)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/10/05/thailand-sends-activist-joshua-wong-back-to-hong-kong.html

Asia

Thailand sends activist Joshua Wong back to Hong Kong

Published October 05, 2016
Associated Press

BANGKOK – *Thailand stopped teen pro-democracy activist Joshua Wong from entering the country and sent him back to Hong Kong, officials said Wednesday, in a move supporters suspected was triggered by pressure from Beijing.

Thai officials and Wong's political party said he was put on a Hong Kong Airlines flight back to the specially administered Chinese region on Wednesday about 12 hours after he arrived at Bangkok's Suvarnabhumi Airport.

The 19-year-old activist rose to global prominence when he helped spearhead huge 2014 street protests against Beijing's plan to restrict elections in Hong Kong.

Wong, who arrived late Tuesday, was due to give a talk at Chulalongkorn University about lessons from Hong Kong's "Umbrella Movement" protests as part of Oct. 6 commemorations of a Thai government crackdown on student demonstrators 40 years ago.

But Netiwit Chotipatpaisal, a Thai activist who had planned to greet him, said he was informed by police that authorities detained Wong after receiving a notice from the Chinese government.

Wong, who turns 20 next week, was one of the high-profile student leaders behind pro-democracy protests two years ago that marked the former British colony's most turbulent period since China took control in 1997. In August, a Hong Kong court sentenced him to community service for his role in the protests, which brought parts of the city to a standstill for months.

In response to questions about Wong, Thai Foreign Ministry spokesperson Sek Wannamethee said permission for foreigners to enter Thailand "involves various factors and has to be in line with the relevant immigration laws and regulations."

If it's true Beijing leaned on Thailand, "it will seriously damage the reputation of the Chinese government and it will show a very bad example of how the Chinese government deals with human rights defenders in Hong Kong," said Nathan Law, who co-founded political party Demosisto with Wong earlier this year. Law, 23, was elected Hong Kong's youngest legislator last month.

He urged Hong Kong Justice Secretary Rimsky Yuen, who departed Wednesday for Bangkok on a previously scheduled three-day, to raise the issue with Thai officials.

A Thai security report obtained by The Associated Press said that more than 10 police officials from the Royal Thai Police Special Branch and Immigration Police were waiting for Wong when he arrived. It said that he was questioned and not allowed to use his cellphone or computer.

China's Foreign Ministry said in a brief statement that it was aware of reports of Wong's detention, but did not say whether China had asked Thailand to detain him — only that it respected Thailand's ability to manage the entrance of people into the country "in accordance with law."

Wong's case is sure to raise concern in Hong Kong, where residents are growing increasingly worried about Beijing overstepping its boundaries and undermining a "one-country, two systems" formula that governs its relationship with the mainland.

Many were shocked at the recent disappearances of five booksellers, including Chinese-born Gui Minhai, a naturalized Swedish citizen who went missing from his holiday home in Thailand and later turned up in mainland Chinese custody.

Refusing entry to Wong would also be in line with recent moves by Thailand's military rulers, who seized power in a 2014 coup.

The government has shown zero tolerance for dissent and has cracked down hard on its own student activists who have protested the military rule. It has detained students, stopped speeches from taking place and last month Thai authorities threatened to arrest Amnesty International speakers who were set to hold a news conference to release a report detailing allegations of torture at the hands of the military and police, causing the rights group to cancel the event.

Wong was also turned back in May 2015 when trying to enter Malaysia to speak at seminars in four cities. Malaysian officials said Wong was banned from entering the country but did not explain why.

Demosisto advocates a referendum on "self-determination" on the future status of Hong Kong, which is in the middle of a 50-year transition period to Chinese rule.
Human rights activists called for Wong's release.

"Thailand's arrest of Joshua Wong, a well-known pro-democracy activist in Hong Kong, sadly suggests that Bangkok is willing to do Beijing's bidding. Wong should be freed immediately and allowed to travel and exercise his right to free expression," said Sophie Richardson, China director at Human Rights Watch.

Two years ago, Wong became one of the most prominent leaders of massive pro-democracy protests that shut down major thoroughfares in Hong Kong for 11 weeks.

He and other youthful demonstrators demanded that the government drop a Beijing-backed plan to restrict elections for the city's top leader, but their movement fizzled out after authorities refused to grant concessions.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...kers-During-October-4th-To-October-7th*Drills

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...radiation-moscow-vladimir-putin-a7345461.html

Russia launches massive nuclear war training exercise 'involving 40 million people'

'Schizophrenics from America are sharpening nuclear weapons for Moscow,' says Russian government-run TV network

Matt Payton
15 minutes* ago
1 comment

The Russian government has launched a nationwide civil defence training exercise to ensure the country is properly prepared in*the event of*a nuclear, chemical and biological attack from the West.

Amid growing*international tensions, particulary over Russia's conduct in Syria, the*Defence Ministry-run Zvezda TV network*announced last week:*"Schizophrenics from America are sharpening nuclear weapons for Moscow."*

Lasting three days, the exercise bing run by the Ministry for Civil Defence, Emergencies and Elimination of Consequences of Natural Disasters (EMERCOM) will involve 200,000 emergency personnel and the co-operation of 40 million civilians.

EMERCOM stated on its website: "The drill will rehearse radiation, chemical and biological protection of the personnel and population during emergencies at crucial and potentially dangerous facilities.

"Fire safety, civil defence and human protection at social institutions and public buildings are also planned to be checked.

"Response units will deploy radiation, chemical and biological monitoring centers and sanitation posts at the emergency areas, while laboratory control networks are going to be put on standby."

Relations between Russia and the West continue to deteriorate with Vladimir Putin suspending an agreement with the US over the disposal of surplus weapons-grade plutonium, BBC reports.

Under the 2000 Plutonium Disposition Pact, both sides were told to get rid of 34 tonnes of surplus nuclear material by burning it in reactors.

In addition to the nationwide exercise, EMERCOM has announced its intention to build underground facilities beneath Moscow*to shield 100 per cent of the capital's population from a nuclear attack.

Russia is currently modernising its nuclear arsenal by introducing a new genration of long-range nuclear bombers, truck-mounted ballistic missiles and nuclear-armed submarines, Time reports.

Despite bilateral agreements to reduce stocks of long-rangle nuclear weapons, the Kremlin is reportedly looking to boost its nuclear capabilities to outweigh the superior firepower of the US.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20161005/opinion/A-crazy-nuclear-power.626994

Wednesday, October 5, 2016, 00:01 by Martin Scicluna

A crazy nuclear power

North Korea will have enough fissile material for as many as 21 nuclear bombs by the end of this year and the capacity to add seven more every year. The country’s increased ability to produce nuclear weapons has added to the prospect that such weapons would be sold to other governments or to so-called “non-state actors”, such as terrorists.

North Korea is approaching the day when it can produce a warhead small enough to fit on a missile and threaten the United States as well its allies in the region. At the end of last month, it test-fired a submarine-launched ballistic missile that flew more than 300 miles towards Japan, confirming its greatly improved missile technology.

Is North Korea under its leader of five years, Kim Jong-Un, rational, or is it crazy? It has given the world ample reason to ask this question, following its threats of war, occasional attacks against South Korea, its succession of eccentric leaders and wild-eyed propaganda. That concern has grown more urgent as its nuclear and missile programmes escalate.

Time and again, political scientists have come up with the same answer. North Korea’s behaviour, far from being crazy, is all too rational. Its belligerence is calculated to sustain a weak, isolated government that would otherwise succumb to the forces of history. Its provocations introduce massive danger, but stave off what North Korea sees as the even greater threats of invasion or collapse.

