Showing posts with label Missiles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Missiles. Show all posts

The Dog Wags Trump

SUBHEAD: The "missile attack" on Syria hardly diverted attention from the impeachment lava flow headed Trump's way.

By Juan Wilson on 14 April 2018 for Island Breath -
(http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-dog-wags-trump.html)


Image above: US Tomahawk fly missiles over Damascus, Syria. Photo by Hassan Amma. From (http://www.srzd.com/geral/putin-acusa-eua-ataque-agrava-crise-humanitaria-na-siria/).

The Upside
Bombing hardly worked to divert attention from "Trump's bad press problem a year ago when US navel forces in the Mediterranean Sea sent 59 Tomahawk missiles to a pre-warned Shayrat Air Base in Syria on 7 April 2017. That "wagging of the dog" ended with Syrian combat flights resumed from the airbase the same day on the relatively undamaged runways.

Now we have another show of force against the Syrian government in reprisal for another supposed "weapons of mass destruction" incident with poison gas. This time 71 of 105 Tomahawk missiles were intercepted by high tech Russian installed missile defense systems.

This kill count was likely enhanced by US military information provided to the Russians to avoid tripping into WWIII.

The effort to drag our allies into this mess did more harm than good, in that England and France (both nuclear powers) came along for the show but Germany and Italy wanted no part i it. This effectively splits the NATO alliance in two.

The Downside
It appears the Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's "personal attorney" and "Fixer"- who did not practice law or have other clients to speak of - will likely be the fall guy for a myriad of felonies related Trump's "business activity" otherwise known as  "organized crime". As in the "Godfather", Cohen has been the Consigliere (counselor Tom Hagen) to the Don ( mob boss Michael Corleone).

Unfortunately for Trump, the warrant the FBI obtained to search the home, office, and hotel room occupied by Cohen will likely produce a treasure trove of records pointing to criminal activity of the Trump organization.

If you look at the leadership personnel of the FBI, Special Prosecutor's Office, and Court of the Southern District of New York, you will realize that it is the Republicans that are legally going after Trump in a way that will likely lead to impeachment in the Republican controlled US Congress and Senate.

Trump is Toast
I think the writing is on the wall. The conservative Deep State has been embarrassed by Trump's crudeness, ignorance, narcissism, selfishness and impropriety. The stench of corruption is everywhere and it's too ugly for them to watch. George Bush was an embarrassment as well, but at least he took orders from Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Karl Rove. Trump has the misconception that he's "The Boss". Sorry chump! YOU'RE FIRED! 


.

Stop Navy killing marine mammals

SOURCE: Koohan Paik (koohanpaik@gmail.com)
SUBHEAD:  Tell the Navy to examine alternatives that would limit activities harmful to marine mammals.

By Dave Henkin on 6 December 2017 for Earth Justice -
(https://secure.earthjustice.org/site/SPageNavigator/P2A_NavySonar.html)


Image above: Outrigger canoe tries to keep this pod of pilot whales from beaching at Kalapaki on Kauai - five of them died. From (http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/36592433/officials-investigating-several-whales-stranded-at-kauais-kalapaki-beach).

The key to reducing harm to marine mammals is to restrict harmful Navy activities in sensitive marine habitat.

Unfortunately, the Navy proposes stripping protections from critical areas.

Thousands of whales, dolphins and other marine mammals could suffer permanent injury—and even death—from warfare training exercises if the Navy walks back their agreement to a reasonable testing and training plan.

Over the next five years, the Navy wants to fire tens of thousands of rockets, missiles and projectiles and blast sonar for tens of thousands of hours in waters off Hawai‘i and Southern California that are home to dozens of vulnerable marine mammal species.

To marine mammals, the deafening sounds from Navy activities can be fatal. In the dark depths of the ocean, these mammals rely almost entirely on sound to “see” their world. It’s how they feed, mate, communicate and navigate. If a whale or dolphin can’t hear, it can’t survive.

Before the Navy can adopt its testing and training plan, it needs to consider public input under the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. You have only until December 12 to tell the Navy to commit to a reasonable plan that achieves military preparedness while maximizing marine mammal safety.


Image above: Two dying pilot whales on the sand at Kalapaki Beach. From (http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/36592433/officials-investigating-several-whales-stranded-at-kauais-kalapaki-beach).

After a landmark settlement with Earthjustice in 2015, the Navy voluntarily agreed to safeguards for whales, dolphins and other marine mammals, protecting vast swaths of vital ocean habitat. But these common sense measures are conspicuously missing from Navy’s draft plan for the next five years of training and testing around the Hawaiian Islands and off Southern California.

The settlement proved that the Navy can both protect our nation and minimize harm to whales and dolphins by limiting the use of sonar and explosives in vital habitats.

The waters off the coast of Southern California are a globally important feeding area for endangered whales, and, for numerous small, resident whale and dolphin populations off Hawai‘i, the islands are literally their only home.

For years, scientists have documented that mid-frequency sonar wreaks havoc on the ocean environment, causing serious impacts to marine mammals, such as permanent hearing loss, lung injuries, strandings, habitat abandonment and even death.

The Navy already acknowledged that it doesn’t need to train in every square inch of the ocean and that it can take reasonable steps to reduce the deadly toll of its activities. Tell it to examine and pursue alternatives that protect both the nation and irreplaceable marine life.

See also: 
Ea O Ka Aina: Air Force plans to bomb whales 2/6/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Hawaiian spinner dolphin restriction 1/9/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Navy to dump 20K tons of poison 11/16/16
Ea O Ka Aina: PMRF injuring marine mammals10/9/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Judgement against RIMPAC 2016 5/29/16
Ea O Ka Aina: US court RIMPAC Impact decision 4/3/15
Ea O Ka Aina: PMRF RIMPAC Claptrap 11/22/14
Ea O Ka Aina: RIMPAC 2014 - another whale death 7/26/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Navy Injury & Death Toll 3/19/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Navy License to Kill 10/9/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Navy admits threat to sea mammals 5/10/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Talk on Ocean Noise 12/28/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Navy to kill Pacific whales 1/17/09

Hawaii prepares for nuclear attack

SUBHEAD: Officials wanted to roll out a response plan before tensions escalated. Then Trump's threats began.

By Carla Herreria on 12 August 2017 for Huffington Post -
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hawaii-response-plan-north-korea-nuclear-tension_us_598cf7e1e4b09071f698b844)


Image above: Why is Hawaii threatened? Because of strategic location to control the Pacific Ocean. That's a major reason for America's takeover. many of the islands are riddled with important military targets.

Months before President Donald Trump threatened North Korea with “fire and fury,” before North Korea claimed to be planning a mid-August attack on Guam and well before Trump tweeted that the U.S. military was “locked and loaded” to strike, officials in Hawaii began organizing guidelines for civilians in case of a nuclear attack on the islands.

The Hawaii Emergency Management Agency has been preparing for possible threats from North Korea since January while trying to avoid causing undue anxiety among residents. But as the state began rolling out its response plan, North Korea successfully test-launched two intercontinental ballistic missiles in July with ranges within reach of Hawaii.

Then a very public exchange of threats and one-upmanship began between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

“Of all the worst things that can happen is to stoop to the level of North Korea [with] threats of destruction and nuclear weapons,” Carl Baker, director of programs at the Honolulu-based Pacific Forum Center for Strategic and International Studies, told HuffPost.

Though most experts are certain that the risk of a North Korean attack on Hawaii, let alone anywhere in the U.S., is still very low, Baker said the president’s “rhetoric isn’t doing anybody any good.”

“Most people are dismissive [of North Korea’s threats] and understand that this isn’t a problem,” said Baker, a retired Air Force officer who served as an intelligence analyst for U.S. Forces Korea. “But when you ratchet up the rhetoric like that and you get the bombast from both sides, it just makes everyone more uncertain.”

Hawaii is one of the first states to begin preparing for a nuclear strike from North Korea. Gov. David Ige requested the attack response plan from the state’s Department of Defense in December after military officials briefed him on North Korea’s potential threats to Hawaii.

“It’s only a matter of time that North Korea will be able to strike Hawaii with any kind of accuracy,” Lt. Col. Charles Anthony, a spokesman for the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, told HuffPost.

“We want to get ahead of” the threat, Anthony added. “To us, it made much more sense to try to get a public information campaign out there before [North Korea] had a series of successful ICBM tests.”


