The Hostage Air Base – and Its Hydrogen Bombs

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ketsuko

Just look at Obama and Hillary's past reactions to issues in the Middle east.

Obama will support the extremist Muslim elements.

He's done it so many times in the past that I really don't see this as a something for debate. Obama will support Erdogan.

Hillary has supported Erdogan in the past and even wrote about it in her book. So she would continue to support him.

It's what they want. I don't know why, but for some reason, a certain segment of the US leadership desires Muslim extremist leadership in the Middle East.

This is also my take on it yes.

a reply to: imod02

not sure what the term is but dont they have some kind of safty feature like they aren't fully armed and need some kind of chip to activate them or is it a code? en.wikipedia.org... ah its this thingy

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org... these i guess

During the Cold War era on the US and NATO bases used by the Quick Reaction Alert readiness forces numbers of bombs were stored in a heavily secured Weapon storage area located on or in the vicinity of the base. The ‘specials’ were located in nuclear weapon (igloo) bunkers. Transporting them to and from the Quick Reaction Alert area (a few heavily guarded aircraft shelters near the main runway) during exercises and for logistic reasons always required a convoy with a large number (appx 50 armed military) of security forces which included a Security Alert Team, Backup Alert and Reserve Force team. The WS3 system consists of a Weapons Storage Vault (WSV) and electronic monitoring and control systems. One vault can hold up to four nuclear weapons and in the lowered position provides ballistic protection through its hardened lid and reinforced sidewalls.[1] The WS3 system allowed storage directly underneath the aircraft intended to carry the bombs. The location inside the aircraft shelter increased the weapon survivability in case of any kind of attack and prevent monitoring of preparations to use the weapons. The electronic systems include various classified sensors, electronic data-transmission and security equipment such as video, motion detectors, closed circuit TV coupled with thermal imaging devices. These facilities enabled remote controlled weapon safety and made the large security forces obsolete. Deployment of the WS3 system was authorized in 1988,[2] and they were in widespread use by 1995. 215 WS3 vaults were built for the United States Air Forces in Europe at 13 sites in seven countries. Additionally 34 WS3 vaults were built for the Royal Air Force to store the WE.177 nuclear bomb; 10 at RAF Brüggen in Germany and 24 at RAF Marham in Britain.[4]

and realistically any one trying to seize us nuclear assets will get lit up like a christmas tree ie we would glass the site with the rationale being well using one or two nukes to keep 60-90 from getting out in the wild would be worth the political and environmental fall out.

i mean hell clinton (bill) bombed a chinese embassy to keep our tech out of enemy hands what do you think a sitting president would order if he was given the option of letting a bunch of nukes getting into the wild? would be a much harder sell if it was terrorists trying to seize them vs the government in question but either way i see the attempt ending in nuclear fire for who ever tries to steal nuclear weapons


foreignpolicy.com... few other links for OP

www.cnn.com...

But Walker, who served at the US Embassy in Ankara, called any concern about the security of the weapons "hyperbolic," saying that the weapons would still need to be activated from Washington to be usable. The Cold War-era nuclear weapons are part of NATO's deterrence strategy. "As long as nuclear weapons exist, NATO will remain a nuclear alliance," reads the official declaration from the July NATO summit in Warsaw, Poland.

so yeah either render them inoperable (that would still leave fissile material in play) or my theory of levling the place to keep them out of enemy hands

www.nti.org... hell we have a plan for what to do if the "wrong country" has a coup of pretty much trying to surge in and secure their nuclear weapons and or steal them to prevent them from getting into enemy hands so id assume we would go to much higher legenths to secure our own from getting out into the wild.

Seizing or remotely disabling a weapon of mass destruction is what’s known in military jargon as a “render-safe mission” -- and JSOC has evidently pulled off such missions before. In his memoir, Hugh Shelton, who chaired the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1997 to 2001, recalls an incident from the 1990s in which the CIA told the Special Operations Command that a ship had left North Korea with what Shelton describes as “an illegal weapon” on board. Where it was headed, the U.S. didn’t know. He wrote: “It was a very time-sensitive mission in which a specific SEAL Team Six component was called into action. While I cannot get into the tactical elements or operational details of this mission, what I can say is that our guys were able to ‘immobilize’ the weapon system in a special way without leaving any trace.” Much more challenging than capturing and disabling a loose nuke or two, however, would be seizing control of -- or at least disabling -- the entire Pakistani nuclear arsenal in the event of a jihadist coup, civil war, or other catastrophic event. This “disablement campaign,” as one former senior Special Operations planner calls it, would be the most taxing and most dangerous of any special mission that JSOC could find itself tasked with -- orders of magnitude more difficult and expansive than Abbottabad. The scale of such an operation would be too large for U.S. Special Operations components alone, so an across-the-board disablement campaign would be led by U.S. Central Command -- the area command that is responsible for the Middle East and Central Asia, and runs operations in Afghanistan and Iraq -- and U.S. Pacific Command.

Recep Özkan is the Turkish tie to the Clinton foundation. He can be found in the 500k-1m donation list and donor to the Ready for Hillary PAC.

open secrets

He was a President of the Turkish Cultural Center Ny Chapter. The center is strongly intertwined in the Gulen Movement.

Turkish Cultural Center

Gulen is a charismatic and reclusive man who has lived in self-imposed exile in Pennsylvania since 1999. The official reason for his exile is given as "medical", but Gulen was actually fleeing charges of plotting to overthrow the government in Turkey. Over the years, he has built an impressive network of more than 1,000 schools in 140 countries, from South Africa to the United States.