North Korea does not want a war but, as an act of policy, its reasoning leads it to cultivate a permanent risk of one. In many ways this is more dangerous than irrational. It prepares to stave off defeat if war should happen by dangling the potential - through its possession of nuclear weapons - of their use. That is a subtler danger, but a grave one.

In a perverse way, North Korea behaves according to its perceived self-interest, the first of which is self-preservation. States are irrational when they do not follow self-interest. In the extreme form of irrationality, leaders are so deranged that they are incapable of judging their own interests. North Korea’s actions, while abhorrent, appear to lie well within rational self-interest. At home and abroad, successive North Korean leaders shrewdly determine their interests and act on them.

As a study by David C. Kang, a political scientist now at the University of California, put it: “All the evidence points to their ability to make sophisticated decisions and to manage domestic and international policies with extreme precision.”

From afar, North Korea’s actions look crazy. Its domestic propaganda describes a reality that does not exist and it appears bent on almost provoking a war that it would certainly lose. But seen from North Korea’s perspective, these actions make perfect sense. Over time, its government’s reputation for irrationality has become an asset as the means of intimidating its adversaries.

It is North Korea’s rationality that makes it so dangerous. Since it believes it can survive only by keeping the Korean peninsula on the brink of war, it creates a risk of sparking just that, perhaps through some accident or miscalculation. It is aware of this risk, but appears to believe it has no choice.

It seems genuinely to fear an American attack. This is rational since weak states that face more powerful enemies must either make peace – which North Korea cannot do without sacrificing its political legitimacy – or find a way of making any conflict survivable.

North Korea’s nuclear programme is designed to halt an American invasion by first striking near-by US military bases and South Korean ports, then by threatening a missile launch against the American mainland. While it does not yet have this latter ability, analysts believe it will within the next decade.

North Korea is an impoverished country whose sophisticated missile programme has been built with Cold War-era Russian technology, as well as the expertise of Russian engineers who moved there in the early 1990s looking for lucrative work after the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, experts believe that North Korea is some years away from deploying a reliable long-range missile.

What is to be done? It would be wise for the West to plan for a day of reckoning. Following the latest nuclear test – North Korea’s fifth and most powerful – the US called for vigorous implementation of existing sanctions on North Korea and the imposition of new ones.

No country has more influence over this rogue state than China, which provides it with food, fuel and access to vital trade routes. But China’s response has been muted. Although six months ago it gave its support, which was critical, for the toughest nuclear-related economic sanctions ever imposed on North Korea by the UN Security Council, recent reports show that trade between the two countries has continued and has actually increased because China left open big loopholes. These included North Korea’s ability to procure components for its weapons programme.

Beijing will not modify its allegiance to North Korea, fearing that its collapse would lead to a unified Korean peninsula dominated by South Korea, a committed American ally. China sees living with a Communist-ruled nuclear-armed state on its border as preferable to the chaos of its collapse. The Chinese leadership is confident that North Korea would not turn its weapons on China and that it will be able to control its neighbour by providing enough oil to keep its economy afloat. The alternative scenario is a nightmare for Beijing - a collapsed North Korean regime, millions of refugees streaming into China and a unified Korean peninsula under an American defence treaty.

Despite China’s distaste for Kim Jong-Un and his unpredictable behaviour, its basic assessment of North Korea remains firm. Beijing’s goal of preventing a unification of North and South Korea prevails over all other considerations.

China’s continued support of North Korea is a fundamental reason for the US to stop relying on China for progress in reducing the North Korean nuclear threat. Since far too little has been done to contain North Korea’s nuclear ambitions, this accelerating threat will require the urgent attention of President Obama’s successor whoever that may be, whether Donald Trump or Hilary Clinton.

This is why the current debate in the US in the lead-up to the presidential elections is so critical. When there is talk about which of the two candidates is to be trusted with access to the nuclear trigger, the argument is not just rhetorical.

Is Trump or Clinton the more qualified by temperament or experience with control of the American nuclear arsenal? Following the first presidential debate, Public Policy Polling found by an 18-point margin that 49% to 31% of Americans think that Trump is the candidate more likely to cause a nuclear war if he were president.

Trump is not just another demented politician of the far right. His threat of blunt coercion is what makes him so uniquely dangerous in the history of American politics. His temperament and demonstrable unpredictability raise genuine doubts about his suitability to deal with a crisis in the Korean peninsula without unleashing a nuclear holocaust. He and Kim Jong-Un are a catastrophe waiting to happen.
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
News_Executive ‏@News_Executive 5m5 minutes ago

BREAKING: 21 Iraqi pro government fighters are believed to have been killed in a US coalition air-strike in northern Iraq
 

Possible Impact

TB Fanatic
Conflict News ‏@Conflicts 13m13 minutes ago

BREAKING: Reports that Houthis have damaged/sunk a UAE navy vessel off the coast of Yemen


Conflict News ‏@Conflicts 7m7 minutes ago

VIDEO: Footage claims to show the moment Houthis struck a UAE navy vessel with a missile.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSW8N-LCsSM





Mikhail D. ‏@Eire_QC 12h
The USS Ponce, Nitze and Mason are heading to the Bab al-Mandeb strait
near the location where the UAE ship was struck on Saturday.

Ct-O1ZsW8AAEDxe.jpg:small


Ct-O3TJW8AAiY3_.jpg:small


Ct-O4PwXgAAilSq.jpg:small


Ct-O5QQWEAELPaw.jpg:small




Alwaght ‏@EnglishAlwaght 6h
Saudi Blockade Leaves 14M Yemenis in Food Shortage
http://alwaght.com/en/News/69934

^^^ Total food blockade, not just weapons.




foxnews-avatar_bigger.png


US warships sent to area where Iran-backed rebels
attacked Saudi-led coalition ship


By Lucas Tomlinson
Published October 03, 2016 FoxNews.com

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/1...rebels-attacked-saudi-led-coalition-ship.html

The U.S. Navy dispatched three warships near the southern coast of Yemen
after four rockets hit and nearly sank a United Arab Emirates auxiliary ship
Saturday, two U.S. defense officials told Fox News.

Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen claimed responsibility for the
attack. There were no reported injuries to the Emerati crew.
Al Jazeera reported on video of the attack.

Iran supplied the Houthis with the “shoulder-fired rockets” that nearly
destroyed the UAE ship, according to two U.S. officials.

It was not immediately clear what type of rocket the rebels may have fired.
The ship was formerly contracted to the U.S., two defense officials
confirmed, and at one time an American company owned the vessel.

Military officials sent the Navy warships to the southern end of the Bab
al-Mandab Strait, also known as the Mandab Strait, which connects the Red
Sea to the Gulf of Aden.

Two U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyers, USS Mason and USS Nitze,
armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles, Harpoon anti-ship missiles and an
assortment of deck-mounted high-caliber machine guns, joined USS Ponce,
a floating staging ship which includes a compliment of special operations
forces, according to one official.


Describing the U.S. response to the Houthis and their Iranian backers,
one official said, “This is a show of force,” adding, “It’s concerning anytime
this happens.”

The U.S. Navy keeps a high state of readiness in the Persian Gulf and
nearby Gulf of Aden south of Yemen, according to the official. It was not
immediately clear if any official guidance had been issued to raise that
posture.

“Sending the warships to the area is a message that the primary goal
of the Navy is to ensure that shipping continues unimpeded in the strait
and the vicinity,” said a U.S. defense official, who spoke on the condition
of anonymity.