Image above: Test flight of an Aegis missile from the Barking Sand area of the Pacific Missile Range Facilty (PMRF) on Kauai.

If a missile were to be launched at the islands, officials say, the state would have approximately 20 minutes to respond. The U.S. Pacific Command in Hawaii would identify the launch within five minutes, giving the islands’ 1.4 million residents a mere 15 minutes to take shelter.

This scenario is what the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency is preparing residents for with a public information campaign, a revised set of nuclear response guidelines and the restoration of statewide attack warning sirens that had been turned off after the thawing of the Cold War in the late 1980s. Ideally, all this would’ve rolled out without stirring up fears ― a just-in-case plan.

Then things between North Korea and the U.S. escalated in a very public way.

“When we started this process, North Korea was zero for five in terms of ICBM missile tests,” Anthony told HuffPost, referring to the five failed ICBM tests. “About a week after we rolled out the public information campaign [on the state’s nuclear response guidelines], North Korea had successfully tested the second ICBM.”

Anthony said that Trump’s increasingly intense exchanges of threats with North Korea aren’t disturbing the state’s plans to prepare residents and visitors for an attack.

“We’re not concerning ourselves with any rhetoric coming out of North Korea or Washington,” Anthony said. “We’ve got our plans, and we’re working on our plans on our particular time table.”

North Korea has made major advancements in the country’s weapon program, which now includes ICBMs and miniaturized warheads that are potentially within range of Hawaii, as well as the mainland’s West Coast and Denver.

But most experts believe that there is no real threat to U.S. soil, especially since it remains unclear if Pyongyang has developed the accuracy to deliver a long-range missile to its intended target.

An attack on Hawaii also wouldn’t be a smart move for North Korea ― and they know that, according to Denny Roy, a senior fellow at the East-West Center in Honolulu who focuses on North Korea.

“An actual strike against Hawaii doesn’t make sense because it wouldn’t help North Korea win a war,” Roy told HuffPost. It “would result in immediate and massive U.S. retaliation, probably the complete destruction of Pyongyang, and would seal not only the defeat of North Korea but its erasure as a political entity.”

And leaders in North Korea aren’t suicidal, Roy added.

However, it appears that Adm. Harry Harris Jr., commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, would disagree.

Harris, who could not be reached for an interview, told Congress in April that Kim is “clearly in a position to threaten Hawaii today” and requested that the government consider installing interceptors on Hawaii, which the state does not yet have, and a defensive radar.

Asked about the state’s readiness in the event of an attack, a Pacific Command official told HuffPost in a statement, “We always maintain a high state of readiness and have the capabilities to counter any threat, to include those from North Korea.”

The Missile Defense Agency currently has 37 interceptor missiles in Alaska and California that the agency claims would protect Hawaii from a North Korean ICBM.

As Trump’s threats to North Korea appear to be intensifying with every new statement, officials in Hawaii are calling for a de-escalation.


Image above: "Ground Zero" on Makaha Ridge atop Kauai is a  key facility for gathering critical aero-space information for the military and NASA. 

The president tweeted Friday that U.S. “military solutions are now fully in placed, locked and loaded, should North Korea act unwisely,” later telling reporters that if Kim “utters one threat ... he’ll regret it.”

In a statement sent to HuffPost, Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) called for “steady American leadership” in order to de-escalate the tensions between the U.S. and North Korea.

“Bluster and saber-rattling will only exacerbate an already difficult situation,” Hirono said.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) criticized Trump’s exchanges with North Korea in a series of tweets this week, calling the president’s statements “unwise in tone, substance,” and urging Americans to listen to the Pacific Command and U.S. Forces Korea commanders instead.

Responding to reports that Trump improvised his North Korea remarks, Schatz said, “Am I supposed to be reassured?”

Amid all this war talk, some in Hawaii want to remind the president who he is endangering when threatening North Korea with nuclear war.

“Trump’s rhetoric puts Hawaii and even more Guam ... on the front line,” DeSoto Brown, Honolulu Bishop Museum historian, told HuffPost, likening the situation to Hawaii’s positioning during World War II.

“The situation is again beyond our capacity to control it,” DeSoto said of a possible nuclear threat.

“It’s just as it was in 1941 because of our geographic location and because of ... the country we are a part of,” he added, referring to the attack on Pearl Harbor. “There’s nothing we can really do about it except either ignore it or try to think seriously about what would we do.”

.

Hawaii readies for N. Korea missile

SUBHEAD: State Emergency Mgt. Agency plans education and monthly tests of “attack-warning” siren.

By AP Staff on 21 July 2017 in Civil Beat -
(http://www.civilbeat.org/2017/07/hawaii-prepares-for-unlikely-north-korea-missile-threat/?mc_cid=0b03c49776&mc_eid=28610da3ab)


Image above: Photo shows launch of a Hwasong-14 intercontinental ballistic missile on July 4, 2017 distributed by the North Korean government. From original article.

Hawaii is the first state to prepare the public for the unlikely possibility of a ballistic missile strike from North Korea.

The state’s Emergency Management Agency on Friday announced a public education campaign about what to do. Hawaii lawmakers have been urging emergency management officials to update Cold War-era plans for coping with a nuclear attack as North Korea develops nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles that can reach the islands.

Starting in November, Hawaii will begin monthly tests of an “attack-warning” siren the state hasn’t heard since the end of the Cold War in the 1980s.

The wailing siren will be tested on the first working day of each month, after a test of an “attention-alert” steady tone siren with which residents are already familiar.

Informational brochures, along with TV, radio and internet announcements will help educate the public about the new siren sound and provide preparedness guidance.

“If they’re not educated, they could actually be frightened by it,” agency Executive Director Toby Clairmont said of needing several months to introduce the new siren.

Because it would take a missile 15 minutes — maybe 20 minutes — to arrive, the instructions to the public are simple: “Get inside, stay inside and stay tuned,” said Vern Miyagi, agency administrator. “You will not have time to pick up your family and go to a shelter and all that kind of stuff. … It has to be automatic.”

He stressed that his agency is simply trying to stay ahead of a “very unlikely” scenario, but it’s a possibility that Hawaii can’t ignore.

Hawaii is an important strategic outpost for the U.S. military. The island of Oahu is home to the U.S. Pacific Command, the military’s headquarters for the Asia-Pacific region. It also hosts dozens of ships at Pearl Harbor and is a key base for the Navy, Air Force, Army and Marine Corps.

The Hawaii Tourism Authority supports preparing for disasters, but it is concerned that misinformation about bracing for a North Korea attack could scare travelers from visiting the islands, spokeswoman Charlene Chan said in a statement:
“The effect of such a downturn would ultimately be felt by residents who rely on tourism’s success for their livelihood.”
With that in mind, Miyagi reiterated, “Hawaii is still safe.”

Hawaii residents, who already face hazards including from tsunami and hurricanes, are familiar with disaster preparedness. Because it’s currently hurricane season, residents should already have an emergency kit that includes 14-days of food and water.

“It also works for this type of scenario,” Lt. Col. Charles Anthony, spokesman for the Hawaii State Department of Defense.

Hawaii officials surveyed 28 U.S. states and cities about what they’re doing for the North Korea threat. “They think it’s too soon,” Clairmont said.

But counterparts in California have contacted him asking for guidance now that they are starting to look at a similar effort, Clairmont said.

.

The Militarized Pacific

SUBHEAD: American military excess in a region scarred by militarism and an ongoing legacy of war without end.

By Jon Letman on 14 May 2017 for Truth Out -
(http://www.truth-out.org/op-ed/item/23688-the-militarized-pacific-an-anniversary-without-end)


Image above: Marshallese children swim and play amongst a junk heap on the shore of tiny Ebeye island, one of the most densely populated places on earth. Some 11-12,000 people are packed onto the 80 acre island. Photo by Richard Ross. From original article.

March 1, the 60th anniversary of the Castle Bravo test - a nuclear detonation over a thousand times more powerful than the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima - has come and gone.

Predictably, major decadal events, like a 15-megaton explosion over a Micronesian atoll, garner fleeting attention, but it's all the days between the anniversaries that tell the real story of those who live with the impacts.

