Obama and ‘experts’ wrongly measure North Korea’s nuclear intentions
By R. James Woolsey and Peter Vincent Pry
On March 9, North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, a paranoid psychopath, displayed a nuclear missile warhead he threatens to launch against the United States and its allies.
The public is being misled by the White House, some so-called “experts” and mainstream media casting doubt on whether the Great Leader’s threat is real. They claim North Korea has not demonstrated sufficient “miniaturization” of a nuclear weapon to be delivered by a missile.
However, defense and intelligence community officials warn North Korea probably already has nuclear armed missiles. The Defense Department’s 2016 report “Military and Security Developments Involving the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea” warns that, in addition to medium-range missiles, they have six KN-08 mobile nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) that can strike the U.S. mainland.
Recently, the Pentagon warned North Korea rolled out a new longer-range ICBM, the KN-14, that can probably deliver a nuclear warhead to Chicago.
Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, Executive Director of the EMP Task Force on National and Homeland Security; and Cynthia Ayers, Deputy Director of the EMP Task Force on National and Homeland Security testified before the Senate Committee on National Security and Defense.
Video of Dr. Peter Vincent Pry and Cynthia Ayers testimony
Dr. Peter Pry and Cynthia Ayers testimony begins at about 15:32
Dr. Peter Vincent Pry
Paris known as the “City of Lights” literally, as the largest city in France, and figuratively, as the cultural capital of Western Civilization, now wonders, along with the rest of the civilized world, what to do about the Dark Ages threat embodied by ISIS and Islamic terrorism?
For the U.S. Congress, the next immediate step to protect America should be obvious. Rep. Trent Franks has introduced a bill, the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act (HR 1073), that would protect the national electric grid from manmade and natural threats that could cause a protracted blackout of the life sustaining critical infrastructures–communications, transportation, business and finance, food and water.
A terrorist attack on the electric grid that causes a nationwide blackout lasting one year could kill up to 90 percent of the American people by starvation and societal collapse, according to the Congressional EMP Commission.
Senator Ron Johnson, Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, has introduced a similar bill (S 1846).
Congress has known for over a decade, since 2004 when the EMP Commission delivered its first report, about the existential threat to the United States from electric grid vulnerability. Yet nothing has been done to protect the grid.
Congress has just a few more weeks before it breaks for the holidays to act.
Dr. Peter Vincent Pry
President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran is not only a bad deal, but the worst deal possible–because Iran probably already has the bomb.
Consider the facts.
Iran A-Bomb Overdue
Historically, judging from open source estimates, the time required for all other nations to develop atomic weapons is 3-12 years. Iran, which has had a nuclear program for over six decades and been crashing on the bomb for 25-30 years, should have developed atomic weapons by now.
The United States during the World War II Manhattan Project (1942-1945) built the first atomic bombs, two different designs, in just 3 years. In just 3 years, when the atomic bomb was merely a theoretical possibility, the U.S. invented the two basic A-Bomb designs–the gun-type A-Bomb used on Hiroshima and the implosion-type A-Bomb used on Nagasaki–that are the basis for all atomic (fission) weapons and are the technological gateway to more sophisticated and powerful thermonuclear (fusion) weapons, including the H-Bomb. In just 3 years, the U.S. invented and built the nuclear scientific and industrial infrastructure that mass produced thousands of A-Bombs and H-Bombs after 1945 during the Cold War.
Read Richard Rhodes’ The Making of the Atomic Bomb (1987) and consider whether it seems plausible that–where the U.S. invented the bomb and its nuclear weapons infrastructure in just 3 years using 1930s and 1940s era science and technology–supposedly (according to the Obama Administration) Iran has not yet duplicated the U.S. feat of World War II. Yet Iran has access to copious unclassified materials on making and designing fission and fusion weapons. Yet Iran is informed and equipped with 21st Century science and technology. And Iran has been crashing on the bomb for 8-10 times longer than the U.S. WWII Manhattan Project–for 25-30 years.
Can Israel trust Vice President Joe Biden’s March 9 promise to Prime Minister Netanyahu and the people of Israel that America “will act” if Iran violates the nuclear deal?