The attacked vessel is an Australian built high-speed logistics ship leased
to the UAE, Reuters reported.

The UAE is part of a Saudi Arabia-led Arab coalition in Yemen fighting
the Houthis in a civil war that began in 2015. The United States has
provided support to the Saudi-led coalition in the past, including
intelligence support and mid-air refueling tankers.

Crews are towing the UAE ship to a port in nearby Eritrea, according to
two U.S. defense officials.

The United States strongly condemned the “unprovoked attack” by
the Houthis in a statement Sunday. “We call on the Houthi-Saleh groups
to immediately cease attacks against all vessels.


These provocative actions risk exacerbating the current conflict and narrow
the prospects for a peaceful settlement,” State Department spokesman
John Kirby said.

In April, the U.S. Navy intercepted a weapons shipment from Iran to Yemen
to aid the Houthis ahead of President Obama’s visit to Saudi Arabia.

A year earlier, the U.S. Navy dispatched the aircraft carrier USS Theodore
Roosevelt to shadow an Iranian convoy which had weapons displayed
brazenly on its decks. The Iranian convoy turned around and returned
home before it reached Yemen, U.S. defense officials said at the time.

Lucas Tomlinson is the Pentagon and State Department producer for Fox News
Channel. You can follow him on Twitter: @LucasFoxNews

^^^ Read his tagline carefully...



The Fox/Pentagon report says “shoulder-fired rockets” did this? :lkick:
(Maybe if Godzilla was now helping the Houthis fight!)


The UAE has been bombing Yemen and blockading the ports with Saudi Arabia,
it would be more correct to call this a "counter-attack" than an “unprovoked attack”
as Kirby called it.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-palestinians-idUSKCN1250NB

World News | Wed Oct 5, 2016 | 10:38am EDT

Israeli aircraft attack Hamas in Gaza after rocket hits Israeli town

By Nidal al-Mughrabi | GAZA

Israeli aircraft attacked Palestinian militant targets in the Gaza Strip on Wednesday, wounding at least one person, witnesses said, after a rocket fired from the enclave hit an Israeli border town.

Israeli police said there were no casualties in the rocket strike on Sderot, but Israel has a declared policy of responding militarily to any attack from the Hamas-run Gaza Strip.

Three Hamas training camps and a security complex were targeted in the air strikes and a passerby was hurt, witnesses said. An Israeli military spokeswoman had no immediate comment.

Hamas has observed a de facto ceasefire with Israel since 2014, but small jihadist cells in the Gaza Strip occasionally fire rockets across the border.

A previously unknown group, "The Grandchildren of the Followers of the Prophet" said in a statement posted on several websites that it carried out the Sderot attack in the name of "oppressed brothers and sisters" under Israeli occupation.

In Sderot, metal fragments and a small crater in a street marked the spot where the rocket exploded. The blast shattered windows in a nearby home and damaged a car.

Shortly after the attack, Israeli tank shells struck a Hamas observation post near the northern Gaza town of Beit Hanoun. Local residents said there were no casualties.

Several hours later, Israeli aircraft hit the training camps, in the southern and central parts of the Gaza Strip, as well as a security complex in the north, witnesses said.

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri issued a statement warning Israel against continuing what he termed its aggression. "Hamas stresses it can not keep silent if the escalation continues," he said.

Militants in the Gaza Strip last fired a rocket into Israel on Aug. 21, in an incident that also caused no casualties, and drew an Israeli air strike and tank shelling.

(Reporting by Jeffrey Heller and Nidal al-Mughrabi; Writing by Jeffrey Heller; Editing by Raissa Kasolowsky)

Also In World News
Baghdad bridles at Turkey's military presence, warns of 'regional war'
Two Brussels police stabbed in possible terrorist attack: prosecutor
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
WOW.......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/ben-cardin-russia-consequences-putin-229199

Cardin rips Russia, says U.S. must 'revisit' approach to Cold War rival

By Nahal Toosi
10/05/16 03:30 PM EDT

A top Senate Democrat is warning in harsh terms that Russia must face "consequences" for its actions in Syria and beyond, and that the U.S. "must revisit its overall approach" to the nuclear-armed government of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The blistering statement by Ben Cardin, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a Russia specialist, underscores the growing bipartisan fury in Congress with Moscow as it tangles with the U.S. over Syria and Ukraine and allegedly meddles in America's elections.

The statement also follows the collapse of U.S.-Russian efforts to impose a cease-fire in Syria, and comes as the Obama administration considers imposing new sanctions on Russia over its role in Syria.

“Russia clearly has no interest in counter-terrorism cooperation, humanitarian relief, or political progress in Syria," Cardin said. “Through its words and deeds, it appears Vladimir Putin’s Russia is not a partner for peace."

The Obama administration said Monday it was suspending its bilateral negotiations with Russia over a Syrian cease-fire. The decision came amid ongoing Russian and Syrian bombing of the city of Aleppo, parts of which are held by rebels seeking to oust Syrian President Bashar Assad.

161005-linda-sanchez-ap-1160
Hispanic Dems say Pence will pay for 'that Mexican thing' at the polls
By HEATHER CAYGLE

In apparent retaliation, Putin announced that Russia was scrapping a 16-year-old nuclear nonproliferation agreement with the U.S. involving destroying plutonium stockpiles. On Wednesday, Russia said it was suspending an agreement with the U.S. to cooperate on nuclear and energy research, Reuters reported.

Asked about Russia's apparent use of nuclear security as a bargaining chip , White House spokesman Josh Earnest said: "I think you'd have to discuss with my Russian counterpart the true intentions of Mr. Putin and this particular policy decision. What I can tell you is that it's certainly within the national interests of the United States of America for us to prioritize nuclear security, and I think any impartial observer would conclude that it's within the national interests of Russia for nuclear security to be prioritized."

Cardin, who represents Maryland and has long advocated punishing Russia over its human rights violations, also has in recent days expressed alarm over allegations that Russia has been hacking U.S. election systems — a frustration felt on both sides of the aisle.

In his Wednesday statement, Cardin said he plans to "explore options the Congress can employ to hold Russia accountable." One option is likely imposing economic sanctions on Russia over its assistance to Assad, an Arab dictator the U.S. already has declared must step down in order for Syria to ever return to normal.

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, a Republican from California, has been pushing the sanctions idea in his chamber. He’s introduced a bill on the issue along with the ranking Democrat on the House committee, New York's Eliot Engel.

"I continue to support the legislation I introduced, which would crack down on the Assad regime and any government or individual that supports it. Russia certainly fits the bill," Engel told POLITICO in a statement Wednesday.

Edward Snowden is pictured. | AP Photo
Snowden: Lack of espionage charges in NSA arrest a 'noteworthy absence'
By MADELINE CONWAY

A U.S. official told POLITICO that the Obama administration is considering leveling sanctions against Russia linked to its assistance to Assad, but described any such move as one of a range of options being discussed. State Department spokesmen have also not ruled out the idea in recent days.

The U.S. has imposed economic and other sanctions against Russia over its invasion of Ukraine, but has been wary of using the tactic in regard to Syria, seeing Moscow as a necessary player in peace efforts. Some European countries, who also are sanctioning Russia due to Ukraine, are now weighing similar sanctions over Syria.

Although the U.S. said it was cutting off the negotiations on the cease-fire, Secretary of State John Kerry spoke via phone to his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, on Wednesday. State Department spokesman Mark Toner told POLITICO that just because the cooperation was cut off, that didn't preclude communication.