For the people of the Marshall Islands, where Enewetak, Bikini and neighboring atolls were irradiated and rendered uninhabitable by 67 nuclear tests between 1946 and 1958, the brief anniversary recognition only underscores what little attention the Marshallese and, in a broader sense, millions of peoples of the Asia-Pacific are given by the US government and public.

The Marshallese, like people across the Pacific, live with impacts of plans devised at the United States Pacific Command (USPACOM) headquarters in Hawaii. After the Pentagon, PACOM is one of the world's most far-reaching military command centers.

With a self-proclaimed "Area of Responsibility" that absorbs half the world's population and covers roughly half the planet from the Arctic to the Antarctic, across the Indian Ocean and from Central Asia to the Central Pacific, it gives new meaning to the word "vast."

Generally, the US public gives little, if any, thought to the impact their military has on entire societies, economies and the natural environments that sustain them - as they pursue "American interests" and "national security" under America's self-dubbed first Pacific president.

Many Americans are aware of the US military presence in Hawaii, Okinawa, Guam and throughout Japan and South Korea. Those old enough may recall the now-closed naval base at Subic Bay in the Philippines and might have noticed President Obama's 2011 announcement of an Asia-Pacific pivot.

Part of the pivot includes the deployment of up to 2,500 Marines, along with B52 bombers, FA18s, C17 transport aircraft and other military hardware, to Northern Australia and a naval base in Western Australia.

However, places like the US-backed naval base being built on South Korea's Jeju island and the enormous military testing and training ranges in the Northern Mariana Islands (larger than much of the western United States) receive almost no attention. Names like Pagan, Rongelap and Kwajalein are scarcely known in the country that uses these islands for its own military testing.

Something to Prove
Nowhere are the costs of a militarized Pacific better illustrated than in the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI). The tiny Micronesian nation, located between Hawaii and Guam, has just 53,000 people. The Marshallese are a young population - the median age is just over 19 years old - yet the country is burdened with some of the highest cancer rates in the Pacific following 12 years of US nuclear tests in what was called "the Pacific Proving Grounds."

Dr. Neal Palafox of the John Burns School of Medicine at the University of Hawaii has been working in the RMI on and off since the 1980s. Palafox says health impacts are not limited to elevated cancer rates (especially cervical, breast and liver) and birth defects, but include heart disease, diabetes, stroke, hepatitis, obesity and substance abuse that stem from the dramatic changes the country has undergone since the 1950s.

"The rapidness at which [Marshall Islanders] had to enter Westernization is a large part of the cause of the non-communicable diseases which are lifestyle and diet [related]," Palafox says, adding that increased levels and types of cancers in the Marshall Islands, based on National Cancer Institute (NCI) research and firsthand accounts by Marshallese, are the result of nuclear testing.

In a series of eight papers published in the journal Health Physics, the NCI found average thyroid radiation doses in the southern Marshall Islands ranged from 12 to 34 megarays (mGy), in the mid-latitudes from 67 to 160 mGy and in the northern inhabited atolls (closest to the nuclear tests) from 760 to 7,600 mGy. In the mainland United States, the report notes, exposure to natural radiation in the environment is 1 mGy.

The militarization that continued after World War II led to sweeping societal changes for the Marshallese as the combination of forced evacuations and relocations due to nuclear testing and the lure of jobs at the military base on Kwajalein Atoll led to rapid urbanization.

Today three-quarters of the country's people live on just two tiny islands - the capital Majuro and Ebeye Island, part of Kwajalein Atoll, home to the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site (RTS), one of the premier missile testing facilities in the Pacific.

Founded in the 1960s, RTS supports the US Space Surveillance Network, the Missile Defense Agency and AEGIS Ballistic Missile Defense testing which contributes to the land-based missile systems the US is preparing to deploy in Poland and Romania.

"Slum of the Pacific"
Three miles north of Kwajalein's main island is Ebeye. At 80 acres, it's little more than a speck of dry land but it's home to an estimated 11,000-12,000 Marshallese, making it one of the most densely populate places on Earth. Over half the population is under 18 years old, largely supported by adults who commute daily to work at RTS as groundskeepers, kitchen workers, custodians or in clerical positions.

Noda Lojkar, who was born on Ebeye says, "The living conditions are really hard - it's bad, especially with power and water [shortages]." Lojkar is the consul general at the RMI's consulate in Honolulu, but has family on Ebeye and still regularly visits.

He says some 800 Marshallese work at RTS, each of them supporting around 14 people on Ebeye. Lojkar remembers less crowded times and a friendlier relationship with military personnel but says conditions have grown more rigid in recent years. "The base became stricter and stricter, and it changed people's mentality and how they looked at the Americans," he says.

After 9/11, Kwajalein island access for Marshallese grew tighter even when visiting in search of potable water. "On Ebeye, there's not enough water," Lojkar says, explaining that the military has multiple sources of water.

With almost no space to grow or raise food, Ebeye residents live mostly on imported rice, flour, canned meats and fish from the US or Australia. The tropical bounty found on other Pacific islands is in short supply on Ebeye, and simply traveling to another island to harvest food is impractical or impossible for those who don't have a boat, can't afford the expensive gas and don't own land on other islands.

A Life Changed
Life on Ebeye wasn't always like this. Giff Johnson, editor of RMI's sole newspaper, the Marshall Islands Journal, has been visiting Ebeye since 1976. He's spent close to a year on the island and has watched as various bodies - the US military, the RMI and US governments, and most recently Australia - have tried to improve basic water, power and hygiene infrastructure.

The urbanization of not just Ebeye but the entire country, which began in the 1950s and 60s, saw people come from as far away as the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) and Palau to work at "Kwaj." As outsiders converged on Ebeye, families grew, and conditions became what they are today.

Johnson, who lives on Majuro, describes how Marshallese visiting Kwajalein, have to go through gratuitous security checks that include multiple identification passes, X-rays, fingerprinting and even confiscation of possessions as innocuous as candy bars.

This treatment is disturbing to Marshallese inside their own country. "We're your allies, [we] vote with the US at the UN. We support you and work on the base. We're not al Qaeda. We are your partners," Johnson says, repeating the sentiment of many Marshallese.

RTS did not respond to a request for comment.

By hosting RTS, Marshallese must also submit to restricted access to Kwajalein lagoon before, during and after range operations - that is, when missiles armed with dummy warheads are being fired from or into the lagoon.

Besides poor infrastructure, overcrowding and few job opportunities, Johnson says life is hard in the RMI's crowded urban centers, citing alcohol abuse, dropping out of school, high suicide rates and chronic health problems as contributing factors to RMI's high outward migration and disproportionately high rate of enlistment in the US military.

"Our industry here is government grants from the United States," Johnson says wryly. "That's our economy."

"Safe" Is a Relative Term
In the northern Marshall Islands, 150 miles east of Bikini, is Rongelap Atoll. Today, the main island is mostly empty, the majority of its population having been removed, relocated and then evacuated with the help of Greenpeace in 1985. The Rongelapese community is divided between remote Mejatto Island and Majuro.

Senator Kenneth Kedi represents Rongelap - his home community - in the RMI's parliament. Kedi describes how, following the nuclear tests, women on Rongelap began having "very unnatural babies - octopus-looking, grape-looking." He says a 1982 report by the US Department of Energy (DOE) confirmed that parts of Rongelap were as contaminated as Bikini.

In 1996, the US provided $45 million to the Rongelap local government for "environmental remediation and resettlement," but today less than $10 million remains and, according to Kedi, "we are not even close to ten percent of decontaminating our islands." A Nuclear Claims Tribunal awarded $1 billion for cleanup and compensation, but Kedi says, "[they] did not have the money. It did not even pay us a penny for that."

Despite this, in 2010 the US Department of Interior began pressuring Rongelapese to return to the island or face cuts in financial support. When Kedi asked a DOE official and scientist if it was safe to return to Rongelap they told him "safe is a relative term." That, Kedi says, sounds more like an environment for animals, not humans.

Kedi describes an ongoing health and environmental crisis that is the direct result of the United States but says, "a lot of our leaders in the [US] Congress have no understanding whatsoever of what took place in the Marshall Islands...they have no idea how grave the situation is..." He adds the same is true for the American public.

"There are still outstanding issues with this unique and great relationship that we have. The United States government needs to address the issue of the radiation legacy. We need to bring this to a closure."

