NALYSIS INFORMATION FROM A EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE

PETROFILM.COM

INTEGRITY  EMPATHY  RESPECT  DIGNITY

Harald Dahle-Sladek

Founder and Editor-in-chief

 Основатель и главный редактор

 創始人兼總編輯



ANALYSIS

THE U.S. MARINE CORPS

PREPOSITIONING PROGRAM NORWAY MCPP-N

A not so logic logistics operations!

Hello friends! Freedom and prosperity are something we cannot take for granted but must work for every day. Under Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the parties agree "that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an armed attack against them all."

The U.S. Marine Corps Prepositioning Program for Norway is a generous help, one that we are greatly thankful for. That said, this must not be something that we can take for granted. Prepositioned war material in Norway is of utmost importance for its survival. Where this material is located is a matter of life and death for Norway's population.

As my study further down indicates, to store all material and munition in one very defined and narrow geographical area makes it highly vulnerable to an enemy attack. Norway has zero protection against any nuclear attack - and hardly any protection against conventional warfare. It is pertinent to ask, what has Norway's politicians done with the oil money? Friends be vigilant, fight terrorism and keep your eyes and ears wide open. Cheers!

The Outdated Norway Strategy

After the end of the Vietnam war, the U.S. military focused on the Soviet threat. The Reagan administration entered office with plans for huge increases in military spending, justified with huge exaggerations of the military capabilities of the Soviet Union. The U.S. Marine Corps needed a role in NATO if it wanted a piece of this larger pie. Simply dispatching its 2nd Division to reinforce the U.S. Army was a bland idea from World War I.

A unique mission was desired, resulting in a sales pitch that U.S. Marines were needed for the defense of Norway. The Soviet Union's northern port at Murmansk froze over during the winter, and a year around warm water port would be helpful. The Soviets might push down the Norwegian coast and seize the warm water port of Narvik. Norway has only 4.5 million citizens and a small army, so U.S. Marines could help repel the Soviets.

This looks plausible when presented on a map, yet critics pointed out that northern Norway is above the Arctic circle and very, very cold, and mountainous, with a narrow, single mountain road to the Soviet Union. The Norwegians had planted explosives and built small forts so they could easily block this path within minutes of war. This objection was overcome by suggesting the Soviets could mount an amphibious end run down the coast to seize Narvik. Critics noted that operation would prove extremely risky, and the Soviets didn't have many amphibious ships. Moreover, it would still take months to repair and clear the road to Petsamo, and the route would still be very difficult for trucks.

As a result, another possibility was ginned up. The Soviets could cut across the open plains of northern Finland and Sweden and seize Narvik along with coal mines in the region.  That would provoke war with Finland and Sweden, but it was a plausible sales pitch. In reality, if the Soviets had invaded West Germany, they would have devoted all resources at that main effort, and not waste combat power on a difficult fight near the Arctic circle while adding Finland and Sweden to its list of enemies.

Nevertheless, the Marines were allowed to play the Norway game, and conducted annual reinforcement exercises. Equipment for a 15,000-man Marine Air-Ground Task force was "prepositioned" in central Norway. If war erupted, Marines could fly in and pull equipment and supplies out of storage from several locations:

Ground Equipment Caves

Frigaard 139,936 sq.ft.; Tromsdal 171,349 sq.ft.; Bjugn 110,000 sq.ft.

Aviation Support Equipment

Vaernes Air Station (Rotary) 60,500 sq.ft.; Oerland Air Station (Fixed) 60,500 sq.ft.

Ammunition Caves

Hammernesodden; Hammerkammen; Kalvaa

After the Cold War ended, Marines assumed this Norway mission would quickly go away. The only value of Norway trips was cold weather training, but that was available at the Corps' huge cold weather training facility in Bridgeport CA, or the Army's school in New Hampshire. However, many businesses were profiting off the Norway "Pre-po" game and used their influence to keep it in place. This dubious Cold War program evolved into a racket, something described in 1933 by retired Marine Major General Smedly Butler:

"A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses."

To help hide this racket, the storage program was renamed MCPP-N and touted as part of a worldwide stockpile, which was promoted as cost effective since Norway paid to maintain the storage facilities. However, this equipment is not easily accessible near the Arctic circle, and not adjacent to ports for rapid embarkation. The cost of rotating this equipment every three years to the USA for testing and overhaul is huge. It was obvious to everyone that this equipment should be placed at navy ports and airfields near areas of potential conflict, like Guam, Italy, Bahrain, or Key West.

The last Pentagon review of our overseas base structure was in 2005 as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld attempted to pry our military out of a Cold war posture. That 2005 commission recommended modest realignments, and summarized the ill-defined value of the Marine program in Norway:

"The Marine Corps, with agreement from the capabilities-Norway government of Norway, has assigned a new global mission for the Norway Air-Landed operational area, it is not clear how these capabilities would be employed or what operational value they add to current capabilities."

As the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan continued, the Marine Corps began to suffer serious equipment shortages. A quiet rebellion broke out among those who manage Marine Corps equipment. They wanted to divert equipment destine for Norway to fully equipped Marine units deploying to combat. They were angered and disgusted when permission was denied, with the laughable excuse that keeping equipment in Norway was a vital to the Marine Corps' commitment to the defense of Norway. All this was after the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union dissolved, and after the weak Russian military struggled to squash a rebellion in Chechnya. As a final blow to the absurd idea that Russia may invade Norway, global warming melted so much Arctic ice that Murmansk became a year around ice free port!

The issue was dropped after Marine Generals secured hundreds of millions of dollars in additional funding to fully restock equipment.  In 2011, the annual Norway Pre-Po sales campaign included a ludicrous "exercise" in which equipment was pulled from caves in central Norway and shipped all the way to Romania  and back to prove the value of keeping Marine Corps equipment in Europe.

As the era of blank check military funding ends, the Ma rine Corps still faces equipment shortfalls. The Marine Corps should be directed to end its MCPP-N program, pull its equipment out of Norway, and distribute it to units that need it, or store some at Navy bases near potential trouble spots, because the Russians will not invade Norway!



NORWAY CHANGES POLITICS ALLOWS FOR US TROOPS TO BE STATIONED ON IT SOIL CAMOUFLAGED AS TEST RUN

U.S. troops on Norwegian soil from 2017

"The United States are our most important ally, and we have a near bilateral relationship that we wish to develop," Defense Minister Ine Eriksen Søreide said in a statement.

