Today, a shocked Washington Times reported that Russia had increased their nukes under the START treaty and now has more nukes than the U.S. – But why do they appear shocked. We knew this was coming…
In the early days of this blog I had taken the time to address the new START treaty that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had put together in a desperate attempt to “Reset” relations with Russia. Before news agencies confirmed my allegations that the new START treaty allowed for an increase in Russia nukes I took to the blog to confidently relay the message myself. The details are available here from May 2011
“New START treaty allows for increase in Russian nuclear warheads”
I actually had to delay the post for nearly 48 hours because there was no verification for this claim. Luckily, I learned that the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists would be releasing a hasty/emergency report on this situation. When they did, the report was cited to back up the claim.
Its interesting that certain publications are trying very hard to keep the PFC woManning story relevant and active. No one needed him, wikileaks, or any other leaks to draw this conclusion 3 years ago. So why is it mentioned in the Washington Times story. All of the data regarding Russian nukes (SECRET, Classified, U/FOUO, etc) was, and still is, easily accessible if you talk to the right people and read the right reports.
Another interesting tidbit is the “retaliatory” clause, which was cited in the original story, and is conveniently left out of every other story on the topic. This has far reaching implications that those in the intel and diplomacy circles have not ignored or forgot about. That clause nicely covers Iran and was done intentionally to stop any preemptive strike against Iran and their nuclear facilities by us or even Israel. It literally paved the way for Iran’s nuclear program by giving Russia 1) more nukes and 2) an agreement from us that says they can nuke us into dust if we arent nice to them and their allies (i.e. Iran)