Kedi spoke to Truthout by Skype from Majuro hours after the surprise announcement of a lawsuit that RMI filed against the nine nuclear nations at the International Court of Justice on April 24. Kedi likens the filing to David vs. Goliath but criticizes the lawsuit for its failure to address compensation.

"If [the lawsuit] were to include the issues of the Marshall Islands for compensation and health care and rehabilitation...then I would support that. Shouldn't we be focusing on our own issues that we are actually struggling with today - health care and contaminated land?" Kedi asks.

Resolving these outstanding issues, Kedi says, is not just a matter of dollars. "It's about doing the right thing...We just want peace and harmony like we used to have before the testing time."

"More Like Us Than Mice"
Today the Rongelap local government is working with Julian Aguon, a human rights lawyer in Guam. Aguon says too many people consider America's nuclear legacy in the Marshall Islands "a chapter that is closed in a book that has ended, it's relegated to the past."

"Oh, this was so tragic... and we're so sorry it happened but it's over," Aguon says, in a voice feigning concern. He says the US ignores a range of big issues and arguments and relied on a faulty study about limited radioactive contamination. "It's very clear that everywhere in the Marshalls was contaminated - not just four atolls."

The ongoing fear of radiation, Aguon says, is part of the reason why so many people have left the RMI, taking advantage of a special agreement that allows visa-free US residence for nationals of the RMI, FSM and Palau. These compacts of free association (COFA) are full of major shortcomings, not the least of which is the requirement to be taxed like a US citizen but with the burden of heavily restricted health care access. COFA has led to sizeable Marshallese communities in Hawaii and places like Salem, Oregon, and Springdale, Arkansas.

"To put it in historical context, these people aren't able to trust anything that the US says only because in 1957 they were moved back with a very clear plan that they were going to be purposefully exposed to long-term low-level radiation. Not the acute exposure right after the bomb but the inhalation and the consumption of the food," Aguon says.

Aguon describes the Marshallese as having been "corralled together and made the unwitting subjects of non-consensual medical experimentation after the Bravo nuclear test."

In a 1956 Atomic Energy Commission meeting, Merril Eisenbud, director of the AEC Health and Safety Laboratory, described the Marshallese thus: "While it is true that these people do not live, I would say, the way Westerners do, civilized people, it is nevertheless also true that these people are more like us than the mice."

"We, in these far-flung places," Aguon says, "[have] a sense that American civil society really bears a greater responsibility for trying to arrest the spread of certain juggernaut forces like militarism that is being perpetuated in their name by their government for their safety."

(Another) Asia-Pacific Pivot
The plight of the Marshall Islands is the back-story of today's increasingly militarized Asia-Pacific, but David Vine, associate professor of anthropology at American University, sees nothing particularly new about Obama's Asia-Pacific pivot.

"Very early on islands were identified as playing a very important role in expanding the reach of the United States, and US commerce in particular," Vine says, citing early US military forays into Okinawa and the tiny Bonin (Ogasawara) Islands southeast of Japan. In the 1960s US nuclear weapons were kept in Okinawan ports and have been documented as passing through Japanese islands despite Japan's stated opposition to introducing and storing nuclear weapons.

Similarly, in 1987, the nation of Palau, under pressure from the US, dropped its opposition to the entry of US nuclear armed and powered vessels into its territory.

Vine talks about the post-World War II "forward posture" of creating a wall of Pacific islands as close as possible to Asia for its own strategic interests. He describes Pacific island nations like the RMI, Palau and FSM as being technically sovereign but, like American Samoa, Guam, Saipan and the Northern Mariana Islands, effectively run as colonies.

Vine says these islands exist under conditions that overwhelmingly benefit US military interests, perhaps best illustrated by the US insisting on the "right of strategic denial." This "right," claimed under COFA, grants the US exclusive military control over half a million square miles of the Pacific and includes provisions allowing for the use of RTS on Kwajalein through 2066 with the option to extend to 2086.

Pointing to small Pacific outposts that lack "Burger King bases" (sprawling military bases loaded with recreational and other amenities), Vine says, "while sometimes military facilities might be quite limited, they often can form the nucleus for what could be a much larger base." He says austere bases with small numbers of personnel or "temporarily embedding" US forces within another nation's military base (Australia, Singapore, the Philippines), are part of the "lily pad strategy." Vine says what constitutes a US military base in name is often subject to semantic games, using words like "military place" instead of "military base."

According to the Department of Defense 2013 Base Structure Report, the US has just one military base in the Marshall Islands: RTS at Kwajalein. However, it also controls 10 other sites in the RMI which are not counted as bases because they don't meet the criteria of at least ten acres and $10 million PRV ("plant replacement value"). Regardless of the true number, in a country made up of just 70 square miles, every foot of dry land counts.

Vine has thoroughly documented the displacement of Chagos Islanders to make way for the US military base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean in his book Island of Shame: The Secret History of the US Military Base on Diego Garcia. He says the patterns of displacement in the Pacific, specifically the Marshall Islands, are similar to what happened at Diego Garcia.

Anniversaries Without End
According to Vine, this is a very dangerous time in the Asia-Pacific and the US is playing a largely unproductive role that is increasing danger and heightening tension between China and other nations. "The presence and build-up of US bases," he says, "is not the way to ensure peace and security in the region."

In the coming months, the world will mark the 70th anniversary of Pacific battles in Saipan, Guam, the Mariana Islands, New Guinea, Palau, the Philippines and Burma.

More anniversaries will be recognized next year to commemorate battles in Bataan, Manila and Iwo Jima, followed by anniversaries of the firebombing of Tokyo, the battle of Okinawa and then, in August 2015, the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Each event represents death and destruction of the past in a region scarred by militarism and an ongoing legacy of war without end.

• Jon Letman is a freelance journalist on Kauai. He writes about politics, people and the environment in the Asia-Pacific region. Follow him on Twitter: @jonletman.
.

Hawaii missile defense a bad idea

SOURCE: Katy Muzik PHD (kmuzik@gmail.com)
SUBHEAD: A missile defense system in Hawaii would be a costly mistake that won't make us any safer.

By Ian Lind on 3 May 2017 for Civil Beat -
(http://www.civilbeat.org/2017/05/ian-lind-why-installing-a-missile-defense-system-is-a-bad-idea/)


Image above: The first intercept flight test of a land-based Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) weapon system and Standard Missile-3 Block IB Threat Upgrade guided missile, launched from the the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Kauai in 2015. From original article.

Pushing ahead with a missile defense system in Hawaii wouldn’t make us any safer, and could signal to North Korea and others that we aren’t interested in diffusing tensions.

With so much going on in Washington and the world these days, it’s no wonder that the remarks of the Hawaii-based Commander in Chief Pacific drew only modest local attention.

Admiral Harry Harris Jr., who has been at the helm of the world’s largest military command for just two years, told the House Armed Services Committee last week that we should be installing a missile defense system here in Hawaii to defend against a potential North Korean nuclear attack.

Harris has repeatedly expressed concern about the threat from North Korea “because you have an unpredictable leader who is in complete command of his country and his military.”

No doubt North Korea’s nuclear program is worrisome. But there are many reasons that building an anti-missile system is not the answer. What’s wrong with a missile defense? The answer, it turns out, is quite a lot.

First, there are the practical aspects. Despite decades of research and development, missile defense is still a hit-or-miss technology. It can’t be relied on for protection, despite incremental improvements over the years, especially in the case of long range missiles, which pose a very different threat than short range non-nuclear missiles, where existing defense systems have proven their value.

Second, remember the old adage—If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail. That’s increasingly our problem today.

At the same time the Trump administration is seeking dramatic increases in U.S. military spending, and loosening restraints on military commanders, it has decimated the State Department’s top ranks by demanding resignations and then leaving most posts unfilled.

To make matters worse, the administration has put sensitive diplomatic tasks, which should be the province of the diplomatic corps, into the hands of family insiders with no experience in such matters.

At a moment when skillful diplomacy is desperately needed, we’re in danger of finding ourselves being forced to rely on military responses to threatening international events because our diplomatic resources have been so severely compromised.

Third, although we like to view anti-missile technology as purely defensive in nature, that’s not how it appears to our adversaries.

Here’s the problem. The nuclear arms race between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union showed that there really isn’t a role for nuclear weapons in actual combat. Instead, their value is primarily as a deterrent against a nuclear attack by another nuclear power.

