| Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| US gov’t papers say nukes deployed in RP | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Sep 15 2011, 10:16 AM (2,163 Views) | |
| Furbolling | Sep 15 2011, 10:19 PM Post #11 |
Member
  ![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
the US have nukes in the Philippine back in the cold war.. Clark Field airbase is one of the major airbase the US have abroad back on those days.... and all major airbase the US have a nuclear weapon bomb on it.... even today US airbase like one in Germany, Turkey, Guam, Okinawa have the B-61 nuclear bomb and other nuclear weapon... this is no surprise for me that they have nuke here in our country back on those days... |
|
"Brothers!! What we do in life, Echoes through Eternity" -Maximus | |
 |
 
|
| Tsukiyomi | Sep 23 2011, 02:55 AM Post #12 |
|
Member
|
There is no way in hell they would leave nukes in our country after their departure. Even the Chinese have very strict nuclear protocols. This is old news. It was one of those "secrets" that everybody in both governments ignored out of convienance. They most likely yanked their nukes out once Pinatubo eased up as it was clear there was no intent to keep us bases. Leaving a nuclear stockpile in Mindanao would be insanity. That sounds like rumour-mongering rather than anything based in solid fact. Last year I had one of our own mid-ranking military personel ask me what I knew about us forces creating large bases in Mindanao as he knew I traveled in the South frequently. What he had described was borderline ludicris. When I asked him where he got his information as this was actually the second time he had brought up odd questions, he admitted it was just rumors "by a bunch of gossiping old women" and nothing based in fact. |
|
|
|
| matrix | Sep 27 2011, 01:09 AM Post #13 |
Member
|
BusinessMirror.com.ph Home Opinion Thank you, America, for the nukes SATURDAY, 24 SEPTEMBER 2011 18:35 TEODORO L. LOCSIN JR. / FREE FIRE FROM, of all people, the Commies come comforting proof that America cared a lot about preserving and protecting our freedom and independence all along. Far from concealing nukes from the governments of countries hosting them, the US readily disclosed their presence but only to the legitimate government and possibly to Peking, as it was then called, but not to the Filipino Left. Why talk to the dog when you can speak to the master? But, first, the declassified 1969 “Top Secret” US State Department memo discovered by Bayan—admirably declassified in the interest of freedom of information—shows that advanced governments, like the American, maintain accurate, even self-damning records of their actions; hell, even the KGB did. Underdeveloped governments, like ours, do not keep accurate records of anything. The 1969 State Department memo reveals that the democratically re-elected Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos “was informed of the storage of nuclear weapons in the Philippines…as early as 1966,” the moment he took office in his first term. This means that all Philippine presidents were apprised of American nukes. So far from concealing, the US was forthcoming about them; possibly even to Red China for deterrent reasons, though not to the Philippine Left. Why speak to the dog when you are in touch with the master? Bayan added that the nukes were stored in Clark and Subic. That means delivery would be by strategic bombers or fighters (with tactical nukes) but not missiles. No silos were found in either base when the US left as though anticipating the end of the Cold War, which the CIA did. The Philippines did not merit a missile defense, which would be instantaneous. Oh, well. Incredibly, the Philippine Daily Inquirer failed to get a reaction from the US Embassy on Bayan’s unwittingly flattering disclosure. Naturally, the embassy generally does not react to every piece of propaganda from the enemy. The Americans hadn’t reacted either when a fetching Miss Aquino a.k.a. Tokyo Rose did daily broadcasts in her soothing at times teasing voice for the Japanese Imperial Forces. What a pity in this case. Here was a golden chance for the embassy to say: “Well, of course, we told him. He was the democratically elected Philippine president, two times at that. Despite the risk that he might blab or be made to blab by fellow travelers in the Senate, the United States knew its diplomatic responsibility to duly inform the head of the country hosting our forces—particularly our nuclear forces—to show the vibrancy of our two countries’ Mutual Defense Treaty whereby an attack on one is deemed without question as an attack on the other, obliging it to retaliate with every means available—conventional or nuclear—as though the attack had been against itself. We will do it still unless your president invites the enemy over as a joint explorer of Philippine territory, in which case it is not a foreign invasion but an abject invitation.” In short, in 1969 the US was prepared to plunge the region, if not the world, into nuclear war if the Philippines was attacked, even with vastly superior forces and while the US was bleeding blood and treasure—in Cory’s moving words before the Joint Houses of the US Congress assembled—in the Vietnam war. The US would do so by any means in its arsenal, including the weapon of last resort. Even shorter, the US was prepared to push the red button to keep us safe and free, just as the US had every expectation that we would do everything in our puny power to keep America the same. At this time, too, the nattering nabobs of nationalism kept yammering on about the one-sided US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty that would drag us into a war with the Soviet slave powers; a treaty which yet was “a paper tiger.” Now in what re-education camp or safe house did our nationalists pick up that peculiarly revealing phrase? Clearly, the State Department memo shows that the US was dead earnest about defending freedom here by all, any and every means in its power. The Americans were ready to nuke the local Left’s principal foreign