Excerpt below - Full article https://www.nukestrat.com/graphics/nato_basemap.jpg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHueMFvw2ss

The United States continued to deploy roughly 480 nuclear bombs in Europe, more than double the number normally estimated by the media and non-governmental analysts. The deployment was detailed in the report "U.S. Nuclear Weapons in Europe" published by the Natural Resources Defense Council. The weapons are all B61 gravity bombs and are deployed at eight bases in six NATO countries: Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey and the United Kingdom (see map below).



The 480 nuclear bombs in Europe are the last of a huge arsenal of forward-deployed weapons that NATO and the Warsaw Pact used to deploy in Europe during the Cold War. The Soviet Union deployed nuclear weapons in Eastern European countries, but all of these weapons have been withdrawn to Russia. On the NATO side, the stockpile peaked at some 7,300 nuclear warheads in 1973 and gradually declined over the subsequent years (see table). In 1991, the U.S. government decided -- and NATO agreed -- to withdraw almost all of the remaining weapons, but left 480 air-delivered bombs in place.



Today, the United States is the only nuclear power that continues to deploy nuclear weapons outside its own territory. The approximately 480 nuclear bombs in Europe are intended for use in accordance with NATO nuclear strike plans, the report asserts, against targets in Russia or countries in the Middle East such as Iran and Syria.

The report shows for the first time how many U.S. nuclear bombs are earmarked for delivery by non-nuclear NATO countries. In times of war, under certain circumstances, up to 180 of the 480 nuclear bombs would be handed over to Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey for delivery by their national air forces. No other nuclear power or military alliance has nuclear weapons earmarked for delivery by non-nuclear countries.

Although the United States retains full control in peacetime, this quasi-nuclear status of non-nuclear NATO countries violates the objective of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The U.S. and NATO argue that there is no violation because the U.S. retains control of the weapons. But the allied nuclear role is far from dormant in peacetime, with host country pilots practicing nuclear strikes and their aircraft being maintained ready to delivery the nuclear weapons if necessary. Besides, the strictly legal argument misses the bigger point: equipping non-nuclear NATO countries with the means to deliver nuclear weapons if necessary contradicts the non-proliferation standards that the U.S. and Europe are trying to impress upon other countries such as Iran and North Korea.

The report also provides new insight into the logistics of the nuclear weapons deployment in Europe, including the capacity and characteristics of the Weapons Storage and Security System (WS3) used to store the weapons underground inside Protective Aircraft Shelters at the individual bases. It also highlights the fleet of Weapons Maintenance Trucks (WMTs) dispersed to the bases to provide on-site maintenance of the nuclear bombs. Because this maintenance program occasionally disassembles weapons inside the Protective Aircraft Shelter, the report reveals, the U.S. Air Force discovered in 1997 that the procedure created a risk of inadvertent nuclear explosion if a disassembled weapon was struck by lightning.

The report recommends that all the weapons should be withdrawn to the United States, and that the U.S. and NATO should use the political leverage from such a move to engage Russia to drastically reduce the large number of Russian non-strategic nuclear weapons, as well as revitalize efforts to create a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East. Initiatives like these, the report concludes, would -- unlike continuing to maintain U.S. nuclear weapons in Europe -- provide real security benefits to NATO.

The full report is available from the right-hand bar along with a number of documents released under FOIA. Also made available are satellite photos of many of the European bases where U.S. nuclear weapons are stored.

Toh

That is what they intend to use Ukraine for

helinues:
Toh

At least Russia would rethink invading other Countries
Turkey shares a border with Russia

Lol

christistruth01:



At least Russia would rethink invading other Countries
Turkey shares a border with Russia

Yes, you are right.

U S are very corny they are the major problems to all this and they pretend to be innocent, and behave like settling the matter, while they are the major problems, if you know you know.

cherishmichael:
U S are very corny they are the major problems to all this and they pretend to be innocent, and behave like settling the matter, while they are the major problems, if you know you know.

spot on!

christistruth01:



At least Russia would rethink invading other Countries
Turkey shares a border with Russia

NATO are simply cowards..

Are Syria, Afghanistan and Libya NATO countries that made them to interfere

helinues:


NATO are simply cowards..

Are Syria, Afghanistan and Libya NATO countries that made them to interfere

United Nations resolution ask them to intervene

bigpicture001:


United Nations resolution ask them to intervene

UN should also tell them this time or are they waiting for Ukranians to be annihilated?

helinues:


UN should also tell them this time or are they waiting for Ukranians to be annihilated?

Russia used their veto power to block the UN resolution

Most of the European countries should know if there is a nuclear war, they will be the ones to suffer it the most.