Norway will allow U.S. troops to be stationed on its soil for a limited period from 2017, the first-time foreign troops have been posted on its territory since the end of World War Two. Some 330 U.S. Marines will be stationed at the Værnes military base in central Norway from January, the ministry said in a statement, adding that the trial would be reviewed in the course of the year.

"The defense of Norway is dependent on allied reinforcement and it is crucial for Norwegian security that our allies get the knowledge required to operate in Norway, together with Norwegian forces," said Søreide who has expressed concern about Russian military activity since Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea. (!)

Comments to the Minister of Defense

The population on Crimea held a legal referendum on whether or not to join the Russia - and there was an overwhelming majority who voted for joining. Russia did not "annex" Crimea! That is shear anti-Russian propaganda.

"There is no political and military resemblance between the referendum of Crimea joining Russia, and the political and military situation between Norway and Russia today. These are two separate and different situations, and the one should not influence the other.

There once was a legally Democratic elected Government in Ukraine that was ushered out by a coup d’état arranged by the United States Department of State. Has the Minister of Defense forgotten that already?"

Highly paid politicians from 1960-2016 at the Norwegian Parliament, Stortinget, has brought Norway to its knees with zero protection for its people against a nuclear attack! Norway's civil preparedness is a laughable joke, and its military readiness is in shambles!

To meet a Russian attack on Finland, Sweden and Norway, blue-eyed Norwegians have built small forts and undermined roads and bridges with explosives. Just as they did before WWII. It didn't work then, and it will not work now.

"What the Norwegians don't seem to fathom, is that to fight an invading Russian Army and Air Force will be the same as to try and stop an approaching tsunami with tea spoons! History has shown us that Norway is neither able to confront successfully a domestic nor a foreign a threat!"

NORWAY'S "CAVE-IN" STRATEGY

Points towards High Treason!

(C) 2016 by Harald Dahle

King Harald of Norway addresses the State of the Nation

A Theoretical Study of a Two-Step EMP and 20Mt Nuclear Air-Burst Attack on Trondelag, Norway

By Harald Dahle

STEP 1: A surprise EMP knock-out!

Opening Scenario

An electromagnetic Pulse, EMP over Trondelag County Norway, with hypocenter over Trondheim city, knocks out electronics and render any resistance futile. Some military Electronics have built-in Electromagnetic redundancy and can continue to operate for a time.

By General Loborev

Director, Central Institute of Physics and Technology, Moscow

DISTANT ELECTROMAGNETIC EMP OBSERVATIONS JULY 9, 1962

1.4Mt/400 Km burst altitude and 410Mt/95 Km burst altitude

A NUCLEAR ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE

A Nuclear Electro Magnetic Pulse warhead designed to be detonated far above the Earth's surface is known as a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse, HEMP, device. The explosion releases a blast of gamma rays into the mid-stratosphere, which ionizes and the resultant energetic free electrons interact with the Earth's magnetic field to produce a much stronger EMP than is normally produced in the denser air at lower altitudes.

A NON-NUCLEAR ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE

The range of Non-Nuclear Electro Magnetic pulse bombs (NNEMP) is much less than nuclear EMP. Nearly all NNEMP devices used as weapons require chemical explosives as their initial energy source, producing only 10−6 (one millionth) the energy of nuclear explosives of similar weight. The electromagnetic pulse from NNEMP weapons must come from within the wea- pon, while nuclear weapons generate EMP as a secondary effect. These facts limit the range of NNEMP weapons, but allow finer target discrimination.

CHERNOBYL, distribution of Cesium 137 over Europe

Cesium 137 has half-life of 30.17 years

Fukushima Daiichi: A Nuclear War without a War

The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation

GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROP

SAVING ABANDONED ANIMALS

STEP 2: A 20Mt nuclear air-burst detonation

With reference to Hiroshima

THESE PICTURES CAN ONE DAY BE THE NUCLEAR REALITY OF TRONDELAG COUNTY IN NORWAY!

Fried Japanese population of the Hiroshima detonation August 6, 1945

THE YELD OF HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI

Hiroshima 15Kt (+-20%)  Nagasaki 21Kt (+-10%)

A deterministic estimate of the nuclear radiation fields from the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nu- clear weapon explosions requires the yields of these explosions. The yield of the Nagasaki explosion is rather well established by both fireball and radiochemical data from other tests as 21 kt.

Instantaneous evaporation of people - only their shadows are left behind!

To summarize, radiation comes in two bursts - an extremely intense one lasting only about 3 milliseconds and a less intense one of much longer duration lasting several seconds. The second burst contains by far the larger fraction of the total light energy, more than 90%.

But the first flash is especially large in ultra-violet radiation which is biologically more effective. Moreover, because the heat in this flash comes in such a short time, there is no time for any cooling to take place, and the temperature of a person's skin can be raised 50 degrees centigrade by the flash of visible and ultra-violet rays in the first millisecond at a distance of 3657m

A person walking with a stick: Gone in a flash!

A child jumping the rope is left as a shadow on the wall

Scaling the gamma-rays dose data...Hiroshima

There are no equivalent data for the Hiroshima explosion. Equating thermal radiation and blast effects observed at the two cities subsequent to the explosions gives a yield of about 15 kt. The pressure-vs-time data, obtained by dropped, parachute-retarded canisters and reevaluated using 2-D hydrodynamic calculations, give a yield between 16 and 17 kt.

Scaling the gamma-ray dose data and calculations gives a yield of about 15 kt. Sulfur neutron activation data give a yield of about 15 kt. The current best estimates for the yield of these explosions are the following: Hiroshima 15 kt Nagasaki 21 kt the outside limits of uncertain- ties in these values are believed to be 20 percent for Hiroshima and 10 percent for Nagasaki.

THE PLUTONIUM CORE OF THE “FAT MAN”

Harold Agnew, the Los Alamos Physicist within the Manhattan project, is seen here

Carrying the plutonium core for the Nagasaki "Fat Man" bomb. The year was 1945

Trondheim

TIME: 14,25,53,00

TRONDELAG COUNTY NORWAY

SIMULATION 20MT NUCLEAR AIR BURST DETONATION TRONDHEIM

Text and illustrations by Harald Dahle

TIME: 14,25,13,10  Missile in position 1500m over Trondheim

TIME: 14,25,53,00  The bomb detonates at an altitude of 600m

TIME: 14,25,53,03  A 3 millisecond ultraviolet extremely hot burst

Clothes, curtains, and people start burning 3 Km from the epicenter

20MT AIR-BURST DETONATION 600m OVER TRONDHEIM CREATES A "MACH STEM" THAT IS 1.5Km WIDE

The air burst is usually 100 to 1,000 m above the hypocenter to allow the shockwave of the fission or fusion driven explosion to bounce off the ground and back into itself, creating a shockwave that is more forceful than one from a detonation at ground level.