The doctrine of “mutually assured destruction,” or MAD, is the idea that neither side could contemplate a nuclear strike on the other because a devastating counter-attack would lead to certain annihilation. Both sides would be wiped out in a nuclear war.  And as long as we knew that, and they knew that, the world stayed away from the brink of nuclear war.

But a robust anti-missile defense system would be destabilizing because it would undermine a key part of the MAD doctrine. If one side could render a nuclear counter-attack ineffective via an anti-missile system, the country that deployed it would no longer have to fear that devastating second strike.

So erecting such defenses can be seen, somewhat counterintuitively, as making nuclear war more likely.

And although the immediate threat today is from North Korea, what we do to counter it has immediately implications for other adversaries, including China and Russia. And their responses could, in the long run, prove more dangerous than the somewhat tenuous current threat of a Korean attack on Hawaii.

Yes, it’s very complicated, as President Trump has been finding out. Each policy has myriads of unintended consequences, and reliance on a missile defense system is no exception.

And, fourth, let’s be honest. If North Korea is targeting Hawaii, it probably isn’t because they’re threatened by our visitor industry. It’s because Hawaii has become home to both the command headquarters and military bases that are targeting North Korea. These military facilities make us targets.

So while island residents mostly relate to military facilities in terms of their economic impact on the state, the jobs they provide, we have to be mindful that they also draw us into the middle of any future military conflicts.

So what should the U.S. do?

I think the first step has to be to stop thinking primarily of military solutions. None of those are pretty.

Meanwhile, China has pointed to the need to reduce tensions on the Korean peninsula by beginning to demilitarize. They have suggested a quid pro quo in which North Korea might drop their nuclear program in exchange for a suspension of joint U.S.-South Korean military maneuvers, which they see as provocative and threatening.

Similar steps to defuse military tensions were backed last week by Women Cross DMZ, a coalition of women from 40 countries, including North and South Korea, who called for “an even-handed freeze on both North Korea’s nuclear program and the US/South Korea military exercises.”


Image above: Admiral harry S. Harris Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet, said a missile defense system should be installed in Hawaii. back in 2011 he said Lybia campaign was sustainable. We all know how well that "victory" turned out... a failed state and ISIS. From (http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/news/story/2011/jun/15/admiral-harris-says-libya-campaign-sustainable/51936/).

But reflecting our over-reliance on military responses—the hammer-and-nail problem— Admiral Harris is doing just the opposite. During his congressional appearance last week, Harris said joint military exercises with Japan and South Korea, as well as deployments of American warships, along with B-1 and B-52 bombers, will “ameliorate Kim Jong Un’s worse impulses.”

It’s not hard to see that what Harris looks at as responses to North Korea are easily seen as threats in their own right, seeming to confirm Kim Jong Un’s worst fears.

In that context, pushing ahead with a missile defense system in Hawaii would be a costly mistake. It wouldn’t make us any safer, and it could make the world a more dangerous place by signaling that we aren’t interested in diffusing tensions between North and South Korea, and their neighbors, or by demilitarizing the region.

So let’s just say to Admiral Harris, “thanks, but no thanks.”

It’s a tradeoff that not everyone is happy with. The military’s extensive physical presence involves a loss of local control over and ability to protect public land and other natural resources.

• Ian Lind is an award-winning investigative reporter and columnist who has been blogging daily for 15 years. He has also worked as a newsletter publisher, public interest advocate and lobbyist for Common Cause in Hawaii, peace educator, and legislative staffer. Lind is a lifelong resident of the islands. Read his blog at (http://www.ilind.net/).

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Kauai military buildup at PMRF 2/22/17
Ea O Ka Aina: Fuck the PMRF's Aegis plan! 1/23/16
Ea O Ka Aina: PMRF Aegis missile test 5/11/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Land based Aegis on Kauai 9/2/11
.

Disgust with Mainstream Media

SUBHEAD: Most corporate media and DC politicians gush over Trump's new war in Syria.

By Nika Knight on 7 April 2017 for Common Dreams -
(http://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/04/07/disgust-corporate-media-and-dc-politicians-gush-over-trumps-new-war)


Image above: Still frame from video of CNN announcing "Breaking News" of Tomahawk missiles fired into Syria. From (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtD1Sl3uDA4).

According to DC pundits, Trump was a dangerous maniac...until he started bombing?

Corporate media and D.C. politicians on both sides of the aisle are falling over themselves to shower praise on President Donald Trump for unilaterally bombing a Syrian air base on Thursday, demonstrating that Washington's hunger for war continues no matter who is at the controls.

Some talking heads' praise for the new war effort has been so over-the-top that it alarmed viewers, as when NBC's Brian Williams called the launch of 59 Tomahawk missiles—which state media now reports have killed civilians, including children—"beautiful" no less than three times in 30 seconds. Williams even misguidedly quoted a Leonard Cohen lyric to gush over the strike.

Print journalists jumped at the chance to beat the war drums, too, framing Trump's decision to bomb Syria as an emotional, heartfelt, and moral one.

The Washington Post's David Ignatius claimed that it was evidence that "the moral dimensions of leadership" had penetrated Trump's Oval Office. And in a New York Times op-ed titled "On Syria Attack, Trump's Heart Came First,"

White House correspondent Mark Landler framed the bombing as "an emotional act by a man suddenly aware that the world's problems were now his—and that turning away, to him, was not an option."

Readers swiftly pointed out the hypocrisy of Trump's supposed sympathy for Syrian war victims, whom he barred from entering the U.S. in one of his first acts as president.


Video above: Brian Williams refers to this Pentagon video of missiles going to kill people as "beautiful weapons".From (https://youtu.be/Q4n3SI81m9w).

Many Congressional Democrats joined neoconservatives in offering immediate praise for the bombing. As Kevin Gosztola of ShadowProof observed:
Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Senate minority leader, proclaimed, "Making sure Assad knows that when he commits such despicable atrocities he will pay a price is the right thing to do." Even Democratic Senator Dick Durbin declared, "My preliminary briefing by the White House indicated that this was a measured response to the Syrian nerve gas atrocity."

Prior to the attack, neoconservative Elliott Abrams, a former official in President George W. Bush's administration, said, "Obama did nothing at all year after year to save the lives of Syrians. Now Trump has to match his rhetoric with something concrete."
Indeed, leftist pundits pointed out that when it comes to war, both sides of the partisan aisle appear ideologically united.
.

Bombs Away!

SUBHEAD: Russia claims Assad’s air force bombed a “rebel” ammo depot that had Sarin nerve gas.

By James Kunstler on 7 April 2017 for Kunstler.com -
(http://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/bombs-away/)


Image above: U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer USS Porter launches a Tomahawk land attack missile in the Mediterranean Sea at Syria on Friday.Photo by Ford Williams. From (http://www.mprnews.org/story/2017/04/07/trump-defends-attack-syria).

Close your eyes, click your heels three times, and tell me if you actually know what the fuck is happening in Syria. There’s an awful lot about the poison gas attack that doesn’t add up for the casual observer.

It was only a week ago that the US enunciated a new policy that we would be content for Bashar al Assad to remain in power presiding over the Syrian government — after years of grousing and threats against him.

 Apparently Trump Central had concluded that Assad was a better alternative than another failed state in the Middle East with no government at all.

That policy change was a yuge benefit for Assad since it removed any pretext for US subterfuge or “black box” mischief against him. He was rather busy fighting a civil war, after all.

Against whom?

A mash-up of Jihadi forces ranging from Isis (so-called), to al Qaeda and Jabhat al Nusra, its spinoff gang dedicated specifically against Assad personally.

Assad’s relations with Isis were ambiguous and complex. Isis had used Syria as a staging area for its operations next door in Iraq. It was rumored that Assad purchased oil from Isis.

Yet Isis had participated in actions against Assad. In any case, all of the Jihadis were Sunni, in opposition to Assad’s Iran-leaning regime.

Assad himself belongs to the Alawite sect of Islam, a twig on the Shia branch. Syria as a whole is a majority Sunni population, so Assad and his father Hafez before him (President 1971 – 2000) have represented a minority (12 percent) in an era of inflamed Sunni-Shia passions.

Trusting that your are not additionally confused by all this, why would Assad choose this moment — only days after the US granted him a pass on remaining in power — to do the one thing guaranteed to bring the wrath of the US down him, namely, kill a lot of civilians, including women and children, with poison gas? Either Assad is inconceivably stupid or possibly the gas attack is not exactly what happened.