I wander why they are letting the USA cause unnecessary wahala in Europe.

bigpicture001:


United Nations resolution ask them to intervene

Did not happen

Simply A LIE


Please cite the resolution that authorized any of those invasions

bigpicture001:


Russia used their veto power to block the UN resolution

Stop giving excuses on behalf of coward UN and NATO..

When Boris travelled to Poland and Estonia, an Ukrainian journalist asked him why did he come to the countries that are not currently affected with war instead of traveling to Ukraine if not that he is afraid of Putin..

Eggzactly

This is why I always laugh when ignorant Igbos talk about Putin and his ancient Soviet-era nuclear weapons when in fact Putin is surrounded by NATO Nuclear weapons all the way into his Kremlin toilet...


If den born put-in well, touch that button..

GodHatesBigots:

The United States continued to deploy roughly 480 nuclear bombs in Europe, more than double the number normally estimated by the media and non-governmental analysts. The deployment was detailed in the report "U.S. Nuclear Weapons in Europe" published by the Natural Resources Defense Council. The weapons are all B61 gravity bombs and are deployed at eight bases in six NATO countries: Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey and the United Kingdom (see map below).



The 480 nuclear bombs in Europe are the last of a huge arsenal of forward-deployed weapons that NATO and the Warsaw Pact used to deploy in Europe during the Cold War. The Soviet Union deployed nuclear weapons in Eastern European countries, but all of these weapons have been withdrawn to Russia. On the NATO side, the stockpile peaked at some 7,300 nuclear warheads in 1973 and gradually declined over the subsequent years (see table). In 1991, the U.S. government decided -- and NATO agreed -- to withdraw almost all of the remaining weapons, but left 480 air-delivered bombs in place.



Today, the United States is the only nuclear power that continues to deploy nuclear weapons outside its own territory. The approximately 480 nuclear bombs in Europe are intended for use in accordance with NATO nuclear strike plans, the report asserts, against targets in Russia or countries in the Middle East such as Iran and Syria.

The report shows for the first time how many U.S. nuclear bombs are earmarked for delivery by non-nuclear NATO countries. In times of war, under certain circumstances, up to 180 of the 480 nuclear bombs would be handed over to Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey for delivery by their national air forces. No other nuclear power or military alliance has nuclear weapons earmarked for delivery by non-nuclear countries.

Although the United States retains full control in peacetime, this quasi-nuclear status of non-nuclear NATO countries violates the objective of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The U.S. and NATO argue that there is no violation because the U.S. retains control of the weapons. But the allied nuclear role is far from dormant in peacetime, with host country pilots practicing nuclear strikes and their aircraft being maintained ready to delivery the nuclear weapons if necessary. Besides, the strictly legal argument misses the bigger point: equipping non-nuclear NATO countries with the means to deliver nuclear weapons if necessary contradicts the non-proliferation standards that the U.S. and Europe are trying to impress upon other countries such as Iran and North Korea.

The report also provides new insight into the logistics of the nuclear weapons deployment in Europe, including the capacity and characteristics of the Weapons Storage and Security System (WS3) used to store the weapons underground inside Protective Aircraft Shelters at the individual bases. It also highlights the fleet of Weapons Maintenance Trucks (WMTs) dispersed to the bases to provide on-site maintenance of the nuclear bombs. Because this maintenance program occasionally disassembles weapons inside the Protective Aircraft Shelter, the report reveals, the U.S. Air Force discovered in 1997 that the procedure created a risk of inadvertent nuclear explosion if a disassembled weapon was struck by lightning.

The report recommends that all the weapons should be withdrawn to the United States, and that the U.S. and NATO should use the political leverage from such a move to engage Russia to drastically reduce the large number of Russian non-strategic nuclear weapons, as well as revitalize efforts to create a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East. Initiatives like these, the report concludes, would -- unlike continuing to maintain U.S. nuclear weapons in Europe -- provide real security benefits to NATO.

The full report is available from the right-hand bar along with a number of documents released under FOIA. Also made available are satellite photos of many of the European bases where U.S. nuclear weapons are stored.


Excerpt below - Full article https://www.nukestrat.com/graphics/nato_basemap.jpg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHueMFvw2ss

The above postulation is arrant nonsense. Such deployment is a top-secret endeavor.

aribisala0:
Did not happen

Simply A LIE


Please cite the resolution that authorized any of those invasions

Type this on Google.. " did the US invade Libya"

Your first article answers your questions

helinues:


Stop giving excuses on behalf of coward UN and NATO..

When Boris travelled to Poland and Estonia, an Ukrainian journalist asked him why did he come to the countries that are not currently affected with war instead of traveling to Ukraine if not that he is afraid of Putin..