TIME: 14,25,56,10  a nuclar explosion, then "Mach Stem" expands

TIME: 14,25,59,12  Mach Stem creates a shock wave that is very forceful

This "Mach stem" only occurs near ground level, and is similar in shape to the letter Y when viewed from the side. Air bursting also minimizes fallout by keeping the fireball from touching the ground, limiting the amount of debris that is vaporized and drawn up in the radioactive debris cloud. Mac Stem illustrations below.

For the Hiroshima bomb, an air burst 550 to 610 m (1,800 to 2,000 Ft.) above the ground was chosen "to achieve maximum blast effects, and to minimize residual radiation on the ground as it was hoped U.S. troops would soon occupy the city. Mac Stem over Nagasaki below, from NHK Japan Television.

NORWAY LOST THE WAR BEFORE IT HAD STARTED

INHUMANE CONDITIONS AS A RESULT OF FLAWED POLITICS

"From a human-protection point of view, the Norwegian people are being led astray and are having the truth omitted to them by incompetent, biased politicians and bureaucrats. The Department of Defense and the Directorate for Civil Preparedness will not tell the truth of how dire the situation is, thereby being guilty of exposing its population to inhumane sufferings, mass casualties and mass deaths! Due to a catastrophically lack of preparedness, Norway will lose the next war before it starts."

 Harald Dahle, Platoon Leader Logistics,  Oslo 03

 No medicines available

Two men caught for refusing to obey orders are given the last rites before being executed

IMPERIAL FLAG OF THE SUNRISE-ISLAND

A survivor of the Hiroshima bombing

Described the damage to people:

"The appearance of people  ... all had skin blackened by burns... no hair... And at a glance you couldn't tell whether you were looking at them from in front or in back... They held their arms bent [forward] like this... and their skin ...hands, faces, Bodies too - hung down... e... But wherever I walked... Many died along the road like walking ghosts..." Hiroshima

NORWEGIAN DEFENSE HEADQUARTERS TRONDHEIM

"The population of Trondelag, mid-Norway, will fry like bacon in a pan!"

 ZERO PROTECTION

DAMAGES TO THE BODY, TO THE GENETICS AND TO MENTAL HEALTH

NORWAY'S TRAITORS I                      

ZERO PROTECTION FOR ITS POPULATION AGAINST A NUCLEAR ATTACK TRONDHEIM TOTALY ERADICATED BY A 20MT BOMB

Trondheim: Simulation of victims of an atomic blast 3-4Km from the hypocenter

FOUR EFFECTS OF LARGER THERMONUCLEAR WEAPONS

The medical effects of the atomic bomb on Trondelag, Norway upon humans can be put into the four categories below, with the effects of larger thermonuclear weapons producing blast and thermal effects so large that there would be a negligible number of survivors close enough to the center of the blast who would experience prompt/acute radiation effects, which were observed after the 16 kilotons yield Hiroshima bomb, due to its relatively low yield:

1) Initial stage—the first 1–9 weeks, in which are the greatest number of deaths, with 90% due to thermal injury and/or blast effects and 10% due to super-lethal radiation exposure.

2) Intermediate stage—from 10–12 weeks. The deaths in this period are from ionizing radiation in the median lethal range. Late period—lasting from 13–20 weeks. This period has some improvement in survivors' condition.

3) Delayed period—from 20+ weeks. Characterized by numerous complications, mostly related to healing of thermal and mechanical injuries, and if the individual was exposed to a few hundred to a thousand Millisievert of radiation, it is coupled with infertility, sub-fertility and blood disorders.

4) Ionizing radiation above a dose of around 50-100 Millisievert exposure has been shown to statistically begin increasing ones chance of dying of cancer sometime in their lifetime over the normal unexposed rate of ~25%, in the long term, a heightened rate of cancer, proportional to the dose received, would begin to be observed after ~5+ years, with lesser problems such as eye cataracts and other more minor effects in other organs and tissue also being observed over the long term.

From the huge amount of money made through the rich years, Norway allocated no money for the protection of its population in a worst-case scenario!

THE NAYVITY OF THE NORWEGIAN GOVERNMENTS

While Norway went shopping Crown Estates in London its population was totally unprotected against a nuclear attack!

Bodies being chalked to prevent spread of deceases         

NORWAYS POLITICS OF SUBMISSION

By Harald Dahle

Hiroshima, totally eradicated by a 15 kilotons (Kt) bomb, 0.015Megatons (Mt) The new B61-12 thermonuclear drop-bomb has a variable yield between 0.3Kt and 50Kt. Imagine what a 50Kt thermonuclear bomb can do of destruction compared to the Hiroshima bomb of "only" 15Kt.

1 Several hundred thousand Norwegians living in the Trondelag County in mid Norway will be fried when Russian Iskander-K GLCM nuclear cruise missiles detonate with pin- point accuracy. Norway has no protection for its population against nuclear attacks. Trondheim city and much of the county will be more or less totally eradicated, just like Hiroshima was, bellow.

2 Positioning of the pre-positioning caves in Trondheim County is an invitation to any potential enemy to destroy these caves before the stored war material is brought out.

3 Positioning of the war material in mid-Norway and not in Finmark County, already gives a message of submission.

4 Positioning of war material and ammunition in mid-Norway is a catastrophically mistake, because it is a sitting duck, and the potential enemy knows that and will not use its own soldiers to attack. Rather the enemy will choose to use cruise missiles and other missiles to neutralize.

5 Norway's 2016-2020 Defense plan and strategy is already outdated, the army is much too weak and small to defend against a Russian attack.

6 Minister of Defense Norway Marie Eriksen Søreide promotes a view on defense that is outright dangerous and outdated. She should resign.

7 Norway is in no way prepared for an atomic war and its population is in fact held hostage by the left wing, pacifist views and politics of its Governments from 1945 till present day.

 8 The fifty-two F-35 fighter planes that Norway has bought from the United States can be outfitted to carry two B61-12 thermonuclear drop-bombs each inside (as part of NATO's Nuclear Sharing Program). The F-35 is a nuclear delivery platform that will encourage Russia to make a pre-emptive strike on Norway's F-35 delivering capacity.

