It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Nuclear Weapons Withdrawn From the United Kingdom

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 02:47 PM
link   

U.S. Nuclear Weapons Withdrawn From the United Kingdom


www.fas.org

The United States has withdrawn nuclear weapons from the RAF Lakenheath air base 70 miles northeast of London, marking the end to more than 50 years of U.S. nuclear weapons deployment to the United Kingdom since the first nuclear bombs first arrived in September 1954.

The withdrawal, which has not been officially announced but confirmed by several sources, follows the withdrawal of nuclear weapons from Ramstein Air Base in Germany in 2005 and Greece in 2001.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 02:47 PM
link   
I'm curious if any of you might have an opinion on why this withdrawal has not been publicly announced. The report does a pretty good job painting a picture of how it could be useful to current arms negotiations to have this information on the table, yet they chose secrecy instead.


Why NATO and the United States have decided to keep these major withdrawals secret is a big puzzle. The explanation might simply be that “nuclear” always means secret, that it was done to prevent a public debate about the future of the rest of the weapons, or that the Bush administration just doesn’t like arms control. Whatever the reason, it is troubling because the reductions have occurred around the same time that Russian officials repeatedly have pointed to the U.S. weapons in Europe as a justification to reject limitations on Russia’s own tactical nuclear weapons.

In fact, at the very same time that preparations for the withdrawal from Ramstein and Lakenheath were underway, a U.S. State Department delegation visiting Moscow clashed with Russian officials about who had done enough to reduce its non-strategic nuclear weapons. General Jones’ “good news” could not be shared.


I also find myself thinking of that Basksdale AFB fiasco. I certainly hope none of these nukes got 'lost' while in transport...

www.fas.org
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Kind of strange that NATO/US never capitalised on the fact of removing the last US Nukes from Northern Europe.

But I for one am glad that they now have gone from UK soil. I dont think any country should be allowed to have their nukes stored on someone else's national territory. Now maybe they will remove the ones from Diego Garcia.



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Wotan
 


stupid question why did the UK need to have US nukes in this country?
we have nukes here already



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul
reply to post by Wotan
 


stupid question why did the UK need to have US nukes in this country?
we have nukes here already


The US/UK bases were used as 'Forward Areas' during the Cold War with the Warsaw Pact countries. It meant that NATO could hit back in a rapid response with nukes if needed. It spread the nukes around a bit so it made more targets. The downside was it also made the country they were stored in a target as well.

But now that the Cold war is over, it has really made nukes with the intent on retailating to the now disbanded Warsaw Pact countries very redundant and politically non-correct.



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 03:57 PM
link   
........ Submarines.

Their need for ALCMs has been slowly dwindling for a decade. Now their use against a horde of soviet troops rushing across europe has gone, so has the need for the ALCM detterent.


Soviet premier Gorbachov said he would 'hug europe to death and drive US forces from european soil'.. Seems socialist / communist doctrine is winning.



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Dan Tanna
 


Read the words of the new Russian President at the EU - Russia conference..

He suggested Europe could govern herself and did not need the United States providing security over Europe i.e formally declare NATO dead.



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 04:07 PM
link   
news.bbc.co.uk...

Russians and EU to seek new pact



Russia's President Dmitry Medvedev and top EU officials have announced the start of talks on a new strategic partnership agreement.

He also harshly criticised US plans to site missile defence facilities in Europe, and warned the EU against relying on others to ensure security in Europe.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Just backing up what I said in the previous post.



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
reply to post by Dan Tanna
 


Read the words of the new Russian President at the EU - Russia conference..

He suggested Europe could govern herself and did not need the United States providing security over Europe i.e formally declare NATO dead.


In a way he is correct. There is no Warsaw Pact now, Russia is a shadow of its former self and is heavily reliant on the West in economical terms so is not likely to start anything silly. NATO is an anchronism and well past its sell by date ........... its time to move on.

There is no major 'evil' player nowadays to threaten an invasion of Europe. The global economy has seen to that, everyone is reliant on someone else and would only be 'cutting off their nose, to spite their face'.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 09:32 PM
link   
The minute that ink is dry...

The russians have feared the USA in Europe for decades. Their wish is to see a EU with no USA prescence at all. Why ?

Because no NATO, no USA in Europe. No cavalry when the Russians steam roll through to paris via their T-72 / 80 highway.

Think i'm paranoid ? Russian intelligence gathering and activity in Europe has not been so high since 1985 - At the very height of the cold war.

Me ? when the EU is complete, and the socialists have destroyed every thing, i fully expect to awake to a shocked news reporter saying the Russians are half way through belgium.



posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Dan Tanna
 


Invasion; No, but Russia using the EU as a puppet state is their key goal. Medvedev and Putin are not stupid, the EU is the largest trading bloc in the World and the most significant regional power in the World. Both the US Presidential candidates talk about "better relations with the EU" because America understands the influence the EU has.

Build a powerful coalition across Eurasia and you'll have the World eating out of your hands.



posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by infinite
 



Am gonna post this then go to sleep.

Russian intelligence agencies have increased their activity across the UK and europe by 700%.

The secret intelligence service is scrambling to cover this threat as well as the islamic threat.

Some quaters are actually asking wether this was a 'smoke screen' to cover the Russian ... I kid you not - you can ask around on that one.

Its not just the UK and Europe either... remeber Paul Hampel in Canada the SVR agent caught out ? he was actually a Russian born and bred.. 10 years he did his work.

1996 UK/ Russia espionage events

The above is from 1996 . . it was well under way even back then. It got worse once 2001 happend... it seems that the cold war didn't thaw, the Russians just got a bit carried away in the new socialist europe before every thing was in place.
'



posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 06:06 AM
link   
the USA is trying to reduce costs, instead of spending more $$$ on securing all those 'older' nukes in another land.

recently the USA began replacing the old warheads that are a generation old with new, more reliable, & smaller yeild nukes.
The ones that were in Greece, Germany & the UK were probably antiquated and in need of dismantling anyhow.
So, the USA puts a quiet PR spin on being magnamimous in removing cold-war weapons from the European Theatre...



next, the USA (it is thought) has a developed and responsive space-based arsenal.... any arms up there would be next to impossible for a terrorist strike team to steal or destroy as are the currently deployed WMDs housed at other NATO countries under treaty & agreement with the USA nuclear force.



even if there is not a space-based delivery system,
the B-2 bombers , Subs, surface ships, can deliver any number of cruise missiles, laser guided bombs, from the safety and security of USA battlestations.,,
the WMD warheads would then have been 100% secure and under control
of the President from the day they were made to the day they were used,

so the need for offshore nukes has been made null.


just some thoughts,

[edit on 29-6-2008 by St Udio]



posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 06:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Dan Tanna
 


Well, interesting to know, the KGB declared the European Union as its successor and main opponent to America. In a way, the KGB is right.

The European Union is a soviet style organisation, the commission is beaucratic and unelected, like the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the European Parliament is the same as the Supreme Soviet of the USSR.

Russia would like to return to the days of the USSR, but less Communist and more authoritarian. But I seriously cannot see Russia invading Western Europe, however, Eastern Europe (Ukraine, Georgia and the Balkans) is likely to see Russian tanks.




top topics



 
2

log in

join