Eggzactly

Stop putting too much emotions on these things.. there is orderliy in the world event and justification... The NaTO are looking to justify any form of military aid to Ukraint, which doesn't exist...

If u angrily beat a co-tennant if your cuz she insulted u heavily in public, uneed to ask one of ur other neighbors to video the insults or try to make her physically attack you before you can excape a jail term even if your right when she reports the bataring of her by u...

There is usually the job done at the United Nations security council meeting before interventions and invasions are carried out....

These things are processes and called world order...

That journalist is simply dumb

bigpicture001:


Type this on Google.. " did the US invade Libya"

Your first article answers your questions

Guy just answer the question

Every US resolution has a citation .

At any rate Libya is not what we are talking about I do not need Google for that

I know there were no official UN forces in Libya

We are talking about Iran and Afghanstan

Invasion is not the only illegal war activity . Airstrikes are a different matter
But on the issue of invasion

Tell us who authorized the Iraq war?

Finally you seem to believe that the first thing you get on Google is the Word of God> Change that mindset

Google is an American company, a business that does business with The Pentagon

aribisala0:
Guy just answer the question

Every US resolution has a citation .

At any rate Libya is not what we are talking about I do not need Google for that

I know there were no official UN forces in Libya

We are talking about Iran and Afghanstan

Invasion is not the only illegal war activity . Airstrikes are a different matter
But on the issue of invasion

Tell us who authorized the Iraq war?

Finally you seem to believe that the first thing you get on Google is the Word of God> Change that mindset

Google is an American company, a business that does business with The Pentagon

I can see you are a conspiracy theorist....

I rest my case. Enjoi ur self satisfying conspiracy theories!

bigpicture001:


I can see you are a conspiracy theorist....

I rest my case. Enjoi ur self satisfying conspiracy theories!

Yes resort to ad hominem , label and attack the messenger instaed of engaging with the issues

Once again provide evidence that the UN authorized the war and invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan

Very simple question

Is Google an American company ? Yes or No

Do they do business with the US military Yes or No?


Does Google do business with any other military?

bigpicture001:


Stop putting too much emotions on these things.. there is orderliy in the world event and justification... The NaTO are looking to justify any form of military aid to Ukraint, which doesn't exist...

If u angrily beat a co-tennant if your cuz she insulted u heavily in public, uneed to ask one of ur other neighbors to video the insults or try to make her physically attack you before you can excape a jail term even if your right when she reports the bataring of her by u...

There is usually the job done at the United Nations security council meeting before interventions and invasions are carried out....

These things are processes and called world order...

That journalist is simply dumb

Please, what's this discussion about again?

The US shares nuclear bombs with allies. If a NATO country does not want to have US bombs on its turf, the US cannot unilaterally deploy such weapons in such countries...


The US are not saints & they have messed up a number of times when they should have kept their noses out of a conflict...

But one thing is certain... the US will not start world war 3, but it will sure as hell end it...

aribisala0:
Did not happen

Simply A LIE


Please cite the resolution that authorized any of those invasions

Would have passed at your comment but don't like when people dish out falsehood as facts.

Your citation as requested is presented to you below.

S/RES/1973 (Document) 2011


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1973

idahme:



S/RES/1973 (Document) 2011

Was this the authorization for the invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan or Syria?
Tell us exactly what your point is do not be afraid

aribisala0:
Was this the authorization for the invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan or Syria?
Tell us exactly what your point is do not be afraid

You requested for reference to at least one of the crises in libya and co .

I choose to give the libya UN security council resolution for military intervention.

idahme:


You requested for reference to at least one of the crises in libya and co .

I choose to give the libya UN security council resolution for military intervention.

You are late scroll up I have already addressed the issue of Libya

You can spin your self serving lies butthe UN did not authorize regme change in Libya which was the publicly declared policy of th Us and NATO
. Crucially when the UN declares no fly zone which is all it authorized on Libya It dd not say Nigeria Turkey or cameroon should enforce it .So the question of who enforces such resolutions and by what procedure ? If the procedure is force does it mean "by any means necessary" including the price e are experiencing today in Northern Nigerian ? Would we therefore ne entitled to have boots on the ground in Libya and a share of Libyan oil when peace returns.? That is my last word on Libya
Let us focus on Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq where the US sought regime change BY FORCE and is still trying in Syria
Did the UN authorize regime change in Iraq or Afghanistan? No The US went to war with Afghanistan because of its security . That is war and security concerns are legitimate for ALL countries
Nigerian Security will improve when we have men and equipment permanently in Libya ,Burkina Faso and others.