NATO's NORWAY RESPONSE: B61-12

Prototype thermonuclear B61-12 drop bomb fitted to a US Air Force F15-E

NORWAY'S F-35's

By Harald Dahle, from his September 21, 2016 YouTube tweet

Norwegian F-35's attacking targets inside Russia? Yes, they will come to the border of Russia, and that's it. It will take minimum 5 years to have the Norwegian pilots fully trained for all of the 52 F-35 planes that Norway has bought, and then we are in 2022!

If some of the F-35's delivered to Norway are equipped to carry B61-12 thermonuclear drop bombs, which Norway is obliged to do through NATO's "Nuclear Sharing Program", Norway will be targeted at once for nuclear retaliation with Iskander-K GCLM nuclear-tipped, winged, cruise missiles and Iskander-M conventional or nuclear missiles.

The county of Trondelag, in mid-Norway, where the US Marine Prepositioning Material is stored in eight caves, will be attacked with Russian nuclear missiles. I really can't see what the F-35's can contribute with, except creating an even direr situation for the Norwegian people!

Below, F-35 bomb bay, room for two B61-12 drop bombs

CRITICISM AGAINST AN F-35-BASED NUCLEAR DETERRENT

Critics argue that any amount of nuclear sharing, utilizing ‘dual-use’ aircraft, violates Article I of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).  Under Toby Fenwick’s proposal, Italy, a non-nuclear nation under the terms of the NPT, would remain part of NATO’s nuclear sharing arrangements.

It is suggested that the B61-12 bomb’s combination of accuracy, low-yield and ground penetration capability will make it the most useable nuclear bomb in NATO’s nuclear arsenal.

If the UK were to develop the new capabilities envisaged by Toby Fenwick it would mean embarking on a testing program. This would not only be expensive, but would more than likely breach the Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty.

It is argued that only the complete removal of NATO’s aircraft-delivered tactical nuclear weapons from Europe, and basing European extended deterrence on strategic nuclear forces alone, will create the necessary political environment needed for Washington and Moscow to reduce Russia’s own arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons.

Norway Moves to Join the Once Reviled NATO Anti-Missile Shield Targeting Russia

A joint analysis group from the Norwegian Defense Forces and the US Missile Defense Agency is expected to finalize its advice to the Norwegian government by the end of this year. The group will make recommends on joining the NATO ballistic missile defense system.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg

The main components are expected to be the Globus II/III radar, on the Russian border just a few kilometers from the home base of Russia’s strategic submarines, and sea-based AEGIS systems on five Norwegian frigates.

Labor and Norway’s two main right-wing parties want an increased focus on “strategic assets” like the F-35 fighter, submarines and surveillance capabilities. Ground forces are to get less priority, except for an elite expeditionary force that can be used at the request of other allies.

NATO’S NORWAY SOLLUTION: THE B61-12

Two B61-12 thermonuclear gravity bombs can be fitted to each F-35 plane

UNETHICAL AND FLAWED POLITICS OF JOINING NATO'S MISSILE SHIELD WILL LEAD TO UNACCEPTABLE MASS CASSUALTIES

“Norway will lose the next war before it starts - and be nuked in retaliation, with an estimated 2.4 million Norwegians dead.”

Norway is part of NATO’s Nuclear Sharing Program. In case of a war, Norway’s new 52, F-35 fighter-bombers are supposed to execute deep strikes in to Russian territory against ships, naval -and air bases. Norway can expect a Russian pre-emptive strike against the F35’s before they even get a chance to take off!

Such preparations underscore the fact that Norway would rapidly be drawn into any war that NATO launched against Russia—a fact that has prompted comment in only academic circles! The Norwegian population is clearly not interested in this very important subject!

Nuclear sharing is a concept in NATO’s policy of nuclear deterrence which involves member countries without nuclear weapons their own in the planning for the use of nuclear weapons by NATO, and in particular provides for the armed forces these countries to be involved in delivering these weapons in the event of their use.

As part of nuclear sharing, the participating countries carry out consultations and take com- mon decisions on nuclear weapons policy, maintain technical equipment required for the use of nuclear weapons (including warplanes capable of delivering them), and store nuclear weapons on their territory. In case of war, the United States told NATO allies the Non-Prolife ration Treaty is not in play.

A CERTAIN ROAD TO DISASTER

By Harald Dahle

 First, we take a swift look at Nordic military history!

In contrast to Sweden, who has a strong and old culture of war footing and epic military operations on the European continent, Norway has no such historic military background to show to. Except from the Viking era when Norse Vikings conquered British Islands during the early medieval period of the 8th Century. Knut the Great was King of Denmark, England and Norway, also referred to as the Anglo-Scandinavian, or North Sea Empire.

The North Sea Empire of Knut the Great, ca. 1030

The Swedish Empire - "Stormaktstiden" in the Swedish history books.

Russian cavalry at Narva 1704

Except for a stint in the Great Northern Wars (1700-1721) were Norway were on the side of Denmark against Sweden, when Peter the Great of the Tzardom of Russia successfully contested the supremacy of the Swedish Empire in Central, Northern and Eastern Europe.

Battle of Poltava 1709

The battle of Poltava (Ukraine) 1709 was the decisive victory of Peter I of Russia, also known as Peter the Great, over the Swedish forces under Field Marshal Carl Gustav Rehnskiøld, in one of the battles of the Great Northern War.

Tzar Russia

Peter the Great, 1690-1718

The home of Peter the Great

Harald Dahle at the home of Peter the Great outside Moscow

Drottningholm Sweden is a private castle for the King and Queen of Sweden

Kingdom of Norway

WHERE DID ALL THE OIL-MONEY GO?

With the waste amount of money Norway has made from its oil and gas production from the early 1970'ies till present days, it could easily have bought all the necessary military equipment it would have needed in a (potential) conflict involving Russia.

The present-day Norwegian Governments, however, decided to spend the new "oil money" on buying expensive city properties from the British Crown Estate instead, among other things!

While Norway went shopping in London, its population was unprotected against nuclear attack!

The rotation of U.S. prepositioned war material in Norway is a very costly operation for the U.S. Marine Corps, but due to Norway's famous, stoic laissez- faire attitude, not an eyelid is moved in Oslo!

Overall, it was more convenient for Norway's Government to accept expensive war material from the U.S. Marine Corps, and continue to play the role of the silly under- dog. Again!

The first time was in 1940 at the outbreak of WWII, when Norway's Foreign Department instructed the country's largest Newspaper, the Aftenposten, not to print the alarming news sent by the newspapers correspondent in Berlin that the German fleet was already on its way to take Norway! 

APRIL 1940

April 6 1940: German soldiers being shipped out to take Norway, who mobilized on April 11 by mail! The pacifist Nygaardsvold Government was not indicted after the War.

