Is mainland Europe under stealth US nuclear military occupation?

Hi All
Having spent the last few days reading Wikileaks cable leaks what should be the biggest issue are the 200 nukes spread out into several European countries that are under exclusive control of the US military
.
I ask our American readers here how they would feel to have even 10 nuclear warheads on American soil under the full control of a friendly external government?

I also ask should even one of these Nuke be deploy without the consent of the host country would the receiver of this nuke not first retaliate at its point of origin?

Are European governments not at a disadvantage in all talk with the USA with 200 nukes under direct US military control.
We are in some ways under a form of nuclear occupation and our governments hands are chained, to be nothing more the lap dogs of the USA.
Food for thoughts here
I would really like to get what my fellow European think of this situation.
Peace& hope
SM

PS mods not sure which form to post this in?

reply to post by smokingman2006


Europe was invaded by US after WWII.

I have been making that argument for a long time, and to support my claim I brought forward the fact that both empires (USSR and USA) was fighting over Europe, hence the Berlin war.

reply to post by smokingman2006

It was the American "occupation" that kept out the Russians.
That's fine by me.
"Better the devil you know [if you'll excuse the expression, Yanks], than the devil you don't know."

This is nothing new. Dual keyed nuclear weapons within NATO have been based in Europe for decades. It was a crucial part of the active NATO deterrent.

www.nato.int...

The Russians did the same with trusted Warsaw Pact member nations such as Poland. Polish Air Force Su-7 Fitter Pilots were trained to deploy tactical nuclear free fall bombs as part of the Warsaw Pact deterrence to NATO.

The current deployments have been known about for decades.

For example the fleet and types from the 1990s deployed the B-61 nuclear free fall.

German Panavia Tornados. Prior to that it was F-104 and before that F-84s
Dutch F-16s. Prior to that it was F-104s
Belgium F-16s. Prior to that it was F-104s
Italian Panavia Tornado. Prior to that it was F-104s
Turkish F-16. Prior to that it was F-104s and F-4s.
Greek A-7 Corsairs and later F-16s.

The UK deployed their own tactical free fall nukes before scrapping them in the late 1990s. Prior to that for decades UK aircraft deployed a combination of US dual-keyed and UK origin nukes.

www.nrdc.org...

During the 1960s there were also NATO deployed US battlefield nuclear weapons. Nation such as Belgium, Canada, Germany, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey, and the United Kingdom provided the artillery or artillery rockets for the dual-keyed warheads.

en.wikipedia.org...

www.uspid.org...

UK forces deploying US owned nuclear weapons as part of NATO.

www.nationalarchives.gov.uk...

The US also deployed dual keyed nuclear tipped Nike Hercules SAMs as part of the NATO air defence system. Nike Hercules SAMs with dual keyed nuclear warheads were deployed by Greece, Italy, Turkey, Belgian and Dutch forces.

en.wikipedia.org...

Canada had the same with US dual keyed weapons on Canadian soil.

www.user.dccnet.com...

The whole point of it was as a complete NATO policy as a warning to the Soviets and Warsaw Pact. It was standard NATO policy to deploy US supplied nuclear weapons within NATO forces.

TJ

reply to post by tommyjo


Dual keyed nuclear weapons may reassure some but overrides or always possible.

Are the Jewish nuclear weapons duel key too!!!

Peace& hope
SM

Originally posted by smokingman2006
reply to post by tommyjo

 

Dual keyed nuclear weapons may reassure some but overrides or always possible.

Are the Jewish nuclear weapons duel key too!!!

Peace& hope
SM

Of course Israeli nuclear weapons are not dual-key. Just the same as Russian, Chinese, French etc independent nuclear deterrents.

Obviously the whole point of dual key was that the B-61s on bases in Belgium, Holland etc were under US control until released onto the Dutch or Belgian F-16s. Those non-US F-16 pilots would be part of that arming system.

en.wikipedia.org...

PAL is also highlighted on the following reposted link.

www.nrdc.org...

TJ

As Russia is still the only major threat to America, by having missiles surrounding Russia it neutralises their missiles so then America can come in and....

A stealth occupation? Does that even make sense to anyone?