"They talked about a number of issues," Toner said later during the daily State Department press briefing. "It would be irresponsible for Secretary Kerry to not raise our concerns about what is happening in Syria."

In a major speech in Brussels on Tuesday, Kerry signaled that the administration's patience with Russia is wearing thin.

"People who are serious about making peace behave differently from the way Russia has chosen to behave," Kerry said.

161005_edward_snowden_gty_1160.jpg
A new Snowden? NSA contractor charged with stealing classified info
By JOSH GERSTEIN and CORY BENNETT

But he held out the possibility that the U.S. might be open to renewed cooperation on "solving common challenges."

"We want to work with Russia.," Kerry said, noting that he had "probably spent as much time with the Russian foreign minister as I have with any other foreign diplomat."

The Obama administration also has been clear that it will continue to seek multilateral negotiations to try to pacify Syria, where estimates of the dead in the five-year-old civil war now reach half a million.

Brent Griffiths and Louis Nelson contributed to this report.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.voanews.com/a/turkey-iraq-tensions-complicate-battle-islamic-state-mosul/3538967.html

Turkey-Iraq Tensions May Complicate Battle Against IS in Mosul

October 05, 2016 8:30 PM
Rikar Hussein
Kasim Cindemir

As the operation to retake Mosul from the Islamic State group approaches, tensions between Iraq and Turkey are escalating over Turkey's possible military involvement in the attack.

The dispute grew more intense Wednesday after Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi warned that the presence of Turkish troops in the north of the country risked provoking a larger regional confrontation.

Around 1,000 Turkish troops are stationed near Mosul to protect what Ankara calls "Turkish interests," which include training Kurdish and Sunni forces to fight IS. Turkey wants its forces to participate in the looming battle to take Mosul by Iraqi, Kurdish and Arab forces. Baghdad says Turkish troops should leave Iraq.

Tensions escalated when the Turkish parliament voted last week to keep troops in Iraq for another year to "fight terrorist organizations." The Iraqi government issued a protest to the Turkish ambassador Wednesday, following a late-night vote condemning the presence of Turkish troops on Iraqi soil.

Future tensions expected

Iraq's Abadi warned Turkey that it was risking a regional war by keeping troops inside Iraq, and said he had "warned Ankara more than once against intervening" in Mosul, Iraq's second-largest city.

This dispute will "complicate the situation for months afterwards," said Michael Knights, an Iraq expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

"The problem is, what do they do after Mosul is liberated?" he asked of Turkish troops. "Do they support some factions? Do they give them a lot of money? Do they give them weapons?"

Turkish troops have entered Iraq several times before, albeit mostly with the consent of the Baghdad government.

A "border security and cooperation" treaty signed in 1983 by Turkey and Iraq allowed Turkish troops to enter Iraq multiple times to chase members of the Kurdistan Workers' Party, a Kurdish guerrilla movement in Turkey that wants independence.

But when Turkey opened a military base in late 2014 in Bashiqa, 15 kilometers northeast of Mosul, the Iraqi government protested, saying Turkey had not consulted Baghdad for permission.

Tensions simmered for months, but the looming battle for Mosul is raising diplomatic pressures.

"We will play a role in the Mosul liberation operation and no one can prevent us from participating," Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told his parliament Saturday.

Turkey wants more than to help militarily in Mosul, analysts say. It is also seeking to increase its influence in Mosul, most of whose people are Sunni Muslims, after Islamic State extremists are pushed out, they say.

Turkish 'sphere of influence'

"What they are doing in Mosul is to increase their sphere of influence," said analyst Knights. "Mosul is a major Sunni Arab city with a population of about 1.2 million people [down from twice that size in 2014, before IS moved in]. It has a major significance for Turkey."

Turkey does not want to see Mosul fall under control of Shi'ite Iraqi troops.

"After Mosul will be rescued from [IS], only Sunni Arabs, Turkmen and Sunni Kurds should remain there," Erdogan said Sunday in an interview with the Saudi-based television channel Rotana.

Ultimately, analysts say, it may fall to the Obama administration to settle the dispute between Baghdad and Ankara over Turkey's involvement in the battle for Mosul. Washington is an ally of both countries and is helping to craft battle plans to drive Islamic State fighters out of the city.

"Washington would most likely solve this Mosul problem before it gets out of hand," former American diplomat Alan Makovsky, a Turkey expert at the Center for American Progress in Washington, told VOA.

However, Khattar Abou Diab, who teaches political science at the University of Paris, told VOA the U.S. "will have a delicate balancing act."

And the U.S. seems to be siding with the Iraqi government.

An American military spokesman, Lieutenant Colonel John Dorrian, told Iraqi state TV that Turkey is "not part of the international coalition" fighting against Islamic State in Iraq.

"The Turkish military presence on Iraqi territory isn't there with official Iraqi permission and is illegal," Turkish media quoted him as saying.

VOA's Edward Yeranian in Cairo and Pentagon correspondent Carla Babb contributed to this report.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india...-of-kashmir/story-w4DlNQezibycdanKPBjfkJ.html

India calls Pak ‘epicentre of terror’, asks it to ‘abandon quest’ of Kashmir

Agencies, United Nations | Updated: Oct 06, 2016 01:54 IST

India on Wednesday hit out at Pakistan, calling it a country that has “established itself as a global epicentre of terrorism”, and asked it to abandon its “futile quest” of Kashmir.

India’s permanent representative in the UN, Syed Akbaruddin, in his statement on the Work of the Organization, also called for a comprehensive reform of the United Nations’ governance architecture.

Video

Roundly attacking Pakistan, he said some countries use terrorists as proxies in their territorial quests.

“Just less than 10 days ago, the GA Debate witnessed a singular lack of support for Pakistan’s baseless claims. Need one say more. Our response to Pakistan is consistent. Abandon your futile quest. Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and will remain so. ”

Noting that the “sell-buy date of Pakistan’s anachronistic approach is long over”, India’s Permanent Representative was quoted by ANI as saying, “No amount of misuse of international platforms by Pakistan will change that reality. ”

Asserting that “We look away as some amongst us stall our collective efforts, as they use terrorists as proxies in their territorial quests,” Akbaruddin added: “We have heard one such lone voice short while ago, making claims to an integral part of India. This comes from a country, which has established itself as a global epicentre of terrorism. Such claims find no resonance among the international community.”

He said the UN has become unresponsive to the needs of our time and ineffective to the meeting the challenges it is confronted with.

“It is a body that ponders for 6 months on whether to sanction leaders of organizations it has itself designated as terrorist entities. At best, it is now a body that can be described as an interesting and random mix of Ad-hocism, scrambling and political paralysis. The Global governance architecture now calls for comprehensive reform.”

On the issue of terrorism, he said the UN is yet to come up with a coherent policy let alone take the lead on one of the biggest threats to global peace and security. “It is near impossible to argue the case of relevance of the UN on the issue of terrorism where even adoption of an international norm to “prosecute or extradite” terrorists evades us despite 20 years of talk,” according to a statement.

Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had earlier used his speech at the UN General Assembly to mount one of his strongest attacks on India on the Kashmir issue, describing Hizbul Mujahideen militant commander Burhan Wani as a “murdered” young leader and calling for a UN fact-finding mission to probe rights violations.