APRIL 2016

Prepositioning ship

At the time of implementing the present "Cave-in" Strategy, it seemed more important to Norway's leadership to play along with the Americans, rather than to come up with an intelligent, better pre- pared, more flexible, cheaper and less vulnerable alternative than todays! 

The Norwegian Army cannot any longer afford to let its military men and women use live ammunition in exercises, because the budget for Norway's rattling defense is way to meager! What a wonderful signal this gives to Russia in the East! Norway has a sort of defense, but that is mostly on paper and in non-binding dialogues among dignitaries in the high corridors of power. 

NORWEGIAN DEFENSE HEADQUARTERS TRONDHEIM

TRONDELAG COUNTY

THE UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS EIGHT PREPOSITIONING CAVES

Bjugn Frigård Hammerkammen Hammernesodden Kalvaa Tromsdal Ørland and Værnes

AMMUNITION CAVES

Kalvaa 34832 sq. ft./3235 sq.m

Hammerkammen 8966 sq .ft./832 sq.m

Hammernesodden 20677 sq.ft./1920 sq.m

GROUND EQUIPMENT CAVES

Bjugn 123623 sq.ft./11484 sq.m,

Frigaard 262171 sq.ft./24256 sq.m

Tromsdal 254900 sq.ft./23680 sq.m

AVIATION SUPPORT EQUIPMENT CAVES

Ørland Air Station (Fixed) 60500 sq.ft./5620 sq.m

Vaernes Air Station (Rotary) 27448 sq.ft./2550 sq.m

HAMMERNESODDEN PIER

US Marines pp-war material at Hammernesodden pier Trondelag County Norway

WITHIN STRIKE RANGE OF TRONDELAG COUNTY NORWAY

In the event of deep international crisis, the Iskander-K, fitted with the Long Range Cruise Missile (LRCM) 9M728 with an unknown, (but estimated range of 2000Km), will be moved to the Alakurtti military base 48Km from the Finnish border. Close enough to threaten the US Marines eight prepositioning caves in the county of Trondelag, Norway.

Ballistic Iskander fitted with Long Range Cruise Missile 9M728 and other more suited long-range ICBM's, Topol-M above. Tromsø ELINT disc below.

Murmansk oblast

ALAKURTTI MILITARY AIR BASE RUSSIA

The Alakurtti Air Base comprises the 4th Naval Bomber Regiment, the 485 Independent Helicopter Regiment, the Arctic Motor Rifle Brigade, and 3000 SIGINT personnel listening in 24/7, only 48Km from the Finnish border.

ELINT personnel

Alakurtti Air Base

Housing complexes

U.S. AIR FORCE AND U.S. MARINE CORPS

IN SETTENES AND RØNNEBY SWEDEN

They are able to give support to Norway's Bodø and Tromsø airports and to Finland. The Swedish and Norwegian military are integrated with common exercises and routines. Also simulated attacks on Åland, Stockholm, Muskø Naval Base, Berga Naval Base and Rønneby,

THE BALTIC CORRIDOR

A simulated attack on Stockholm, Åland, Muskø Naval Base, Berga Naval Base and Rønneby, with ballistic Iskander and ships. Resistance from the US Marines in Settenes. Rønneby attacked with ballistic Iskander. Russian paratroopers take Visby airport, Gotland and the S-400 anti-aircraft weapon system is brought to Visby airport by Antonov 124.

MUSKØ NAVAL BASE

BERGA NAVAL BASE

GOTLAND

Gotland is a large Swedish island and province in the Baltic Sea. Visby airport below.

BORNHOLM

The battle for the Baltic islands of Åland, Gotland and Bornholm - and the Danish Strait must be kept open!

NORWAY'S TRAITORS II

LEASED OUT ITS OWN SECRET SUBMARINE BASE

"Olavsvern" to Russia!

"Military readiness badly weakened!"

Ann-Margrethe Bollman

President Norwegian Defense Association

-Our military readiness has been badly weakened. Facilities have been closed, reserve capabilities have been reduced, and readiness plans have been forgotten. Olavsvern is a prime example of a facility that has been lost, and in hindsight it's clear that selling it was not a good decision.

NORWAY'S "RUSSIAN MADE" OLAVSVERN SUB BASE

SCANDINAVIAN AND RUSSIAN AIR & SEA BASES

NORWAY'S TRAITORS III

THE KONGSBERG-TOSHIBA EXPORT VIOLATIONS

SOVIETS SCORE SILENT SUCCESS IN UNDERSEA RACE WITH THE U.S.

A Sudden Closing of the Noise Gap!

The Soviets' sudden closing of the noise gap has put the U.S. submarine community on the defensive for the first time since the submarine USS Nautilus made history in 1955 by getting under way on nuclear power.

Former Navy secretary John F. Lehman Jr. and Admiral James D. Watkins, recently retired chief of naval operations and a submariner, have blamed the spy ring headed by former Navy radioman John A. Walker Jr. for the sudden Soviet advances.

Defense Secretary Caspar W. Weinberger and other administration officials are blaming Japan and Norway for allowing their high-tech companies to ship to the Soviet Union the technology needed to manufacture smooth, quiet submarine propellers.

But those explanations are only the latest chapters of a long book, according to antisubmarine warfare (ASW) specialists inside and outside the government. "Quieting submarines is a laborious process of doing a lot of little things," one veteran ASW specialist said.

Russian sub with high-precision milled propeller

NORWAY'S CRIMES AGAINST THE ALLIANCE

KONGSBERG NUMERICAL CONTROL DEVICES

October 9, 2015 Russian Sub Kaluga armed with silent propellers from Kongsberg in Norway back in Homeport. Russian Navy’s kilo-class submarine Kaluga came back to her homeport after a long-range trip today, October 10. According to the report of Captain second rank Sergei Pirozhenko, the vessel successfully completed all tasks and submarine materiel was operative.

Almost every machine in the Leningrad-Baltic Naval Shipyard Propeller Machine Shop was Western-made

An actual rendering of the USSR Leningrad Baltic Naval Shipyard Machine Shop

USS Henry L. Stimson

(SSBN-655) underway, 12 July 1984

THE UNITED STATES LOST MUCH OF ITS SUBMARINE EDGE OVER THE USSR

The United States Department of Defense, Pentagon

Caspar Weinberger

 U.S. Secretary of Defense

Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger has said the Toshiba and Kongsberg sales have caused the U.S. to lose its once-great edge in submarine technology. But, Weinberger said, Japan and Norway have ``taken drastic and very decisive actions`` to punish the companies, implying no further American action is needed.”