IB Times

Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Clinton Foundation have taken in hundreds of thousands of dollars from Gülen’s followers, including from Recep Ozkan, former president of the Gülen-connected Turkish Cultural Center.

Gulen Institute

They will not get those nukes. I don't have a lot of confidence in anything anymore, but I'm pretty sure I don't have enough digits to count the countries would would create a death zone within a mile of that base as we had the great Turkey Air Lift and got those bombs out if it came down to it.

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

We used to have a motto that we never left our people behind too ... until Benghazi.

Again, with this current administration all bets are off. It's not even in the press, so how many even know there are nuclear weapons at Incirlik?

a reply to: ketsuko

I think he wouldn't have a chance in hell of stopping us getting them back before he moved on them.

Thats when things from the sky start zapping soldiers to fireballs and the top of the line athlete tacrical squads drop down. We may not always bring out the big guns in order to keep tactical secrecy advantage over other armies but this would be a quick strike and out. The back lash would destroy Erdogan before he can achieve his goals. It ain't happening.

If we are dumb enough to not cut our ties and we don't have a solid tactical advantage retrieving the weapons then sure it could happen, .. my guess is NATO cuts ties if he is brandishing this army like sadam. In this case he would be a theocratic version with conservative Muslim views on social issues and Islam's place in the modern view.

In a few months if this path continues and NATO doesn't back out i would argue we set ourselves up. Like a fixed fight. We intend to do a fast and furious with some duds.

Or we have morons running the show. If we give up Gulen it would be embarrassing for "democracy"


I guess we need to start making a difference between 'elections" and "democracy". .

There are just some things you shouldn't be able to vote for and they aren't democratic.

Like say rounding up Christians. The Orthodox compound and security has been hefty since Mr Erdolf became PM and president. He brings about a certain sentiment among his supporters.

Just send a couple carrier air wings in there overhead while the ground planes take off.

a reply to: ketsuko

No one wants to see another nuclear nation in that region, but Pakistan has had nukes for decades.

And even with the Taliban, Al Queda and ISIS in the region no one has attempted to seize their nukes not even in the aftermath of Bhuto's assassination.

So with American forces still there I don't see anyone getting them unless we just give them to Erdogan. Which would be seen by me at least as seriously nefarious.... So actually it might happen.

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

a reply to: ketsuko

They wont ever find there way in to Turkish hands.

Even if Obama would be to weak to act in a crisis ,Neighboring European country's wont be. Non of the EU or country outside the EU (UK) want a nuclear Turkey.

If Obama wont go in an get them we will.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Obama is waiting for his cue to come in and say, see it wasn't such a bad idea to let Iran have them nukes, now they can point them at each other. All an evil orchestrated long term plan. Turkey goes Sunni extreme to counter Iranian Shia extreme, and they want them armed with nukes. China aims at India, Pakistan aims at India, Iran aims at India, India is kind of screwed. Why is nobody talking about poor India?

Because India have there owns nukes too....

What is on the base is 50 husks that once were "hydrogen bombs" . They were dismantled in the mid to late 70s n favor of the new nukes and Minute Men IIs
Peace.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: luthier

So you're cool with the idea that if Erdogan says, "No you can't move those nukes." After we determine it would no longer be safe or sane to keep them there that we might have to use military force against Turkey and ostensible ally and NATO country in order to remove them?

Really?

Every country that matters in NATO will be lining up behind the USA to prevent a nuclear Turkey.

USA will have the UK and France. And I dont think Germany will be to pleases at a nuclear Turkey.

The base would get a message something . "Put your heads down in eleven minutes EXACTLY and dont pick them till you hear from us again"

a reply to: ketsuko

Very interesting. Keep in mind that Erdogan still wants entry into the EU. I doubt the EU will let him in if he threatens that base.

The litmus is whether or not he gives the coup perpetrators the death penalty...the EU said death penalty is a big no no.

If he loses his patience, he might take it out on that base and take the nukes, but as long as he plans to enter the EU, he will only purge his own govt with the failed coup as justification for his action, before the EU.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

He does, but the EU is also on the cusp of crumbling internally.

Hate to rain on the doom porn parade, but.... Those are useless to them, I know they are not missiles but they still have to be armed, that and we have men on that base. Mutually assured destruction has worked for every other country up until now and last time I checked if they moved on that base the only assured destruction would be his regime. Only thing that would be destroyed on our part is one of our allies and maybe a fraction of our budget.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Erdogan needs to look at the U.S. and E.U. realize there is a lot of money to be created from nothing by imprisoning as many people as possible.

Biggest industry in the U.S. it is, yes.

Nothing good will come to a country that looks forward to finding ways to lock people up for the sake of profit.

A bit off topic, I KNOW.

But pertinent still.

a reply to: crazyewok

The US UK would take each others side even if it were the last side to take. France Germany lol, thank you guys for your concern

a reply to: ketsuko

Very true. Prior to the Brexit, it seems that people like Merkel were pushing hard the Turkish entrance, and Merkel has been consolidating European military forces. I'm beginning to think that Merkel wants to form a new federalized EU, leaving the current on behind.

I dont trust Merkel or Erdogan. Sounds like they want a 3rd Reich.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The whole narrative in Europe does seem to have a creepily similar tone to that prior of both world wars. Division, tension and the foreshadowing of possible strange and disheartening alliances. That being said I doubt anything of the same magnitude will pan out, but logic, reason and history would say don't speak in absolutes.