supporter, whence the arms on MV Karagatan originated. On top of that, the State Department memo stressed that openness and transparency had to be observed, despite the imperative of secrecy and the heightened risk of betrayal in a country as riddled with fellow travelers as the Philippines, with a population as irrepressibly chatty as Filipinos tend to be even about having gonorrhea, for heaven’s sake. The memo stressed the urgency of full disclosure “on the eve of elections scheduled on October 11.” October 11? What country held elections on that day? Not ours, not the US. Maybe China? But October 11 is one day after 10-10. The rest of the memo, said Bayan, suggested how to handle a leakage of the nuclear secret imparted out of diplomatic courtesy to the democratically elected president of Asia’s most vibrant democracy then. Meanwhile, it appears, from another document, that the US State Department went overboard with its commitment to transparency by a seemingly reckless policy of deliberate, if selective, leakage of the deployment of US nuclear weapons among its allies. The purpose was to forewarn Russia and China that the US had encircled them with nukes in allied nations—but where and how many exactly were for them to figure out and waste their resources on a guess. That is the essence of deterrence, the doctrine to which both sides, friends and enemies of freedom, adhered. Deterrence strategy requires that the enemy know one’s capabilities as much as one should know the enemy’s so that neither side tries something it is unprepared to carry through despite full knowledge of the consequences. Capability, in military thinking, equates to intent. That was the beautiful symmetry of the Cold War. Both sides had to know what the other side had—to the extent of even exaggerating—so as to discourage reckless aggression. There was no place for loonies as in the post-Cold War world where any hirsute jackass with a turban wants a nuke in his camel bag. In a mutually deterrent universe, each side had a stake in keeping the other apprised of what it could do, even if not exactly when nor exactly from where it would do what it could. Read Schelling. He was the guru of nuclear deterrence. The Americans made sure the Soviets read Schelling, otherwise there was an unacceptable risk of miscalculation. Both sides had to be on the same page all the time even as they prepared to tear up the book in a nuclear exchange both sides were yet determined never to stumble into. There was an elegant study on the Cuban missile crisis showing just that; it was required reading at the US naval war college in Monterrey. Of course, such revelations invited, not just the risk of too much disclosure, but also the annoyance of nationalists making a big to-do about their countries hosting American nukes. But, at the height of the Cold War, agitation wasn’t anything local security forces couldn’t brush aside. So, thank you, Bayan, for revealing the sound historical basis of a renewed trust in our American ally. The US was prepared to launch World War III for its allies, including us. Nice. I couldn’t bear to live in communist slavery. Jeanne Kirkpatrick defended the American tolerance for fascist regimes by arguing that fascism can evolve into or step aside for a liberal democracy. (History has shown this.) Communist totalitarianism abides forever, she said. Subsequent events would show it could morph into a fascist regime with the same longevity, the same thuggery but without the fraternal patina of internationalism; witness, the Soviet Union and the Russia it has become today. But Bayan says that, while the US State Department memo demonstrates the profound sincerity of the Americans in our defense and their concern for transparency, it also exposes their hypocrisy. “The US,” said Bayan, “acts as if they [sic] are concerned with the proliferation of nuclear weapons while, on the other hand, it retains the world’s biggest stockpile of nuclear weapons.…It [right, singular] acts as if it is concerned with nuclear weapons entering the Philippines, while in the past it stored nuclear weapons here without informing our government.” Now, now, we are getting beside ourselves, comrades. The US did inform our government even while it was democratic. And the US has to retain the world’s biggest stockpile of nuclear weapons to credibly threaten anyone else attempting to stockpile them; elsewhere would come its moral authority and suasion for nuclear disarmament? It is not true that “the US is concerned with nuclear weapons entering the Philippines.” Only those that are not American. We should be concerned, too, about incoming nukes from, say, China or Islam via Philippine customs, which never turns a blind eye to contraband but covers its eyes with cash. That is why the $26-million nuclear-radiation detection facility was set up by the US in the Port of Manila. Bayan complains that US nukes do not pass through that facility. A warship? How? How big is that facility? Besides, why would the US facility have to apply to US nukes? The US would know already. No need to radiate them again. My God, X-raying them might tip the US nukes over to critical mass. Boom. No more smugglers; thousands of X-rayed but not untaxed containers vaporized; deep mourning in the Palace; the only trace of Ruffy Biazon a round shadow on a wall. So, thank you, Bayan, for assuring us that the US meant every word of its commitment to our freedom by any means—even nuclear—necessary to preserve it. On the other hand, we reciprocate by inviting Communist Chinese firms—all of which are state firms—to put up a dedicated government broadband network through which all government messages must pass, such as military communications to and from US forces and ours. The Chinese would set up the broadband network. This is like giving an extension phone to Beijing to our hot line to the Pentagon. http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/home/opin...a-for-the-nukes |
|
|
|
| ejvgarcia_08 | Feb 6 2012, 09:55 AM Post #14 |
|
Member
|