"The breach is very serious!"

Dr. Fred C. Ikl

U.S. Undersecretary of Defense

Although some administration officials said Kongsberg’s

"Big assist to the Soviets' submarine-quieting will cost the United States up to $20 billion to overcome."

Fred Ikle said in an interview that an accurate estimate cannot be made because no one knows how soon the Soviets would have quieted their submarines without the gear supplied by Toshiba and Kongsberg. However, he said the breach is,

"Very serious" and probably will cost "billions" to correct.

"Decreased our submarine superiority!"

Bruce DeMars

Vice Admiral

Bruce DeMars served as Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion from 1988 to 1996. He was deputy chief of naval operations for submarine warfare, said Soviet advances in quieting should be attributed to more than just new propellers.

"Their recent perceived gains are more evolutionary than revolutionary,"

He said on a recent "MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour." And continued,

"What it means in the aggregate is that they have closed a little bit of the margin of submarine superiority that we hold over the Soviet submarine forces."

Several countries of the Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls, (CoCom) member nations had illegally exported to the Soviet Union machine tools that could be used in combination with the Kongsberg Numerical Control devices made in Norway in violation of the CoCom agreement during the Cold War.

The involvement of Toshiba in this scandal was disclosed in May 1987. There was a significant fallout from the revelation as it was feared that American military secrets had been disclosed.

A Russian Typhoon Class submarine

WASHINGTON - Toshiba Corp., fighting to keep from being thrown out of a $2.3-billion share of the U.S. electronics market over the sale of sensitive submarine technology to the Soviets, said Wednesday that its workers had found similar equipment made by a French company in the Soviet Union. The equipment in question enables the Soviets to manufacture submarine propellers that are virtually noiseless, a key factor in anti-submarine warfare.

According to an investigative report issued Wednesday by Toshiba at a news conference, a company named Forest Line, a subsidiary of the French firm Machines Lourdes Francaises, may have been the first to sell the Soviet Union milling machines that grind and shape submarine propellers.

U.S. government sources noted, however, that the Soviet submarines did not become "silent" until after the sale of the eight high-technology milling machines made by a Toshiba subsidiary, suggesting that the French technology was not sufficiently sophisticated to make the specially engineered, virtually noiseless propellers.

U.S. government sources noted, however, that the Soviet submarines did not become "silent" until after the sale of the eight high-technology milling machines made by a Toshiba subsidi- ary, suggesting that the French technology was not sufficiently sophisticated to make the specially engineered, virtually noiseless propellers.

Typhoon Class Russian sub with twin propellers.

Military Insignia of the Russian Federation

RUSSIA IN SYRIA

Syria, October 4 2016, Deployment of S300VM and Iskander

 THESE VEAPONS CONCERN NORWAY

S300VM "ANTEY 2500"

The 9M82M missile is intended to defeat tactical, theater and medium range ballistic missiles, as well as aerodynamic targets at a range of up to 200 km. The Antey-2500 system is mounted on a tracked cross-country vehicle equipped with self-contained power supply and navigation systems, as well as surveying and positioning equipment.

ISKANDER-K: A CERTAIN THREAT

Iskander-K with 9M728, is a ground launched cruise missile (GLCM) prohibited for export.

In June 2013, it was revealed that Russia had deployed several Iskander-M ballistic missile systems in Armenia at undisclosed locations throughout the country. In December 2013, Russia disclosed that the Iskander missile system had been deployed in the Western Military District.

In March 2015, there were reports in Russian media that Russia had deployed Iskander missiles to the Kaliningrad Oblast enclave. Iskander-K, K stands for Krylataya, or "winged".

However, if push comes to show, nuclear tipped or conventional R-500 cruise missiles, with a 500Kg warhead and with a range between 1000Km and 2000Km, might be launched from an Iskander transporter, erector, launcher, TEL-platform stationed in the Kaliningrad Oblast enclave (among other places.)

Each missile in the launch carrier vehicle can be independently targeted in a matter of seconds. The mobility of the Iskander launch platform makes a launch difficult to prevent.

Targets can be located not only by satellite and aircraft but also by a conventional intelligence center, by an artillery observer or from aerial photos scanned into a computer. The missiles can be re-targeted during flight in the case of engaging mobile targets.

KALININGRADSKAYA OBLAST

Iskander-K GLCM Radius from Kaliningrad

ISKANDER-K GLCM CRUISE MISSILES ARE INDIVIDUALLY STEERABLE DURING RE-ENTRY, CAN BYPASS NORWEGIAN AIR DEFENCES WITH SUPERSONIC SPEED AS  WELL AS HIT AND DESTROY THE EIGHT PREPOSITIONING CAVES WITHIN 30 MINUTES OF A LAUNCH FROM RUSSIA'S KALINGRADSKAYA OBLAST ENCLAVE.

With one move only from the Russian side, Norway can be rendered checkmate and forced to negotiate a peace settlement! Within a matter of minutes, these cruise missiles can completely destroy the entrances, as well as a great part of the prepositioning caves with their valuable and non-replaceable war-inventory.

The electro-optical guidance system provides a self-homing capability. The missile's on-board computer receives images of the target, then locks onto the target with its sight and descends towards it at supersonic speed.

The Iskander-K GLCM winged cruise missile in flight. The expandable wing underneath, at the front, has not yet been deployed.

Iskander-K TEL-Platform, with R-500 GLCM conventional or nuclear tipped cruise

missiles are placed in four separate canisters at the back.

The director of the state corporation Rostec Sergey Chemezov said that the Missile complexes "Iskander" is a serious offensive weapon capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. The ballistic missile system is in the military list of products prohibited for export, June 6, 2016

The R-500 GLCM (left) seems very similar to the nuclear-only

SS-1-21 SLCM (right) first deployed in 1987

Iskander R-500 GLCM during military exercise

Iskander-M missiles on their way to test targets

Iskander-M launcher vehicle with two missiles

THE RUSSIAN FLEET

KALININGRAD OBLAST

Much of the Russian fleet is located in the Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad Oblast

Passing through the English Channel

KNOCK-KNOCK" ON NORWAY'S DOOR!

S-400 AND ISKANDER IN SYRIA FROM OCTOBER 2016

RUSSIAN S-400 TRIUMF AIR DEFENCE SYSTEM

The S-400 uses three different missiles to cover its entire performance envelope. These are the extremely long range 40N6, long range 48N6 and medium range 9M96 missile.