In response, Union external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj said, “(Pakistan) persists in the belief that such attacks (Uri) and provocative remarks will enable it to snatch the territory (Kashmir) it covets. My firm advice to Pakistan is: Abandon this dream. Let me state unequivocally that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and will always remain so”.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://warontherocks.com/2016/10/the-world-has-passed-the-old-grand-strategies-by/

The World Has Passed the Old Grand Strategies By

Michael J. Mazarr
October 5, 2016

It’s grand strategy season in Washington, and with good reason. From*War on the Rocks*to*Foreign Affairs*to a*recent spate of*books, there has been a renewed argument over primacy, offshore balancing, and other contenders for the grand strategy crown. The debate is timely: The international order is in the midst of an epochal shift and a new administration will have to rethink basic organizing concepts for America’s role in the world.

Unfortunately, most of the debate has already begun to ring hollow. The default grand strategy concepts no longer capture the choices that America faces. The most important truth about grand strategy today is that the United States badly needs new options to choose from. The classic stand-off is between advocates of*primacy or preeminence*on the*one hand, and*restraint*or*offshore balancing*on the other. There are dramatically different versions of each, and the terms can mislead as easily as they can inform. As Stephen Brooks, John Ikenberry, and William Wohlforth have*rightly argued,*for example, “primacy” can sometimes imply a straw man vision of hegemonic dominance that nobody really advocates.

The most important thing to realize about these alternatives is that*neither*offers an appropriate concept for dealing with the emerging security environment, which has at least three defining features. The first is a burgeoning, grievance-fueled multipolar rivalry. A number of major powers, led by China and Russia, have become dissatisfied with the U.S.-led global order. They want more of a voice and are increasingly willing to test the edges of rules and norms with aggressive behavior.

A second and closely related trend is a more intense pursuit of identity in a shifting geopolitical context by major powers. In various ways, China, Russia, Hungary, Turkey, India, Brazil, Mexico, Japan, the Philippines, and other countries are redefining their international roles and seeking *enhanced prestige and status as the U.S.-dominated post-war order gives way to something more multipolar, complex, and fluid. Their*status-seeking*is complicated, and in some cases inflamed, by growing*popular resentment*against the effects of*globalization. At both the elite and mass levels, identity politics, fueled in part by a global surge of radical populism, is becoming a defining feature of world politics. Resistance to U.S. dictates is growing, even among friends.

The third dominant feature of the emerging era is a now-persistent difficulty in projecting military power. Part of the reason is the well-known spread of anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) capabilities and proliferation of more advanced nuclear capabilities to actors such as North Korea, which pose mortal threats to large-scale power projection efforts. But the trend also encompasses insurgencies and hybrid tactics that can exhaust efforts to project power over time as well as aggressive*gray zone*campaigns that avoid the basis for a decisive response.* (The United States could in theory develop creative new concepts to overcome both of those barriers—but we have not done so yet.) Adversaries can also deter or disrupt power projection by holding homelands at risk, including through the use of relatively new techniques such as large-scale cyber-attacks.

The fundamental strategic mandate of these characteristics is thus a paradox: The emerging security environment demands more engagement and more restraint at the same time. Neither primacy nor offshore balancing thus represents a feasible answer for this complex and fractious emerging era.*The surge of power- and identity-seeking, for example, makes “primacy” a dangerous anachronism. A range of major powers — China, Russia, India, Brazil, and more — are frustrated with U.S. dominance and determined to create a more multipolar world. A grand strategy that tries to recruit states back to a “U.S.-led” order could run aground very quickly. Meantime the difficulties of power projection suggest that the United States is also at the wrong end of cost curves for reasserting its military dominance: Primacy is operationally infeasible in an age of A2/AD.

Offshore balancing*doesn’t align with the emerging context any better than primacy.*In an increasingly interdependent world characterized by the vulnerability of homelands, standing aloof from the world’s security challenges simply isn’t possible. Withdrawing the balancing effect of American power would be ill-advised at such a sensitive moment. Growing Russian and Chinese belligerence if anything demands a more vibrant U.S. response. Gray zone tactics also cast doubt on the feasibility of balancing from afar. If the United States goes offshore, it is likely to watch helplessly while rivals gain ground, waiting for the big balancing moment that may never arrive. Finally, in practical terms, because U.S. strategy is shaped by so many different interests, ideas and stakeholders, Washington never chooses the pure, unalloyed version of any grand strategy. An administration trying to embrace offshore balancing is likely to end up with an imprecise, halfway version — slashing presence without abandoning alliances, for example. This could be the most dangerous posture of all, universalizing the “Korea 1950 problem” where the United States will not promise to defend an interest (or ally) in advance, but feels compelled to fight for it once challenged.

Where are the New Paradigms?

The emerging environment for U.S. strategy, then, offers little support for either exceptionalist primacy or disengaged offshore balancing. The United States needs a new grand strategy debate to articulate creative new ideas in the space*between*primacy and disengagement. U.S. strategy needs to be more engaged in some ways, on some issues, and at some times, and significantly more restrained in others. In terms of the post-war, U.S.-led order, Washington needs to reaffirm some of its norms and institutions, and be willing to be more flexible on others. The issue is how: By what criteria, capabilities, and operational concepts can the United States best strike this tricky balance?

This debate hasn’t even begun, and so it would be premature to argue for the “right” grand strategy just yet. The important thing now is to begin getting compelling options on the table that offer ways to manage the dilemmas of the new strategic context.

Some options might try to strike the balance with bold geopolitical moves: Double-down on the pivot to Asia, for example, and prioritize the coming rivalry with China (even at the expense of painful accommodations to Russia and disengagement from the Middle East). Or aim for a new great power “concert,” offering China and Russia spheres of influence and building cooperation in areas of shared interest like climate, counterterrorism, and counterproliferation.

Other concepts could possibly maximize the impact of U.S. power while reducing its provocations. A new Nixon Doctrine might be an example, using U.S. defense policy and posture mostly to shore up regional partners with defensive concepts and capabilities. Another option might be focusing on a particular set of capabilities designed to overcome constraints without over-engaging: going all-in on a range of transformative long-range strategic strike systems, for example, that could provide a near-instant global veto on any large-scale aggression (without solving related problems such as gray zone aggression or sudden faits accompli).

Not all of these concepts are mutually exclusive. A future administration could pair a new great power concert with a focus on long-range strike systems, or pursue a deepened pivot through a regional Nixon Doctrine. If history is any guide, given the multiple influences on its strategy, the United States will inevitably settle on a blended approach. But the components should be linked by a central concept that provides coherence to the various efforts, one that can both market and justify the resulting U.S. role.

In the process, U.S. strategists will need to resolve a critical emerging choice about the fundamental goals of its grand strategy. Is it most interested in actively promoting the spread of liberal values or encouraging stable great power relations? Both have been central to U.S. strategy since 1945, and U.S. strategy will never definitively choose one over the other. But the emerging context is creating unprecedented strains between the two, and the United States will have to decide which way to lean. Is it time for the United States to become definitively more accommodationist in its approach to Russia and China, or to redouble its efforts to enforce the norms and rules of the liberal order? The worst situation would be to chug ahead on autopilot, allowing knee-jerk and default reactions to generate arbitrary strategic outcomes.

The next administration faces a daunting reality: Changes in the strategic environment demand a rethinking of grand strategy fundamentals. Reasserting U.S. exceptionalism and offering bromides about the liberal order won’t be enough, but a dramatic global disengagement would be equally dangerous. The debate between primacy and offshore balancing needs to give way to a new dialogue over ideas to manage the multiple dilemmas of the emerging strategic environment.

Michael J. Mazarr is senior political scientist at the nonprofit, nonpartisan RAND Corporation and associate director of the Strategy, Doctrine and Resources Program of the RAND Arroyo Center. He co-leads the RAND Project on Building a Sustainable International Order.