http://www.interaksyon.com/article/13045/u...7_5007048005167 (UPDATED - 10:30 p.m.) MANILA, Philippines - The US government had secretly stored nuclear weapons in the Philippines "for many years" during the regime of President Ferdinand Marcos and the strongman knew about it as early as 1966, a "top secret" US document that has been declassified and released by a US-based non-government organization shows. The document released by the National Security Archive based in George Washington University showed that the 1969 "top secret" memo was from US career diplomat Robert McClintock who informed the acting secretary of the US State Department that the US President had signed a directive that information about contingency plans, CIA activities in Laos, and storage of nuclear weapons everywhere "Would be covered by executive privilege and not divulged to the Symington Subcommittee on overseas commitments." The said committee was then asking for detailed information on the the Central Intelligence Agency's "counter-insurgency activity in Laos and on the storage of nuclear weapons in the Philippines." Marcos secretly informed The same document from McClintock states that, "Divulgence of the fact that nuclear weapons are stored in the Philippines, and have been there for many years without prior consultation with the Philippine Government, would gravely jeopardize US-Philippine relations, particularly on the eve of presidential elections scheduled for October 11." The document added that, "The fact that President Marcos was secretly informed of the presence of these weapons in 1966 would not work to his advantage in the elections." "The Philippine government and public are not aware of storage nor of President Marcos' knowldege thereof," the document further stated. Prevent publicity McClintock underscored the importance of "how best to prevent any publicity being given to the matter." "It was recommended, therefore, as a fall-back position from the recommendation that no comment whatever be given on nuclear weapons that, if there is indeed danger of a leak, the Secretaries of State and Defense should get in touch with the Senators on the Symington Subcommittee, tell them the facts off the record without any transcript being taken, and enjoin the Senators under no circumstances to reveal this highly sensitive information." Hyprocrisy assailed The Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan) assailed the alleged hypocrisy of the US government when it recently inaugurated a $26-million nuclear facility at the Port of Manila. "The public relations event smacks of US nuclear hyprocrisy when one considers the historical relations we've had with the US and its nuclear weapons," said Renator Reyes Jr., in his blog, where the story about the secret nuclear weapons of the US in the Philippines first came out. "US nuclear hypocrisy is when it acts as if it is concerned with the proliferation of nuclear weapons, while on the other hand, retaining the world’s biggest stockpile of nuclear arms. It acts as if it is concerned with nuclear weapons entering the Philippines despite having secretly stored nuclear weapons in our country without informing our government," added Reyes. Deception He said the chapter of this history on the clandestine presence of US nuclear weapons in the country "should be revisited and the US should be called to task for its deception." "This is another proof on why we should never allow the return of US bases in the country," said the Bayan secretary general. Bayan fears that the same deception is happening now under the Visiting Forces Agreement especially since Philippine authorities "have no way of determining if warships entering the country are carrying nuclear weapons." "The US government’s hi-tech nuclear detection device, unfortunately, does not apply to US warships that freely enter the Philippines under the past and present administrations. We will never know if these ships are bringing in nuclear weapons, nuclear waste or other weapons of mass destruction," said Reyes. |
|
|
|
| arvcab | Feb 6 2012, 11:22 AM Post #15 |
Member
|
I would rather prefer a US warship with nuclear warhead entering our shores than a chinese pointing one at us. 
|
|
|
|
| Mckoyzzz | Feb 6 2012, 01:09 PM Post #16 |
Ipsa Scientia Potestas Est
|
A related report was already posted in another thread last September... http://z3.invisionfree.com/Defense_Philipp...?showtopic=9468 |
 "Do not condemn the judgment of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong -- Dandemis" | |
|
|
| Duminus | Feb 6 2012, 02:05 PM Post #17 |
PDFF Admin Support
|
Merged. |
|
|
|
| diktador | Mar 20 2012, 12:44 AM Post #18 |
|
Recruit
|
100% of those who oppose nukes of USA in the Philippines are either communists or communist terrorists. Why, do these Chinese spies oppose the nukes in North Korea? The hell, no. Will nukes in the Philippines cause poverty?Will it make us poorer?The hell, no because the safekeeping of these nukes would require more personnel; hence, more employment! Anything that would endanger Philippine national security, these commies, would do. because they are hell-bent on establishing a communist terrorist government here in the Philippines. Israeli version of the patriot missiles intercepted a lot of rockets fired from Palestine to Israel. American patriot missiles or nukes save Filipino lives! Period! |
|
|
|
| Parastriker | Mar 29 2012, 10:11 AM Post #19 |
Member
|
Nukes are quite a fail-safe device for our government, but if we still have the said "nuclear weaponry" then we might be breaching an agreement, the Southeast Asian Nuclear Weapon-Free zone (SEANWFZ) treaty. If we have none, then we could use this bluff. |
|
Success through information, victory through disinformation. "Good leaders make efficient followers. Great leaders make good followers. But true leaders make leaders out of mere followers." "Measuring the intelligence of a common internet user is as easy as looking at his/her grammar." | |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · General Military and Law Enforcement · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
2:47 PM Jul 13