NORWAY'S OUTDATED WW2 REASONING

It is the reasoning behind the "Cave-in" strategy which can be questioned because it is founded on an obsolete WWII and "Cold War" thinking. Norway neither calculated in the cost of proper missile defense systems, nor was it interested in creating dialogue and common ground with Russia in the years leading up to a (potential) armed conflict.

The Prime Minister of Norway, Erna Solberg, will at the upcoming Warsaw NATO meeting July 8-9 2016 argue that in the event of a military showdown with Russia, the United States must guarantee that the trans-atlantic supply routes from the United States to Norway will be kept open. 

French President Francois Hollande (R) and Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg held bilateral talks on the sidelines of the summit. Did she ask for guarantees?

Soviet Intel-plane: Norway coast listening in

BETRAYAL I

In the Autumn of 1939 Poland asked for guarantees for its security from England and France. Both guaranties failed to meet their legal, diplomatic, military and moral obligations with respect to the Czech and Polish Nations. This became known as the Western betrayal. It happened then, and it could happen to Norway! We have no guarantees that it would not happen.

Book cover

It is the mindset of the Norwegian Government and the Department of Defense that is not only wrong, but outright dangerous! In an armed conflict with Russia, supply routes to Europe will be shut down within 48 hours, if not earlier, and there is reason to fear that already at the onset of war, Norway's eight prepositioning caves would no longer be operative.

BETRAYAL II

With a relatively small air force and an almost non existing army of sorts to rely on, Norway's capability to defend itself, after an attack on the eight prepositioning caves had taken place, would be catastrophically weakened.

I conclude my article about the US Marines Prepositioning Program in Norway, by emphasizing, that the real traitors today - to put it bluntly - are those elected Norwegian representatives in the Governments after the War, who over time has laid the disturbing groundwork for and contributed to a betrayal on an unprecedented human scale.

A suicidal scenario of humongous magnitude destined to mushroom into a grim and certain atomic reality tomorrow! It can't get darker than this, because it is the ultimate betrayal of the Norwegian people!

SECRETARY OF THE NAVY RAY MABUS' VISIT TO NORWAY'S

PREPOSITIONING CAVES

Secretary Ray Mabus

Trondheim County, Norway during "Operation Cold Response 2016". In February Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus toured the reserve material storage site, one of eight prepositioning caves in the U.S. Marine Corps Prepositioning Program Norway.

The Frigård cave, one of eight in the program, holds a variety of vehicles including armored amphibious vehicles, high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle variants, medium tactical vehicle replacements and logistics vehicle system replacements, snow-capable tracked vehicles, tank recovery vehicles, along with trailers and towed carriages.

Secretary of the Navy toured the US Marine Corps Norwegian prepositioning caves

The eight caves are placed in various locations in the region surrounding Trondheim. Three caves hold ground equipment, three are configured for munitions and two hold aviation support equipment. US Ambassador to Oslo on a visit to the Frigård prepositioning cave. 

Mk48 LVS with fuel bladders and a pump system is loaded on the MV Villars, Valsneset, Norway, on its way to Estonia, for Baltic Challenge '97

BJUGN CAVE

TRONDHEIM NORWAY IS ONE OF EIGHT DEEP PREPOSITIONING CAVES

Deep cover for heavy duty war material prepositioned in mid Norway inside a mountain in the Trondheim region. Norway's order to the German Rhein-Metall-MAN will give the northern most NATO member a much-needed logistical boost. Picture below, courtesy of the United States Historic Archives.

CLICK PICTURE BELOW AND WATCH VIDEO

Norwegian Army Leopard 2A4 Winter Exercise

FRIGÅRD CAVE

Offloading of U.S. war material in the region of Trondheim, Norway.

Deep within a Norwegian hillside, thousands of U.S. Marine Corps combat veterans await their next assignment. They are lined up in rigid rows. They are clean, fresh and ready. They are prepared to be deployed worldwide. You can put a key in any of these vehicles and it'll turn on" declared Kevin Finch, a civilian working for the Corps.

ABRAHAMS MOUNTAIN CAVE

Other caves hold armored vehicles, including M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks and light armored vehicles. Also stored are earth-moving equipment, generators, bulk fuel and bulk liquid systems, water production system, shelters, tents, netting and tool kits. Aircraft support equipment includes tow tractors, cranes, deicing equipment and arresting gear.

CENTRALIZED MOUNTAIN CAVES

AN OUTDATED NORWAY STRATEGY

Below, Norway’s sea border with Russia patrolled by Norwegian military

After the end of the Vietnam War, the U.S. military focused on the Soviet threat. The Reagan administration entered office with plans for huge increases in military spending, justified with huge exaggerations of the military capabilities of the Soviet Union.

THE U.S. MARINE CORPS' ROLE IN NATO

The U.S. Marine Corps needed a role in NATO if it wanted a piece of this larger pie. Simply dispatching its 2nd Division to reinforce the U.S. Army was a bland idea from World War I. A unique mission was desired, resulting in a sales pitch that U.S. Marines were needed for the defense of Norway.

US Abrahams Tank being unloaded in Norway

The Soviet Union's northern port at Murmansk froze over during the winter, and a year around warm water port would be helpful. The Soviets might push down the Norwegian coast and seize the warm water port of Narvik. Norway has only 5.084 million citizens (2003) and a small army, so U.S. Marines could help repel the Soviets.

This looks plausible when presented on a map, yet critics pointed out that northern Norway is above the Arctic circle and very, very cold, and mountainous, with a narrow, single mountain road to the Soviet Union. The Norwegians had planted explosives and built small forts so they could easily block this path within minutes of war.

RUSSIA WOULD NOT OPEN WAR ON TWO FLANKS SIMULTANIOUSLY

This objection was overcome by suggesting the Soviets could mount an amphibious end run down the coast to seize Narvik. Critics noted that operation would prove extremely risky, and the Soviets didn't have many amphibious ships. Moreover, it would still takes months to repair and clear the road to Petsamo, and the route would still be very difficult for trucks.

As a result, another possibility was ginned up. The Soviets could cut across the open plains of northern Finland and Sweden and seize Narvik along with coal mines in the region.  That would provoke war with Finland and Sweden, but it was a plausible sales pitch.

In reality, if the Soviets had invaded West Germany, they would have devoted all resources at that main effort, and not waste combat power on a difficult fight near the Arctic Circle while adding Finland and Sweden to its list of enemies.