There is a lot less of the US military in Europe than there used to be, and a lot less buckets of instant sunshine too. The whole point of those was to deter a Soviet led attack on Western Europe, since if the Soviets and Warsaw Pact did come across, they had a very large numerical advantage in armor.

And the US invaded Europe after WW2? really??? Thats funny, I always considered that US Forces, along with the UK, Canada, and others had invaded continental Europe during WW2. And if it had not been for aggressive Soviet actions immediately following WW2 in regards to Eastern Europe and especially Berlin, there would have been a lot more brought home.

An occupation is just that, occupying and taking over of a countries affairs. Western Europe was not controlled by US, UK and Canadian forces. For a while West Germany was most definitely occupied, but ran itself when it got back on its feet. And if there was an occupation, France sure seemed to be able to do what they wanted, even leaving the military portion of NATO, and they have their own nukes too

Originally posted by firepilot


And the US invaded Europe after WW2? really??? Thats funny, I always considered that US Forces, along with the UK, Canada, and others had invaded continental Europe during WW2. And if it had not been for aggressive Soviet actions immediately following WW2 in regards to Eastern Europe and especially Berlin, there would have been a lot more brought home.

An occupation is just that, occupying and taking over of a countries affairs. Western Europe was not controlled by US, UK and Canadian forces. For a while West Germany was most definitely occupied, but ran itself when it got back on its feet. And if there was an occupation, France sure seemed to be able to do what they wanted, even leaving the military portion of NATO, and they have their own nukes too

Yes you can say during WWII, but the real fight for Europe started after WWII. It was the US which orchestrated the divide and conquer policy in Europe. Dividing Europe, causing an European civil war, then once Europe bombed each other to pieces US came with its forces and took over.

USSR came from the other side, WWII was finished, then the fight over Europe started between the two empires.

The fight escalated and spread all across the globe, to South America, Middle East, and East Asia.

US won by using the most horrendous and the most viscious war techniques in the world.

Using biological weapons, Chemical weapons, proxy wars, assassinations, puppet regimes etc etc.

Millions died in the process, literally millions.

Originally posted by oozyism


Yes you can say during WWII, but the real fight for Europe started after WWII. It was the US which orchestrated the divide and conquer policy in Europe. Dividing Europe, causing an European civil war, then once Europe bombed each other to pieces US came with its forces and took over.

USSR came from the other side, WWII was finished, then the fight over Europe started between the two empires.

The fight escalated and spread all across the globe, to South America, Middle East, and East Asia.

US won by using the most horrendous and the most viscious war techniques in the world.

Using biological weapons, Chemical weapons, proxy wars, assassinations, puppet regimes etc etc.

Millions died in the process, literally millions.

The real fight for Europe began after WW2? So that ww2 was just a sideshow to later on? That would be rather insulting to the millions of people that died from Hitler and Stalin and Mussolini.

You may bone up on some history, the US pulled a lot of its forces back home after the war, the Soviets occupied and controlled Eastern Europe. Those countries had no choice in the matter either, especially the East Germans and Poles.

Oh guess what, there was that little thing called the Berlin Airlift, where the allies, especially the US, was flying in food and coal to Berlin. Such a divisive thing that was. And then then that whole Berlin Wall thing too, that divided up East and West Berlin and the US built it. Oh did I say US, I mean East German government did that.

You may go visit places Poland, and see real history about post WW2, They certainly see the USSR as the who controlled them and would not let them have be free.. And look at all the eastern european countries, and ex soviet republics, who could not wait to join NATO, or want US bases on their soil. They could not wait to get the Soviets out. And look at happened in Budapest, and Prague too. Oh that was not US forces doing that, that was Soviet forces keeping those countries under their thumb.

Would you have been happier if the US had just totally handed over all of Germany, and not help form NATO? And what about the other countries that had forced deployed to postwar Germany? Both the UK and France occupied parts of Germany for a while, and afterwards, the UK, and Canada also had their own forces in Germany too .

America is Britains "Ogre for hire".

A failed experiment,maybe.

Maybe not.

Britain is occupying the rest of the world by stealth,including the U.S..