Related:

Commentary
It is Time to Drive a Stake into the Heart of the American Credibility Myth

Course Correction
New Rules for U.S. Military Intervention

Course Correction
Primed Against Primacy: The Restraint Constituency and U.S. Foreign Policy

--

2 thoughts on “The World Has Passed the Old Grand Strategies By”

Rick Sinnreich says:
October 5, 2016 at 2:33 pm

A thoughtful piece, but unlike the binary postures that he rightly criticizes, Mazarr offers no basis for choosing among, let alone prioritizing, the mixed options he prefers. Arguing that the former are too rigid is easy. Formulating a consistent rationale for the latter isn’t. Absent such a rationale, however, we risk reducing strategy to improvisation. Maybe that’s all we can achieve in the environment he describes, but I’m not sure that it qualifies as grand strategy.

Basil Davis says:
October 5, 2016 at 7:15 pm

Excellent piece. Rick: I think the omission was intentional on the author’s part; the development of a new plan would be a basis for another and more in-depth article. For myself, I would venture to say that most of the missteps in US policy since WWII have not been due to an error in grand strategy, rather there have been specific crises that were mishandled or poorly evaluated beforehand. Perhaps more emphasis on evaluation of risk/reward and proper situational planning rather than ‘big picture’ concepts would prove more fruitful moving forward. To me, every situation is unique and grand policies are guidelines, not a rule book.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37572738

Russia expands Pacific bomber patrols near US bases

7 hours ago
From the section Europe

Russia has prepared a new strategic bomber division in the far east to patrol a huge area of the Pacific where the US military is especially active.

Tupolev Tu-22M3 and Tu-95MS bombers will fly from Siberia as far as Hawaii, Guam and Japan, all of which host major US naval and air bases, Russia's Izvestia daily reported.

Russia has sent Tu-22M3s on bombing runs in Syria and Tu-95s regularly carry out patrols near Western Europe.

Nato has criticised Russia's flights.

Britain's RAF and other Nato air forces regularly scramble fighters to monitor the Russian bombers' movements over the North Sea and Atlantic.

Nato jets scrambled for Russian bombers
How to spot a Russian bomber

A Russian defence ministry official told Izvestia dozens of the Tupolevs would be based at Belaya and Ukrainka, in eastern Siberia.

_91546838_russia_bomber_patrol_map624.png

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cp...ion/_91546838_russia_bomber_patrol_map624.png

The announcement comes amid heightened Russian-US tensions over the Syria conflict. Western politicians have accused Russia of bombing civilian areas heavily and indiscriminately in support of Syrian government forces.

The new bomber division will be Russia's second - the first was created last year in western Russia, Izvestia reported.

Tu-95 on display over Moscow, 7 May 15Image copyrightAFP
Image caption
The Tu-95 - a Cold War veteran - can be a launch platform for missiles

The Tu-22M3 has the Nato codename "Backfire", while the Tu-95 - a decades-old, Cold War turbo-prop plane - is called "Bear".

The Soviet Union sent bombers over the northern Pacific regularly during the Cold War, but such patrols ceased in the 1990s and early 21st Century.

However, Russian bombers have been spotted in the region in recent times. In 2007 President Vladimir Putin announced the resumption of Russian long-range bomber flights.

A Russian military expert quoted by Izvestia, Anton Tsvetov, said "this build-up of Russian military capabilities in the Pacific Ocean demonstrates the seriousness of Russia's ambitions in the East".

Russia is also expanding its military facilities on the Kuril Islands, north of Japan. The islands were occupied by Soviet forces in 1945 and the sovereignty dispute over them still hampers Russian-Japanese relations.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Heads up!......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://38north.org/2016/10/punggye100616/

North Korea’s Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Site: Activity Spotted at All Three Portals

By 38 North
06 October 2016

A 38 North exclusive with analysis by Jack Liu.

Recent commercial satellite imagery of the Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Site from October 1 indicates continuing activity at all three tunnel complexes that could be used to conduct a nuclear test. Activity at the North Portal where the September 9 test occurred, may be for a number of purposes including collecting post-test data, sealing the portal or preparing for another test. There is also increased activity near one of the two entrances at the South Portal where excavation stopped in 2012. The purpose of this activity is also unclear although the portal is assumed to be capable of supporting a nuclear test once a decision is made to move forward.

North Portal

Commercial satellite imagery from October 1 shows a large vehicle, possibly a truck, near the entrance of the North Portal. The large canopy in the parking lot that has been present for the past two months remains in place. There is no evidence of new excavation but there appear to be boxes or material around the side of the main building. One possible reason for this activity is to collect data on the September 9 test although other purposes cannot be ruled out, such as sealing the portal or other preparations related to a new test.

Figure 1. Large vehicle near portal entrance and unidentified material around the main building at the North Portal.

Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
West Portal

While mining carts and furrows are evident on the spoil pile, it is unlikely that tunnel excavation has resumed since the pile has not grown over the past two months.

Figure 2. Mining carts and furrows evident on the spoil pile at the West Portal.

Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
Main Support Area

There is little activity except for the presence of a few carts or vehicles.

Figure 3. Carts or vehicles present at the Main Support Area.

Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
South Portal

Imagery shows two small vehicles present on the road as well as what appears to be a group of people standing near one of the portal entrances, indicating ongoing work or maintenance. It is unclear if this activity is test related although this area may be fully capable of supporting a test since excavation stopped in 2012.

Figure 4. Increased activity near one of the South Portal entrances.

Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
South Command Center

A few crates and possible vehicles are visible at the main and support buildings.

Figure 5. Crates and possible vehicles are visible at the South Command Center.

Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
Found in section: Satellite Imagery
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Daniel Nisman ‏@DannyNis 4h4 hours ago

Russia mulls restoring military bases in Vietnam and Cuba. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4863965,00.html


posted for fair use and discussion
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4863965,00.html

Russia mulls restoring military bases in Vietnam and Cuba

Reuters|Published: 07.10.16 , 12:32

MOSCOW - Russia is considering plans to resume its military presence in Vietnam and Cuba where Moscow earlier had military bases, Russian news agencies quoted Russian Deputy Defence Minister Nikolai Pankov as saying on Friday.

"We are dealing with this issue," the agencies quoted Pankov as saying in the State Duma lower house of Russia's parliament.

He said the Defence Ministry was currently "rethinking" the past decisions on the closure of these bases, but declined to go into more detail.
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
I saw this last night but didn't post it. There was also an article I am still looking for where the youngen or one of his ministers basically said we (the US) could expect nukes coming our way any time.


Steve Herman Verified account ‏@W7VOA Oct 6

#DPRK foreign ministry claims North Korea now capable of launching a #nuclear attack, "US will sooner or later face a shuddering reality."



Steve Herman ‏@W7VOA Oct 6 Foggy Bottom, Washington

Continuing activity detected at all 3 tunnels at #DPRK's Punggye-ri #nuclear test site, says @38NorthNK. http://38north.org/2016/10/punggye100616/


Nathan J Hunt Retweeted
Silver Surfer ‏@RobPulseNews Oct 6

Satellite imagery shows activity at all three portals of #NorthKorea's Punggye-ri nuclear test site

via @38NorthNK http://bit.ly/2dyaWCi



posted for fair use and discussion
http://38north.org/2016/10/punggye100616/

North Korea’s Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Site: Activity Spotted at All Three Portals


By 38 North
06 October 2016

A 38 North exclusive with analysis by Jack Liu.