Dr. Peter Vincent Pry
The Obama administration’s willful blindness to the present nuclear missile threats emanating almost daily from North Korea is a “teaching moment” on how President Obama–and any future Democrat administration that supports Obama’s nuclear deal–will respond to nuclear missile threats from Iran.
Denial. Obfuscation. Impotence. This is how President Obama is reacting to the fact that North Korea is a fully fledged nuclear missile state. No doubt it is how President Obama, or a future President Hillary Clinton or President Bernie Sanders–who also support the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA)–will react when Iran reveals to the world that it too is a nuclear missile power.
North Korea has conducted four overt nuclear tests, the last possibly of a hydrogen bomb. All of these nuclear tests are illegal violations of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which North Korea once subscribed in order to acquire its nuclear infrastructure.
Of great significance for the case of Iran, North Korea’s nuclear tests are flagrant violations of the Agreed Framework. The Agreed Framework is not an official treaty with the U.S. but an agreement concluded with President Bill Clinton under his executive authority–exactly the same unconstitutional basis for President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran.
Family Security Matters
by DR. PETER VINCENT PRY February 13, 2015
Terrorism is NOT an existential threat, according to Susan Rice, President Obama’s national security advisor, and according to the new White House national security strategy unveiled on Friday, February 6, 2015. Nor does the United States face any other threats to its existence, according to the White House, except for “climate change.”Rice explained, “Too often, what’s missing here in Washington is a sense of perspective. Yes, there is a lot going on. Still, while the dangers we face may be more numerous and varied, they are not of the existential nature we confronted during World War II or during the Cold War.”
Polling indicates as many as one-third of Americans believe Rice and the White House, when in reality the U.S. faces existential threats of greater severity than World War II or the Cold War from terrorists, Iran, Russia, China, and North Korea.
Regular readers of Family Security Matters do not need to be told why Russia, China, and North Korea–all nuclear missile states hostile to America and U.S. allies–pose a growing existential threat to the United States.
This article shall focus on the existential dangers from terrorists like Al Qaeda and ISIS and from the world’s leading sponsor of international terrorism–Iran. Islamic terrorists and Iran pose an even greater threat to the existence of the United States than did Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany during World War II, or than the USSR during the Cold War.
By: Dr. Peter Vincent Pry
North Korea’s third illegal nuclear test on February 12, 2013, was followed by increased international sanctions, that prompted escalating threats from North Korea to make nuclear missile strikes against U.S. allies, South Korea and Japan, and the mainland United States. President Obama denied that North Korea could deliver on these threats, claiming that North Korea does not yet have nuclear armed missiles–despite assessments to the contrary by DIA, CIA, and NATO.
Three months earlier, on December 12, 2012, North Korea successfully orbited a satellite, the KSM-3, thereby demonstrating the capability to deliver a small nuclear warhead to intercontinental ranges–against any nation on Earth. The Congressional Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack assessed that Russia, China, and North Korea (with help from Russia) have probably developed nuclear weapons of special design that produce a low explosive yield and high gamma ray output in order to generate an extraordinarily powerful EMP field. The Russians term these “Super-EMP” weapons. Independently, South Korean military intelligence and a Chinese military commentator in open sources credit North Korea with having Super-EMP warheads.
Hardening infrastructure will be key to minimizing the threat
By: Dr. Peter Vincent Pry
A majority of Americans support a military strike to stop or slow Iran’s nuclear weapons program. But that assumes Iran doesn’t already have some.
What if Iran already has one or more nuclear weapons and the capability to make a nuclear strike on the United States – right now? If true, this would change the calculation for the American people. Then the risks of a U.S. or Israeli military attack on Iran’s nuclear program would change radically.
The truth is, no one knows for sure just how far advanced Iran’s nuclear weapons program is. There are sound reasons for doubting Washington’s official estimates that Iran does not yet have the bomb or the ability to make a nuclear strike on the United States. The U.S. Manhattan Project during World War II, working with 1940s-era technology to develop nuclear weapons that were then merely a theoretical possibility, succeeded in building two working atomic bombs of radically different designs – in just three years. Iran supposedly has been struggling to develop nuclear weapons for 20 years, with help from nuclear-armed Russia, China and North Korea.