Russia has claimed that Assad’s air force attempted to bomb a “rebel” (al Qaeda? Al Nusra? Isis?) ammunition depot that apparently contained supplies of Sarin nerve gas.

Neither the US government or the American media has presented any arguments to counter that hypothesis. The New York Times banged the war drum as loudly as possible in the days after the incident.

And now, of course, Trump Central has fired $60 million worth of cruise missiles at Assad’s main air force base. Assad’s spokesmen denied responsibility for the attack and the Russians are still asking for conclusive evidence via the UN Security Council.

The current incident appears to be — or was engineered to be — a replay of the August 2013 gas incident that left President Barack Obama looking weak and indecisive for not carrying out retaliation against Assad “crossing a line in the sand” against human decency.

And so you have Mr. Trump, who may feel now that he cannot afford to appear weak and indecisive — above all other considerations, including the truth about what really happened at Khan Sheikhoun, Idlib province of Syria.

So he bombed an airport, after warning the Russians to remove their personnel from the vicinity.

In the event that the world ever does learn what actually occurred at Khan Sheikhoun, and the truth turns out differently than the current narrative, Mr. Trump can say, “We only bombed some Syrian air force infrastructure… no biggie… no women and children harmed.”

The outstanding question remains: what might have possibly motivated Bashar al Assad to turn upside down a situation of great advantage to himself mere days after he achieved it? It will be interesting to see if a credible response emerges from the hall of mirrors that US policy has become.



Likely False Flag in Syria
SUBHEAD: Ron Paul says Ron Paul: "Zero Chance" Assad Behind Chemical Weapons Attack In Syria.

By Tyler Durden on 7 April 2017 for Zero Hedge - 
(http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-06/ron-paul-zero-chance-assad-behind-chemical-weapons-attack-syria-likely-false-flag)  

According to former Congressman Ron Paul, the chemical weapons attack in Khan Sheikhoun that killed 30 children and has led to calls for the Trump administration to intervene in Syria could have been a false flag attack.

As Paul Joseph Watson details, pointing out that the prospect of peace in Syria was moving closer before the attack, with ISIS and Al-Qaeda on the run, Paul said the attack made no sense.
“It looks like maybe somebody didn’t like that so there had to be an episode,” said Paul, asking, “who benefits?”

“It doesn’t make any sense for Assad under these conditions to all of a sudden use poison gases – I think there’s zero chance he would have done this deliberately,” said Paul.
he former Congressman went on to explain how the incident was clearly being exploited by neo-cons and the deep state to enlist support for war.
“It’s the neo-conservatives who are benefiting tremendously from this because it’s derailed the progress that has already been made moving toward a more peaceful settlement in Syria,” said Paul.

Many have questioned why Assad would be so strategically stupid as to order a chemical weapons attack and incite the wrath of the world given that he is closer than ever to winning the war against ISIS and jihadist rebels.

Just five days before the attack, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said, “The longer-term status of President Assad will be decided by the Syrian people,” implying a definite shift in U.S. foreign policy away from regime change in Syria.

Why would Assad put such assurances in jeopardy by launching a horrific chemical attack, allowing establishment news outlets like CNN to once against use children as props to push for yet another massive war in the Middle East?
.

Kauai military buildup at PMRF

SUBHEAD: Sen. Schatz and Rep Gabbard pushing for Aegis Missile Base on Kauai's westside.

By Kristin Downey on 22 February 2017 for Civic Beat -
(http://www.civilbeat.org/2017/02/congress-how-vulnerable-is-hawaii-to-missile-attack/)


Image above: Aegis command facility at PMRF for test firing Aegis missiles. From (http://www.staradvertiser.com/2015/12/13/breaking-news/video-photos-released-of-kauai-missile-defense-system-test/).

[IB Publisher's Note: This will do several bad things to Kauai. One - it will paint a bullseye on Kauai as a strategic target that would be hit in the first wave of any attack on America from the western Pacific. We should be going in the opposite direction. That is restoring national sovereignty to Hawaii and have a withdrawal of American strategic weapons systems from the islands. The Hawaiian nation could then return to its friendly relations to all in the Pacific Rim. 

Moreover, this buildup on Kauai will require additional housing for military personnel and their families. It means three shifts all day everyday and additional traffic on our limited highway.

And worse, another ill effect this Aegis base is likely to have is the eventual closing of Polihale State Park in the name of National Security. Some will argue that the park is a source of many "illegal" activities like homelessness, unsanctioned camping, driving on the beach, and illicit drug consumption. 

Advocates of closing access will argue there is no proper road to get to the park and many rental cars are damaged trying to get there. They will say it is also a high risk to inexperienced swimmers and surfers. Just remember in 2009 when rains ruined access to the park the DNLR stalled on fixing access saying it would take years. Because of the "danger" the DLNR chained the gate and denied access to Polihale - to the delight of Syngenta and the US Navy.  Local surfers, contractors and engineers repaved the damaged bridges and fixed the road and forced a reopening of access to the park.

In truth, this park is a vital resource for many residents of the south and west side of Kauai. Regardless of  other "liberal" and even "progessive" positions of Senator Schatz and Representative Gabbard, this issue is a deal killer in terms of our support for them.]


At the request of Congress, the federal Missile Defense Agency is evaluating the threat to Hawaii from ballistic missiles and possible defenses against them.

The little-noticed provision raising questions about Hawaii’s vulnerability was tucked into the massive $607 billion National Defense Authorization Act, which was signed into law by President Barack Obama on Dec. 23. The report will be presented to the Senate and House armed services committees when it is completed.

The provision, Section 1685 of Senate Bill 2943, asks about the costs and benefits of turning the Aegis Ashore Test Complex at the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai into an “operational” weapons intercept site, or a project that may include fielding a medium range ballistic missile sensor “for the defense of Hawaii.”

The provision in the defense bill also calls for creating an updated environmental impact statement, if seen as necessary, that would permit work to proceed quickly.

The report has not yet been completed, according to Chris Johnson, spokesman for the Missile Defense Agency.

“The Aegis Ashore Missile Defense Test Complex at the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai was designed and built as a test asset and was not intended to be an operational facility,” Johnson wrote in an email to Civil Beat.

“While the Department of Defense has no plans to make the AAMDTC an operational facility, we are continually reviewing the feasibility of using current and future ballistic missile defense capabilities to address a range of ballistic missile threats, including North Korean ICBMs.”

The idea of changing the purpose of the Kauai facility has been controversial. Many people are opposed to increasing the military’s footprint in the state. Others fear Hawaii becoming a military target to enemies because of military expansionism on the mainland.

And some believe that the United States has no right to control Hawaii because the overthrow of the kingdom was, in their opinion, illegal.

‘Hiroshima Times 10’


Image above: Photo of Aegis missile test on Kauai in 2015. From (http://www.staradvertiser.com/2015/12/13/breaking-news/video-photos-released-of-kauai-missile-defense-system-test/).

Some danger to the islands could be unavoidable.

“People think of Hawaii as an isolated paradise but it could be targeted by an adversary wanting to neutralize the U.S. military in the Pacific,” said Denny Roy, a senior fellow at the East-West Center in Honolulu and author of a recent journal article, “Preparing for a North Korean Nuclear Missile.”

North Korea’s technical capabilities are growing, and if it fired an missile armed with a nuclear warhead and managed to hit the islands, the results could be dire, Roy said.

“Nuclear would wipe out all life on Oahu,” said Roy. “It would be Hiroshima times 10.”

Roy cautioned, however, that the United States needs to be careful not to overreact to North Korean provocation, which may represent little more than bravado. After all, he said, the resulting U.S. retaliation would destroy North Korea.

There is no immediate cause for alarm, other military experts told Civil Beat.

The Missile Defense Agency’s Johnson said Hawaii is adequately protected from North Korean ICBMs by the U.S. Ground-Based Midcourse Defense System. He said the system includes 36 ground-based interceptors — and will expand to 44 by the end of 2017 — located in California and Alaska. It also includes sensors on land, sea and in space.

“North Korea has not yet tested any operational missile with the range to hit Hawaii,” said Kingston Rief, director for disarmament and threat reduction policy at the Arms Control Association, a national organization promoting arms control policies.