Recent commercial satellite imagery of the Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Site from October 1 indicates continuing activity at all three tunnel complexes that could be used to conduct a nuclear test. Activity at the North Portal where the September 9 test occurred, may be for a number of purposes including collecting post-test data, sealing the portal or preparing for another test. There is also increased activity near one of the two entrances at the South Portal where excavation stopped in 2012. The purpose of this activity is also unclear although the portal is assumed to be capable of supporting a nuclear test once a decision is made to move forward.

North Portal

Commercial satellite imagery from October 1 shows a large vehicle, possibly a truck, near the entrance of the North Portal. The large canopy in the parking lot that has been present for the past two months remains in place. There is no evidence of new excavation but there appear to be boxes or material around the side of the main building. One possible reason for this activity is to collect data on the September 9 test although other purposes cannot be ruled out, such as sealing the portal or other preparations related to a new test.

Figure 1. Large vehicle near portal entrance and unidentified material around the main building at the North Portal.
Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.

Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.

West Portal

While mining carts and furrows are evident on the spoil pile, it is unlikely that tunnel excavation has resumed since the pile has not grown over the past two months.

Figure 2. Mining carts and furrows evident on the spoil pile at the West Portal.
Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.

Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.

Main Support Area

There is little activity except for the presence of a few carts or vehicles.

Figure 3. Carts or vehicles present at the Main Support Area.
Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.

Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.

South Portal

Imagery shows two small vehicles present on the road as well as what appears to be a group of people standing near one of the portal entrances, indicating ongoing work or maintenance. It is unclear if this activity is test related although this area may be fully capable of supporting a test since excavation stopped in 2012.

Figure 4. Increased activity near one of the South Portal entrances.
Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.

Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.

South Command Center

A few crates and possible vehicles are visible at the main and support buildings.

Figure 5. Crates and possible vehicles are visible at the South Command Center.
Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.

Image includes material Pleiades © CNES 2016. Distribution Airbus DS / Spot Image, all rights reserved. For media licensing options, please contact thirtyeightnorth@gmail.com.
 

energy_wave

Has No Life - Lives on TB
F-35 and F-22 fighters to control weapons aboard nearby B-52 bombers by data link

http://www.militaryaerospace.com/ar...-aboard-nearby-b-52-bombers-by-data-link.html

New and old: F-35 and F-22 fighters to control weapons aboard nearby B-52 bombers by data link
September 30, 2016
file
WASHINGTON, 30 Sept. 2016. What if a stealthy jet fighter could control massive loads of smart munitions aboard big B-52 bombers? This scenario of preserving the fighter's stealth by radically increasing its firepower soon may be reality. Business Insider reports. Continue reading original article

The Military & Aerospace Electronics take:

30 Sept. 2016 -- The Pentagon’s emerging arsenal plane or “flying bomb truck” is likely to be a modified, high-tech adaptation of the iconic B-52 bomber designed to fire air-to-air weapons, release swarms of mini-drones, and provide additional fire-power to 5th generation stealth fighters such as the F-35 and F-22 via data link.

An arsenal plane networked to F-22 and F-35 stealth fighters would add substantial offensive bombing capability by using stealth capability to defeat enemy air defenses and still have an ability to drop large amounts of bombs on targets.

Such a scenario also could involve enabling the fighters to control the sensors and weapons on nearby drones to relay strategic or targeting information among fighter jets, drones and arsenal planes.

Related: Exercise shows how F-35 combat jets can data-link targeting data to Navy shipboard weapons

Related: Harris Weapon Data Link for Small Diameter Bomb Increment II receives NSA certification

Related: U.S. Air Force selects TCG BOSS software for tactical data link testing and simulation

John Keller, chief editor
Military & Aerospace Electronics

Learn more: search the Aerospace & Defense Buyer's Guide for companies, new products, press releases, and videos

Read More at Business Insider

F-35s may fly with loaded up B-52s as 'arsenal planes'

http://www.businessinsider.com/f-35s-may-fly-with-loaded-up-b-52s-as-arsenal-planes-2016-9

The Pentagon’s emerging “Arsenal Plane” or “flying bomb truck” is likely to be a modified, high-tech adaptation of the iconic B-52 bomber designed to fire air-to-air weapons, release swarms of mini-drones and provide additional fire-power to 5th generation stealth fighters such as the F-35 and F-22, Pentagon officials and analysts said.

It is also possible that the emerging arsenal plane could be a modified C-130 or combined version of a B-52 and C-130 drawing from elements of each, Pentagon officials said.

Using a B-52, which is already being modernized with new radios and an expanded internal weapons bay, would provide an existing “militarized” platform already engineered with electronic warfare ability and countermeasures designed to thwart enemy air defenses.

“You are using a jet that already has a military capability. The B-52 is a military asset, whereas all the alternatives would have to be created. It has already been weaponized and has less of a radar cross-section compared to a large Air Force cargo plane. It is not a penetrating bomber, but it does have some kind of jamming and countermeasures meant to cope with enemy air defenses. It is wired for a combat mission,” said Richard Aboulafia, Vice President of analysis at the Teal Group, a Virginia-based consultancy.

Flying as a large, non-stealthy bomber airplane, a B-52 would still present a large target to potential adversaries; however, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter said part of the rationale for the “Arsenal Plane” would be to work closely with stealthy fighter jets such as an F-22 and F-35, with increased networking technology designed to increase their firepower and weapons load.

An "Arsenal Plane" networked to F-22 and F-35 stealth fighters would enable the fighter aircraft to maintain their stealth properties while still having substantial offensive bombing capability. If stealth fighters attach weapons to their external pylons, they change their radar signature and therefore become more vulnerable to enemy air defenses. If networked to a large "flying bomb truck," they could use stealth capability to defeat enemy air defenses and still have an ability to drop large amounts of bombs on targets.

Such a scenario could also likely rely upon now-in-development manned-unmanned teaming wherein emerging algorithms and computer technology enable fighter jets to control the sensor payload and weapons capability of nearby drones from the cockpit of the aircraft. This would enable Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance assets to more quickly relay strategic or targeting information between fighter jets, drones and “Arsenal Planes.”

J20 Inverted China's J-20 Chinese Military Review

Aboulafia explained that air fighters being developed by potential adversaries, such as the Chinese J-20 and other fighters, could exist in larger numbers than a US force, underscoring the current US strategy to maintain a technological edge even if their conventional forces are smaller. An “Arsenal Plane” could extend range and lethality for US fighters, in the event they were facing an enemy force with more sheer numbers of assets.

“There is a concern about numbers of potential enemies and range. When you are dealing with a potential adversary with thousands of jets and you’ve got limited assets with limited weapons payloads, you have got to be concerned about the numbers,” he said.

An effort to be more high-tech, if smaller in terms of sheer numbers, than rival militaries is a key part of the current Pentagon force modernization strategy.

“In practice, the “Arsenal Plane” will function as a very large airborne magazine, networked to fifth generation aircraft that act as forward sensor and targeting nodes, essentially combining different systems already in our inventory to create wholly new capabilities,” Carter told reporters. Aboulafia added that an idea for an “Arsenal Plane” emerged in the 1980s as a Cold War strategy designed to have large jets carry missiles able to attack Soviet targets.

Carter unveiled the “Arsenal Plane” concept during a recent 2017 budget drop discussion at the Pentagon wherein he, for the first time, revealed the existence of a “Strategic Capabilities Office” aimed at connecting and leveraging emerging weapons and technology with existing platforms. This effort is aimed at saving money, increasing the military’s high-tech lethality and bringing new assets to the force faster than the many years it would take to engineer entirely new technologies.

