WEAPONS GRADE PLUTONIUM and how USA violates Treaties..again..

Discussion in 'World Affairs' started by teddytennisfan, Oct 4, 2016.

  1. teddytennisfan

    teddytennisfan Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,123
    Likes Received:
    495
    Trophy Points:
    83
    sputniknews.com
    Washington Taking 'Devil-May-Care Attitude' to Plutonium Deal With Russia
    Sputnik
    Politics
    14:55 04.10.2016Get short URL

    Military analyst Igor Korotchenko pointed to Washington's double standards with regard to the deal on weapons-grade plutonium.

    "The United States promotes signing agreements only in those areas it can benefit from. In an opposite case, the US simply does not fulfil its obligations," he told Russian TV-channel Zvezda. "The non-compliance with this deal once again points to Washington's devil-may-care attitude when it comes to its own promises and international law."

    The Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement was signed in 2000 and updated in 2010. The Plutonium Disposition Protocol signed by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on April 13, 2010, reaffirmed that both countries were committed to "transparently" disposing surplus weapons-grade plutonium "from their respective defense programs, thereby preventing the plutonium from ever being reused for weapons or any other military purpose."

    "However, virtually right away the US made attempts to revise disposal strategies," Zvezda asserted. "In particular, new plans were unveiled under which plutonium was supposed to be buried and not irradiated."

    Initially, both countries agreed to get rid of weapons-grade plutonium by using it as fuel in civil power reactors. In this case, the radioactive element is blended with natural uranium, reprocessed uranium or depleted uranium to produce mixed oxide (MOX) fuel.

    According to Zvezda, Russian experts were against storing plutonium in underground facilities, arguing that its disposal would not be irreversible. "In other words, this plutonium could be once again used to produce weapons," the TV channel said.

    Earlier this year, three experts from Stanford also said that burying nuclear waste was a risk-prone strategy that had to be revised.

    © Sputnik/ Grigoriy Sisoev

    In April, Russian President Vladimir Putin lambasted the US for not delivering on its obligations under the deal. "We have met our commitments, and constructed the necessary facilities. The US has not," he said.

    Putin also warned that the dilution and disposal method, which Washington now wants to use, allows nuclear fuel to retain its "breakout potential," meaning that "it can be extracted, processed and weaponized again. That is not what we agreed on."

    "However, the 'plutonium bluff' was not the only reason which prompted Russia to [suspend] the PMDA," Zvezda noted. "The United States has lately made steps leading to changes in strategic stability. In particular, [Washington] has scaled up its military presence in Eastern Europe" as part of NATO's increasingly assertive stance close to Russia's borders.

    In the last two years, the North Atlantic Alliance has created additional command and control centers in post-Soviet nations, deployed additional troops on a rotational basis to the region and drastically enhanced its war-gaming.
     
  2. teddytennisfan

    teddytennisfan Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,123
    Likes Received:
    495
    Trophy Points:
    83
    [​IMG]

    Latest News


    Home > Russia > Alexander Rogers: Plutonium, Gaddafi and The Russian Bear
    Alexander Rodgers Bloggers Geopolitics Plutonium Russia


    Alexander Rogers: Plutonium, Gaddafi and The Russian Bear

    [​IMG]

    October 3, 2016 - Fort Russ -



    Alexander Rogers, Journalistic Truth - Translated from Russian by Kristina Kharlova



    Don't read or watch BBC, CNN and Deutsche Welle today, and especially Ukrainian news - this hysteria is dangerous for your blood pressure. Moscow is only beginning to asymmetrically respond to Western ultimatums ...

    The day before yesterday one of the leading American news agencies posted an article in its Opinion section expanding on the theme that "now that Putin's fault for the downed Boeing is proved, he should await the fate of Gaddafi."

    Pot-heads [Ukrainian junta supporters -FR] are overjoyed, "Now our great American master will punish you bloody cotton jackets [Russians -FR]". Although in recent years they should get accustomed to that everything always follows the Ukrainian saying "It did not go as expected".

    First, let's be honest, Gaddafi was killed not for Lockerbie, but for trying to introduce the Gold Dinar, which would allow African countries to abandon the dollar.
    Secondly, Gaddafi was killed just after he gave up those responsible for the terrorist attack, paid compensation to the families of the victims and made concessions to the West in other matters. But this crowd operates on the principle of "eating the weak".

    Third, no one proved the fault for the downed Boeing. It's from the same series as the "doping scandal," when two months after the Olympics the IOC head declared: "I don't understand why the Russians were suspended."

    Hitler also staged a provocation in Gleiwitz. The Americans blew up their own warship to unleash the Korean war. They also sacrificed their passenger jet to enter into a world war. They blew up their own WTC towers to justify the invasion of Afghanistan. They shook the fake vials to invade Iraq (and later, after killing one and a half a million people, said "Sorry, we made a mistake"). And the script with a downed passenger jet was invented by them back in the seventies of the last century.

    That suggests who is the true culprit of this disaster.


    Fourthly, Gaddafi really had no army, modern air defense systems and nuclear weapons, and Russia has it. Therefore, the United States can only send its special combat dogs.

    Fifth, Russia is tired of the dull hopping and the antics of the Americans, and it announced the impossibility of unilaterally honoring the plutonium agreement with the United States. So now let them store their nuclear waste in Obama's backyard.
    Or in Hillary's kitchen, we don't give a damn.


    And according to the new bill we shall resume the agreement on plutonium only after USA will:

    — reduce the size of its military in Europe at least to the level where they were before the beginning of this agreement;
    — abandon the hostile policy towards Moscow;
    — lift all sanctions against the Russian economy;
    — cancel all decrees and laws on assistance to Poroshenko's regime;
    — pay compensation for damage caused by the sanctions (including forced counter-sanctions).

    And if they still argue, Rogozin will realize his dream and grant them with a trampoline instead of a space program.

    And will also stamp 100,500 hypersonic missiles, which are untouchable to the rapidly aging American missile defense, with the warheads from the left-over plutonium.
    Back in the nineties, when Russia was in liberal decay, there was a joke that "If necessary, we will enter NATO up to the very Netherlands".

    But now it's not the nineties anymore
     
    #2 teddytennisfan, Oct 4, 2016
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2016
  3. teddytennisfan

    teddytennisfan Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,123
    Likes Received:
    495
    Trophy Points:
    83
    there -- they say -- a certain Russian phrase -- which amounts to a conclusion when a ''partner" can not be reasoned with anymore...no matter how one tries...

    it is considered -- according to russians -- a kind of the lowest form of disdain:

    but translates roughly :

    "incapable of agreements".

    meaning - basically someone who simply can not be trusted for having NO capacity , no skills, no ability -- for a task..

    like asking a person to play CHOPIN or Rachmaninoff who doesn't even know what a piano or music is...

    like when you describe a person who is incapacitated, invalid, so you don't ask a person to RUN who can not even walk..and lately -- the ever-so-patient LAVROV foreign minister had already started to use that phrase to describe americans..meaning?

    NO MORE COMPROMISES with americans...they are just INCAPABLE of coming to agreements and honoring them.
     

Share This Page