“With each test it is making progress toward fielding a long-range ballistic missile but they are still five to 10 years away from making it operational, according to my understanding,” Rief said

He said members of Hawaii’s congressional delegation would need to decide whether they would encourage turning the Kauai test facility into an operational site that plays a part in the nation’s missile defense strategy.

“It’s a good question for Hawaii’s lawmakers,” Rief said.

Congressional delegation members did not respond to requests for comment from Civil Beat, but are well positioned to influence such a decision. Sen. Mazie Hirono serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee, while U.S. Reps. Tulsi Gabbard and Colleen Hanabusa serve on the House Armed Services Committee.

Making Kauai Facility Operational

On the floor of the Senate a year ago, Sen. Brian Schatz urged the military to “explore new opportunities to strengthen our ballistic missile defense, including increasing the protection of our forces in Hawaii and the Western Pacific by turning the Aegis Ashore Test Complex on Kauai into an operational site,” according to the Congressional Record.

At that time, Schatz said that Reps Gabbard and Mark Takai were “working on” the proposal with the Department of Defense. (Takai died in July of cancer, and was replaced by Hanabusa.)

Schatz discussed making the Kauai facility into an operational site in the context of trying to curtail North Korean belligerence. He said North Korea’s technological capabilities were increasing and it was becoming more provocative.

In the face of requests from China that North Korea stop its missile launch program, the East Asian country instead launched a missile on the eve of the important Lunar New Year celebrations in China, according to Schatz.

On Feb. 11, the North Koreans launched another missile, this one 310 miles into the Sea of Japan, where it landed in international waters. President Donald Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe learned of the launch as they ate dinner after a golf outing in Palm Beach at Trump’s resort estate.

The two men quickly issued a joint press statement, which was delivered as a news broadcast and also as a video message from Trump’s twitter account. Abe called the missile launch “intolerable” and Trump said that the United States stood “100 percent” behind “Japan, its great ally.”

Two days later, the Pentagon issued a formal condemnation of the missile launch.

The next day, there was another odd development, when the half-brother of North Korea’s brutal and secretive dictator suddenly died, allegedly poisoned at an airport in Malaysia. Kim Jong Nam, was once seen as heir to the family dynasty, according to some reports. But it was instead his half-brother, Kim Jong Un, who took control of the country about five years ago.

Kim Jong Un is the driving force between North Korea’s efforts to build an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of hitting targets in Japan, South Korea or the United States.

The population of North Korea is starving, but the missile launch in 2016 cost about $1 billion, enough money to feed the people of the country for a year, Schatz said in his congressional testimony last year.


See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Kauai and Niihau endangered 9/24/16
Ea O Ka Aina: DLNR responsibility on RIMPAC 7/5/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Oceans4Peace Pacific Pivot Panel 6/18/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Ocean 4 Peace Events 6/11/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Prepare for RIMPAC 2016 War in Hawaii 5/22/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Navy to "take" millions of mammals 5/17/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Fuck the PMRF's Aegis plan! 1/23/16
Ea O Ka Aina: US court RIMPAC Impact decision 4/3/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Kauai's PMRF is bang out of sight 6/28/14
Ea O Ka Aina: The Pacific Pivot 6/28/14
Ea O Ka Aina: RIMPAC IMPACT 6/8/14
Ea O Ka Aina: RIMPAC Then and Now 5/16/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Earthday TPP Fukushima RIMPAC 4/22/14
Ea O Ka Aina: The Asian Pivot - An ugly dance 12/5/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Help save Mariana Islands 11/13/13
Ea O Ka Aina: End RimPac destruction of Pacific 11/1/13 
Ea O Ka Aina: Moana Nui Confereence 11/1/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Navy to conquer Marianas again  9/3/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Pagan Island beauty threatened 10/26/13
Ea O Ka Aina: Sleepwalking through destruction 7/16/12
Ea O Ka Aina: PMRF Aegis missile test 5/11/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Okinawa breathes easier 4/27/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Navy Next-War-Itis 4/13/12
Ea O Ka Aina: America bullies Koreans 4/13/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Despoiling Jeju island coast begins 3/7/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Jeju Islanders protests Navy Base 2/29/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Hawaii - Start of American Empire 2/26/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Korean Island of Peace 2/26/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Land based Aegis on Kauai 9/2/11  
Ea O Ka Aina: Military schmoozes Guam & Hawaii 3/17/11
Ea O Ka Aina: In Search of Real Security - One 8/31/10
Ea O Ka Aina: Peace for the Blue Continent 8/10/10
Ea O Ka Aina: Shift in Pacific Power Balance 8/5/10
Ea O Ka Aina: RimPac to expand activities 6/29/10
Ea O Ka Aina: RIMPAC War Games here in July 6/20/10
Ea O Ka Aina: Pacific Resistance to U.S. Military 5/24/10
Ea O Ka Aina: Guam Land Grab 11/30/09
Ea O Ka Aina: Guam as a modern Bikini Atoll 12/25/09
Ea O Ka Aina: GUAM - Another Strategic Island 11/8/09
Ea O Ka Aina: Diego Garcia - Another stolen island 11/6/09
Ea O Ka Aina: Polihale Clean Up 4/6/09
Ea O Ka Aina: DARPA & Super-Cavitation on Kauai 3/24/09 
Ea O Ka Aina: Polihale access to be restored 3/11/09
Ea O Ka Aina: Polihale access denied! 2/25/09
Ea O Ka Aina: Residents want beach access 1/5/09
Island Breath: RIMPAC 2008 - Navy fired up in Hawaii 7/2/08
Island Breath: RIMPAC 2008 uses destructive sonar 4/22/08
Island Breath: Navy Plans for the Pacific 9/3/07
Island Breath: Judge restricts sonar off California 08/07/07
Island Breath: RIMPAC 2006 sonar compromise 7/9/06
Island Breath: RIMPAC 2006 - Impact on Ocean 5/23/06
Island Breath: RIMPAC 2004 - Whale strandings on Kauai 9/2/04
Island Breath: PMRF Land Grab 3/15/0


.

America on a War Path

SUBHEAD: Around the world the USA military is challenging Russia, Iran and China as the pot boils.

By Juan Wilson on 13 October 2016 for Island Breath  -
(http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/nuclear-war-is-on-the-horizon-this-is-not-just-talk-action-has-been-taken_10102016)


Image above: American and Russian flags in flames. From www.shtfplan.com.

The United States seems to be unable to handle its any of its substantial problems or even identify them. Looking at the presidential race it would seem the most important issue is who-grabbed-who-where.  It comes down to deciding who is dirtier between Trumps or Clinton.

No debate about finding peaceful solutions in the Middle East, Eastern Europe or South China Sea. No back-and-forth on ways to avoid the climate catastrophe we face. No proposals for getting off dirty fossil fuel dependence. No plans for mitigating the damage from the nearing economic bubble collapse.

Both Trump and Clinton have their bogeymen. For Trump its China, for Clinton its Russia. Both these candidates seemed poised to take a punch at their nemesis.

Both Clinton and Trump agree on vilifying Iran. They see Iran's proxy Hezbollah as the source of many evils in the Middle East beginning in the 1980s with the Lebanese Civil War to today with "tentacles" in Yemen and Syria. But it gets complicated. 

It seems Iran is the nexus between Russia and China. Both Russia and China are Iran's neighbors. Russia and Iran share borders on the Caspian Sea and China and Iran share borders with Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Iran is also a longtime ally of Syria and its current ruling Assad family. And, since the United States dumped Saddam Hussein and the Sunni leaders in Iraq, Iran has had an opening to the Shia leadership in Iraq. And the only thing that separates Syria from Iran is Iraq.

So China and Russia and Iran all have more close vital interests in the area than the United States. 

American resentment for Iran links us to continuing confrontation with both Chinese and Russian activities in the region.

We've been at war there for a very long time. It should be noted how very far away from the United States this part of the world is and how it has proved to create for us quagmires in Iraq, Afghanistan and now Syria.  

Our potential "enemies" have been building up their capabilities as we have spilled blood and treasure in the sand. The sounds of our saber rattling will not strike them as so terrifying the next time it comes down to a fight.



US joins Saudis in Yemen conflict

SUBHEAD: US actively joins Yemen conflict with cruise missile strikes on anti-Saudi targets.