Originally posted by firepilot



The real fight for Europe began after WW2? So that ww2 was just a sideshow to later on? That would be rather insulting to the millions of people that died from Hitler and Stalin and Mussolini.

WWII was a sideshow, the whole war started because of Zionist terrorists creating friction between European nations. The Zionist organization was backed by US and USSR. I suspect both US and USSR was in the same bed, to destroy world powers in Europe, and yes, Europe had very strong world powers, without divide and conquer they would be impossible to defeat.

This map shows the power of Europe:

You may bone up on some history, the US pulled a lot of its forces back home after the war, the Soviets occupied and controlled Eastern Europe. Those countries had no choice in the matter either, especially the East Germans and Poles.

It is not about pulling your troops out or not, the war between USSR and US wasn't conventional, they didn't bomb each other, it was the new age warfare, for example proxy war, puppet regimes etc.

Oh guess what, there was that little thing called the Berlin Airlift, where the allies, especially the US, was flying in food and coal to Berlin. Such a divisive thing that was. And then then that whole Berlin Wall thing too, that divided up East and West Berlin and the US built it. Oh did I say US, I mean East German government did that.

It doesn't matter who built the wall, or who brought in food, it is about the fight between USSR and USA, to control Europe, that is why the wall was there, because neither side budged.

You may go visit places Poland, and see real history about post WW2, They certainly see the USSR as the who controlled them and would not let them have be free.. And look at all the eastern european countries, and ex soviet republics, who could not wait to join NATO, or want US bases on their soil. They could not wait to get the Soviets out. And look at happened in Budapest, and Prague too. Oh that was not US forces doing that, that was Soviet forces keeping those countries under their thumb.

You mean US defeated USSR therefore NATO expanded and controlled USSR territory. Duuh, when you are defeated, you will lose territory.

Would you have been happier if the US had just totally handed over all of Germany, and not help form NATO? And what about the other countries that had forced deployed to postwar Germany? Both the UK and France occupied parts of Germany for a while, and afterwards, the UK, and Canada also had their own forces in Germany too .

Happy? This is not about me being happy, this is about history and the fight between two greedy, power hungry empires who were fighting over Europe. Don't post rhetoric that USA territories were more free etc etc, because most historians know one thing, that history is written by the winners of wars.

Originally posted by oozyism
Using biological weapons, Chemical weapons, proxy wars, assassinations, puppet regimes etc etc.

Yeah, because the Soviets never did anything like that before....

Originally posted by signal2noise

Yeah, because the Soviets never did anything like that before....

Please provide some sources thanks.

From the history I read, US used viscous, backward, inhumane and destructive war tactics all over the world to topple socialist government and replace them with brutal dictators, then give those dictators weapons of mass destructions to do their biddings.

From what I know, USSR relied on Democracy to spread its ideology, while US relied on murder, assassination, terror (supporting terrorists groups), coups, proxy wars, blablabla..

I could be wrong regarding the above claim, if you think I'm wrong, please provide some evidence so I can re-check the bases of my knowledge.

reply to post by oozyism

From what I know, USSR relied on Democracy to spread its ideology, while US relied on murder, assassination, terror (supporting terrorists groups), coups, proxy wars, blablabla..

The first thing the Communists did after acquiring power was to abolish democracy, and the USSR occupied us in 1968 militarily against the will of the people. So much for democracy in USSR.

I guess this is the point at which someone (with the "someone" meaning me) should point out that it was the United States and her allies that saved european "civilization" from itself on two distinct occasions, as the europeans have a really odd way of creating madmen who love to engage in mass murder.

These are the facts, and they are absolute.

If you need proof, pick up a history book.

If you want to argue about this, go stand in front of a mirror and have at it.

If you want to feel better about the morally bereft state of europe, then and now, go see a shrink...or a priest.

Smokingman,

The United States had enough chemicals weapons at Ramstein Air Base to kill everyone in Europe several times over. Under Bill Clinton it was all shipped out on rail cars...which took YEARS to get it all out of there.

From there the bad stuff was burned on a ship in the Pacific Ocean.

A few nukes is safer than what we did have in your countries in Europe.

(BTW we didn't destroy our chemical weapons stockpile per the Chemical Weapons Convention....we might have some Chemical Weapons in yer country yet!!)