HOLDING OUT UNTIL HELP ARRIVES CAN BE PROBLEMATIC

Norway's "Cave-in" Strategy

Nevertheless, the Marines were allowed to play "the Norway game," and conducted annual reinforcement exercises. Equipment for a 15,000-man Marine Air-Ground Task force was "prepositioned" in central Norway. If war erupted, Marines could fly in and pull equipment and supplies out of storage from several locations. The eight prepositioning caves are,

AMMUNITION CAVES

Kalvaa 34832 sq. ft. /3235 sq.m

Hammerkammen 8966 sq .ft. /832 sq.m

Hammernesodden 20677 sq.ft./1920 sq.m

GROUND EQUIPMENT CAVES

Bjugn 123623 sq.ft./11484 sq.m

Frigaard 262171 sq.ft./24256 sq.m

Tromsdal 254900 sq.ft./23680 sq.m

AVIATION SUPPORT EQUIPMENT CAVES

Ørland Air Station (Fixed) 60500 sq.ft./5620 sq.m

Vaernes Air Station (Rotary) 27448 sq.ft./2550 sq.m

As a result, another possibility was ginned up. The Soviets could cut across the open plains of northern Finland and Sweden and seize Narvik along with coal mines in the region.  That would provoke war with Finland and Sweden, but it was a plausible sales pitch.

In reality, if the Soviets had invaded West Germany, they would have devoted all resources at that main effort, and not waste combat power on a difficult fight near the Arctic Circle while adding Finland and Sweden to its list of enemies.

AWACS

A significant milestone was reached when a NATO E-3A completed the 1,000th mission in sup- port of NATO Assurance Measures. The NATO E-3A Component has provided the bulk of these missions from Geilenkirchen and from its Forward Operating Bases and Locations in Action, Greece, Konya, Turkey, Trapani, Italy and Ørland, Norway.

Boeing E-3 Sentry "AWACS" at Ørland Main Air Station, Norway

After the Cold War ended, Marines assumed this Norway mission would quickly go away. The only value of Norway trips was cold weather training, but that was available at the Corps' huge cold weather training facility in Bridgeport CA, or the Army's school in New Hampshire.

A SMALL INSIDE GROUP KNOWS

However, many businesses were profiting off the Norway "Pre-po" game and used their influence to keep it in place. This dubious Cold War program evolved into a racket, some- thing described in 1933 by retired Marine Major General Smedly Butler:

"A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses."

To help hide this racket, the storage program was renamed MCPP-N and touted as part of a worldwide stockpile, which was promoted as cost effective since Norway paid to maintain the storage facilities. However, this equipment is not easily accessible near the Arctic Circle, and not adjacent to ports for rapid embarkation.

The cost of rotating this equipment every three years to the USA for testing and overhaul is huge. It was obvious to everyone that this equipment should be placed at navy ports and airfields near areas of potential conflict, like Guam, Italy, Bahrain, or Key West.

THE ILL-DEFINED VALUE OF THE MARINE PP-PROGRAM?

The last Pentagon review of US overseas base structure was in 2005 as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld attempted to pry our military out of a Cold war posture. That 2005 commission recommended modest realignments, and summarized the ill-defined value of the Marine program in Norway:

"The Marine Corps, with agreement from the Government of Norway, has assigned a new global mission for the Norway Air-Landed operational area, it is not clear how these capabilities would be employed or what operational value they add to current capabilities."

As the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan continued, the Marine Corps began to suffer serious equipment shortages. A quiet rebellion broke out among those who manage Marine Corps equipment.

They wanted to divert equipment destined for Norway, to fully equipped Marine units deploying to combat.

They were angered and disgusted when permission was denied, with the laughable excuse that keeping equipment in Norway was vital to the Marine Corps' commitment to the defense of Norway.

The issue was dropped after Marine Generals secured hundreds of millions of dollars in additional funding to fully restock equipment.  In 2011, the annual Norway Pre-Po sales campaign included a ludicrous "exercise,"

In which equipment was pulled from caves in central Norway and shipped all the way to Romania and back to prove the value of keeping Marine Corps equipment in Europe!

LOGISTICS COMMAND MCPP-N

THE US MARINE CORPS

SUPPORT FACILITY

Blount Island, Jacksonville FL

Summary of consequences: U.S.-Russian war producing 150 million tons of smoke.

2600 U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear weapons on high alert are launched in 2 to 3 minutes at targets in the U.S., Europe and Russia and perhaps at other targets which are considered to have strategic value.

Some fraction of the remaining 7600 deployed and operational U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear warheads/weapons are also launched and detonated in retaliation for the initial attacks.

Hundreds of large cities in the U.S., Europe and Russia are engulfed in massive firestorms which burn urban areas of tens or hundreds of thousands of square miles/kilometers.

150 million tons of smoke from nuclear fires rises above cloud level, into the stratosphere, where it quickly spreads around the world and forms a dense stratospheric cloud layer. The smoke will remain there for many years to block and absorb sunlight.

The smoke blocks up to 70% of the sunlight from reaching the Earth's surface in the Northern Hemisphere, and up to 35% of the sunlight is also blocked in the Southern Hemisphere.

In the absence of warming sunlight, surface temperatures on Earth become as cold as or colder than they were 18,000 years ago at the height of the last Ice Age.

There would be rapid cooling of more than 20°C over large areas of North America and of more than 30°C over much of Eurasia, including all agricultural regions 150 million tons of smoke in the stratosphere would cause minimum daily temperatures in the largest agricultural regions of the Northern Hemisphere to drop below freezing for 1 to 3 years. Nightly killing frosts would occur and prevent food from being grown.

Average global precipitation would be reduced by 45% due to the prolonged cold.

Growing seasons would be virtually eliminated for many years.

Massive destruction of the protective ozone layer would also occur, allowing intense levels of dangerous UV light to penetrate the atmosphere and reach the surface of the Earth.

Massive amounts of radioactive fallout would be generated and spread both locally and globally. The targeting of nuclear reactors would significantly increase fallout of long-lived isotopes.

Gigantic ground-hugging clouds of toxic smoke would be released from the fires; enormous quantities of industrial chemicals would also enter the environment.

It would be impossible for many living things to survive the extreme rapidity and degree of changes in temperature and precipitation, combined with drastic increases in UV light, massive radioactive fallout, and massive releases of toxins and industrial chemicals.

Already stressed land and marine ecosystems would collapse.

Unable to grow food, most humans would starve to death.

A mass extinction event would occur, similar to what happened 65 million years ago, when the dinosaurs were wiped out following a large asteroid impact with Earth (70% of species became extinct, including all animals greater than 25 kilograms in weight).

Even humans living in shelters equipped with many years’ worth of food, water, energy, and medical supplies would probably not survive in the hostile post-war environment.