By Tyler Durden on 13 October 2016 for Zero Hedge -
(http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-13/us-joins-yemen-conflict-cruise-missile-strikes-anti-saudi-targets)


Image above: USS Mason (DDG-87) fires an SM-2  missile during a March 2016 exercise. Photo by US Navy. From (https://news.usni.org/2016/10/11/uss-mason-fired-3-missiles-to-defend-from-yemen-cruise-missiles-attack).

We can now put away any speculation whether the US will limit its support and arming of Saudi Arabia in its ongoing campaign over Yemen over "war crime" concerns.

Overnight, the U.S. military not only did not rebuke the Saudis for a military campaign that has claimed nearly 10,000 innocent civilian lives, but became the latest entrant in the Yemen offensive, when it launched cruise missile strikes on Thursday to knock out three coastal radar sites in areas of Yemen controlled by Iran-aligned Houthi forces, in what was supposedly a retaliation after failed missile attacks this week on a U.S. Navy destroyer, U.S. officials said.

Cited by Reuters, U.S. officials speaking on condition of anonymity, said U.S. Navy destroyer USS Nitze launched the Tomahawk cruise missiles around 4 a.m. (0100 GMT). The strikes, authorized by President Barack Obama, represent Washington's first direct military action against suspected Houthi-controlled targets in Yemen's conflict.

As we reported previously, U.S. officials said there growing indications - if no official proof - that Houthi fighters, or forces aligned with them, were responsible for Sunday's attempted strikes, in which two coastal cruise missiles designed to target ships failed to reach the destroyer.

And like on all previous occasions when the US got involved in a nation's sovereign affairs, the Pentagon stressed the limited nature of the strikes, aimed at radar that enabled the launch of at least three missiles against the U.S. Navy ship USS Mason on Sunday and Wednesday.

What it did, however, was make Saudi incursions into Yemen even easier, providing the Saudi airforce a corridor deep into the country which making sure Yemen was unable to retaliate against its invaders.

Of course, the official line is different. "These limited self-defense strikes were conducted to protect our personnel, our ships and our freedom of navigation," Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook adding that "these radars were active during previous attacks and attempted attacks on ships in the Red Sea," including the USS Mason, one of the officials said, adding the targeted radar sites were in remote areas where the risk of civilian casualties was low.

In retrospect one now wonders if the "cruise missiles" that fell close to the US ships were merely the latest false flag providing the US cover to launch another foreign intervention.To be sure, the Houthis, who are battling the internationally-recognized government of Yemen President Abd Rabbu Mansour al-Hadi, denied any involvement in Sunday's attempt to strike the USS Mason.

On Thursday, the Houthis reiterated a denial that they carried out the strikes and said they did not come from areas under their control, a news agency controlled by the group reported a military source as saying.  The allegations were false pretexts to "escalate aggression and cover up crimes committed against the Yemeni people", the source said.

it wouldn't be the first time that the US has done just that to launch an offensive war (without Congressional approval). Sure enough, the US from immediately launching a strategic attack.
According to Reuters, the US military official identified the areas in Yemen where the US strikes took place as near Ras Isa, north of Mukha and near Khoka.

There may have been another reason for the strikes: shipping sources told Reuters sites were hit in the Dhubab district of Taiz province. As the map shows, the area impacted by US air strikes overlooks the Bab al-Mandab Straight known for fishing and smuggling; also known for being one of the world's busiest transit spots.

The missile incidents, along with an Oct. 1 strike on a vessel from the United Arab Emirates, add to questions about safety of passage for military ships around the Bab al-Mandab Strait, one of the world's busiest shipping routes.

This latest US attack appears to be just the beginning: Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook warned against any future attacks, adding that "The United States will respond to any further threat to our ships and commercial traffic, as appropriate."

Others chimed in:
The United Arab Emirates (UAE), a leading member of a Saudi-led Arab coalition fighting to end Houthi control, denounced the attacks on the Mason as an attempt to target the freedom of navigation and to inflame the regional situation. 

Although Thursday's strikes against the radar aim to undercut the ability to track and target U.S. ships, the Houthis are still believed to possess missiles that could pose a threat.

Reuters has reported that the coastal defense cruise missiles used against the USS Mason had considerable range, fuelling concern about the kind of weaponry the Houthis appear willing to employ and some of which, U.S. officials believe, is supplied by Iran.  One of the missiles fired on Sunday traveled more than two dozen nautical miles before splashing into the Red Sea off Yemen's southern coast, one U.S. official said.
And suggesting that Yemen is about to become the next major geopolitical hotzone, earlier today Iran's semi-official Tasnim news agency reported that Iran sent two warships to the Gulf of Aden on Thursday, establishing a military presence in waters off Yemen where the U.S. military launched cruise missile strikes on areas controlled by Iran-backed Houthi forces.

"Iran's Alvand and Bushehr warships have been dispatched to the Gulf of Aden to protect trade vessels," Tasnim reported.
As a result, we expect many more "false flag" events in the coming days.



British has Green Light in Syria
SUBHEAD: Royal Air Force pilots can shoot down Russian jets over Syria if they feel threatened.

By Tyler Durden on 13 October 2016 for Zero Hedge -

(http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-13/royal-air-force-pilots-ordered-shoot-down-hostile-russian-jets-over-syria)



Image above: A British Tornado is one of a family of twin-engine, variable-sweep wing multi-role combat aircraft manufactured by Panavia  for Britain, Italy and Germany. From (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panavia_Tornado).


As the US officially enters the Yemen military campaign, the UK appears ready and willing to precipitate a catalytic event from which there is no going back.

With relations between Russia and the West at post-Cold War lows and deteriorating fast, Royal Air Force (RAF) pilots have been given the go-ahead to shoot down Russian military jets when flying missions over Syria and Iraq, if they are endangered by them.

The development comes with warnings that the UK and Russia are now "one step closer" to being at war, according to the Sunday Times.

While the RAF's Tornado pilots have been instructed to avoid contact with Russian aircraft while engaged in missions for Operation Shader, the codename for the RAF's anti-Isis work in Iraq and Syria, their aircraft have been armed with air-to-air missiles and the pilots have been given the green light to defend themselves if they are threatened by Russian pilots.

"The first thing a British pilot will do is to try to avoid a situation where an air-to-air attack is likely to occur — you avoid an area if there is Russian activity," an unidentified source from the UK's Permanent Joint Headquarters (PJHQ) told the Sunday Times.

"But if a pilot is fired on or believes he is about to be fired on, he can defend himself.

We now have a situation where a single pilot, irrespective of nationality, can have a strategic impact on future events."

Where things get tricky is the qualifier "if he believes he is about to be fired on" - since this makes open engagement a function of threat evaluation in real time during stressed conditions, the likelihood of an escalation that could result in two warplanes shooting at each other, just jumped significantly. 

The RAF Tornados aircraft will be armed with heat-seeking Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missiles (Asraams, also called AIM-132 missiles), the IBT adds. These weapons, which cost £200,000 each, have a longer range than other air-to-air missiles, allowing RAF pilots to shoot down enemy aircraft without being targeted themselves.

Providing cover to the largely underreported, if substantial escalation, according to the Sunday Times report an appraisal carried out by UK defence officials said: "It took six days for Russia to strike any Isis targets at all. Their air strikes have included moderate opposition groups who have been fighting to defend their areas from Isis.

Among the targets hit were three field hospitals." In the past 24 hours Russia's Defence Ministry said that it has continued its air strikes on IS positions in Hama, Idlib, Latakia and Raqqa. It reported that the attacks resulted in the "complete destruction" of "53 fortified areas and strong points with armament and military hardware", seven ammunition depots, four field camps of "terrorists", one command centre, and artillery and mortar batteries.

Russia has countered that US airstrikes have failed to make much of an impact on ISIS targets, and as reported last month, a "mistaken" strike by the US coalition forces killed over 60 Syrian soldiers in a move Russia accused of being a provocation to war.

The Sunday Times' report quoted a defence source as saying: "Up till now RAF Tornados have been equipped with 500lb satellite-guided bombs — there has been no or little air-to-air threat. But in the last week the situation has changed. We need to respond accordingly."

But another source of the original story summarized the severity of the situation best when he said that "we need to protect our pilots but at the same time we're taking a step closer to war.

It will only take one plane to be shot down in an air-to-air battle and the whole landscape will change."

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Russia warns of shooting down US jets 10/6/16
.