“I created the SCO (Strategic Capabilities Office) in 2012, when I was Deputy Secretary of defense to help us to re-imagine existing DOD and intelligence community and commercial systems by giving them new roles and game-changing capabilities to confound potential enemies -- the emphasis here was on rapidity of fielding, not 10 and 15-year programs,” he said.

Carter said “Arsenal Plane” development would be funded through a $71 billion research and development 2017 budget request.

While Carter did not specify a B-52 during his public discussion of the new asset now in-development, he did say it would likely be an “older” aircraft designed to function as a “flying launchpad.”

“The last project I want to highlight is one that we're calling the “Arsenal Plane,” which takes one of our oldest aircraft platforms and turns it into a flying launchpad for all sorts of different conventional payloads,” Carter added.

The Air Force is already surging forward with a massive, fleet-wide modernization overhaul of the battle-tested, Vietnam-era B-52 bomber, an iconic airborne workhorse for the US military dating back to the 1960s.

Engineers are now equipping all 76 of the Air Force B-52s with digital data-links, moving-map displays, next-generation avionics, new radios and an ability to both carry more weapons internally and integrate new, high-tech weapons as they emerge, service officials said.

The technical structure and durability of the B-52 airframes in the Air Force fleet are described as extremely robust and able to keep flying well into the 2040s and beyond – so the service is taking steps to ensure the platform stays viable by receiving the most current and effective avionics, weapons and technologies
b52 The B-52 with all its ammunition. Tech Sgt. Robert Horstman/US Air Force
Weapons Upgrade

Aboulafia said the new B-52 “Arsenal Plane” could, for the first time, configure a primarily air-to-ground bomber as a platform able to fire air-to-air weapons as well – such as the Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile, or AMRAAM.

The integration of air-to-air weapons on the B-52 does not seem inconceivable given the weapons upgrades already underway with the aircraft. Air Force is also making progress with a technology-inspired effort to increase the weapons payload for the workhorse bomber, Eric Single, Chief of the Global Strike Division, Acquisition, told Scout Warrior in an interview several months ago.

The 1760 Internal Weapons Bay Upgrade, or IWBU, will allow the B-52 to internally carry up to eight of the newest “J-Series” bombs in addition to carrying six on pylons under each wing, he explained.

B-52s have previously been able to carry JDAM weapons externally, but with the IWBU the aircraft will be able to internally house some of the most cutting edge precision-guided Joint Direct Attack Munitions and Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles, among others.

“It is about a 66 percent increase in carriage capability for the B-52, which is huge. You can imagine the increased number of targets you can reach, and you can strike the same number of targets with significantly less sorties,” said Single.

Single also added that having an increased internal weapons bay capability affords an opportunity to increase fuel-efficiency by removing bombs from beneath the wings and reducing drag.

The first increment of IWBU, slated to be finished by 2017, will integrate an internal weapons bay ability to fire a laser-guided JDAM. A second increment, to finish by 2022, will integrate more modern or cutting-edge weapons such as the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile, or JASSM, JASSM Extended Range (ER) and a technology called Miniature Air Launched Decoy, or MALD. A MALD-J “jammer” variant, which will also be integrated into the B-52, can be used to jam enemy radar technologies as well, Single said.

IWBU, which uses a digital interface and a rotary launcher to increase the weapons payload, is expected to cost roughly $313 million, service officials said.

The B-52 has a massive, 185-foot wingspan, a weight of about 185,000 pounds and an ability to reach high sub-sonic speeds and altitudes of 50,000 feet, Air Force officials said.
B52s in the Pacific B-52s fly in the Pacific. The Aviationist via US Navy
Communications, Avionics Upgrades

Two distinct, yet interwoven B-52 modernization efforts will increase the electronics, communications technology, computing and avionics available in the cockpit while simultaneously configuring the aircraft with the ability to carry up to eight of the newest “J-Series” precision-guided weapons internally – in addition to carrying six weapons on each wing, Single said.

Eight B-52s have already received a communications (coms systems) upgrade called Combat Network Communication Technology, or CONECT – a radio, electronics and data-link upgrade which, among other things, allows aircraft crews to transfer mission and targeting data directly to aircraft systems while in flight (machine to machine), Single explained.

“It installs a digital architecture in the airplane,” Single explained. “Instead of using data that was captured during the mission planning phase prior to your take off 15 to 20 hours ago – you are getting near real-time intelligence updates in flight.”

Single described it key attribute in terms of “machine-to-machine” data-transfer technology which allows for more efficient, seamless and rapid communication of combat-relevant information.

Using what’s called an ARC 210 Warrior software-programmable voice and data radio, pilots can now send and receive targeting data, mapping information or intelligence with ground stations, command centers and other aircraft.

“The crew gets the ability to communicate digitally outside the airplane which enables you to import not just voice but data for mission changes, threat notifications, targeting….all those different types of things you would need to get,” Single said.

An ability to receive real-time targeting updates is of great relevance to the B-52s close-air-support mission because fluid, fast-moving or dynamic combat situations often mean ground targets appear, change or disappear quickly.

Alongside moving much of the avionics from analogue to digital technology, CONECT also integrates new servers, modems, colored display screens in place of old green monochrome and provides pilots with digital moving-map displays which can be populated with real-time threat and mission data, Single said.

The new digital screens also show colored graphics highlighting the aircraft’s flight path, he added.

Single explained that being able to update key combat-relevant information while in transit will substantially help the aircraft more effectively travel longer distances for missions, as needed.

“The key to this is that this is part of the long-range strike family of systems — so if you take off out of Barksdale Air Force Base and you go to your target area, it could take 15 or 16 hours to get there. By the time you get there, all the threat information has changed,” said Single. “Things move, pop up or go away and the targeting data may be different.”

The upgrades will also improve the ability of the airplane to receive key intelligence information through a data link called the Intelligence Broadcast Receiver. In addition, the B-52s will be able to receive information through a LINK-16-like high-speed digital data link able to transmit targeting and Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, or ISR information.

The CONECT effort, slated to cost $1.1 billion overall, will continue to unfold over the next several years, Single explained.

Twelve B-52 will be operational with CONECT by the end of this year and the entire fleet will be ready by 2021, Single said.

B52 Bomber Getty Images
B-52 History

Known for massive bombing missions during the Vietnam War, the 159-foot long B-52s have in recent years been operating over Afghanistan in support of military actions there from a base in Guam.

The B-52 also served in Operation Desert Storm, Air Force statements said. “B-52s struck wide-area troop concentrations, fixed installations and bunkers, and decimated the morale of Iraq's Republican Guard,” an Air Force statement said.

In 2001, the B-52 provided close-air support to forces in Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom, service officials said. The B-52 also played a role in Operation Iraqi Freedom. On March 21, 2003, B-52Hs launched approximately 100 CALCMs (Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missiles) during a night mission.

Given the B-52s historic role in precision-bombing and close air support, next-generation avionics and technologies are expected to greatly increase potential missions for the platform in coming years, service officials said.

Read the original article on Scout Warrior. Copyright 2016. Follow Scout Warrior on Twitter.
More from Scout Warrior:

Navy Weighs New Attack Methods for LRASM
Russia Taunts the US to Intervene in Syria
One Commando Kills 30 Taliban
VIDEO: Special Forces Raid Terrorist Compound
5 Times Navy Ships Returned After Damage

SEE ALSO: We spent a day with the people who fly and fix the F-35 — here's what they have to say about the most expensive weapons project in history
NOW WATCH: Watch 12 B-52s take off in an exercise to demonstrate the US's 'nuclear prowess'
 
Top