Sentences with phrase «nuclear strikes in»

Prime ministers can authorise nuclear strikes in two circumstances envisaged under the arrangements in place since the cold war.

Not exact matches

Panetta believes there is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in April, May or June — before Iran enters what Israelis described as a «zone of immunity» to commence building a nuclear bomb.

Tillerson said the U.S. is engaged in a very active diplomatic effort to halt Kim's pursuit of a nuclear weapon that could strike the U.S. mainland.

Formal talks on North Korea's nuclear program collapsed in 2009, and Kim has accelerated his efforts to obtain the ability to strike the U.S. with a nuclear weapon.

«This default setting would be a nuclear first strike against [the] ad industry,» the Interactive Advertising Bureau's senior vice-president and general counsel Mike Zaneis tweeted in response to Mozilla's Feb. 25 announcement.

Attempting a preventive military strike out of the misplaced belief that we have «run out of road» will result in the very fate we're trying to avoid, a North Korean nuclear strike.

The Iranian nuclear deal, formerly known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was struck in 2015 between Iran and China, the U.S., U.K., Russia, France and Germany.

In the past, Bolton has recommended scrapping the Iran nuclear deal and justified the need for U.S. strikes against North Korea.

In 2013, China's Communist Party - affiliated newspaper Global Times published a detailed report on future nuclear attacks on the western United States showing how the strikes would kill 12 million Americans through blast and radiation.

Russian president Vladimir Putin significantly escalated anti-American rhetoric Tuesday with a chilling video of a new «invincible» nuclear weapon that was shown striking Florida in a CGI video.

Pyongyang looks at states such as Iraq — where Saddam Hussein was overthrown by the United States — and Libya — its late leader, Moammar Gadhafi, gave up his nuclear ambitions for sanctions relief and aid, only to be toppled and killed after the United States intervened in his country's civil unrest — and believes that only being able to threaten the US mainland with a retaliatory nuclear strike can stop American military intervention.

Lawmakers will need to decide whether to reimpose the crippling sanctions on Iran that were suspended in exchange for Iran curbing its nuclear activities in a deal struck in 2015.

That's how the World Bank's chief economist for the Middle East and North Africa, Shantayanan Devarajan, characterized the boost to the Iranian economy from the lifting of sanctions in the wake of the nuclear deal struck with the permanent members of the UN Security Council.

In an interim deal struck between Iran and the UN Security Council plus Germany in November, Iran agreed to freeze parts of its nuclear program in return for.In an interim deal struck between Iran and the UN Security Council plus Germany in November, Iran agreed to freeze parts of its nuclear program in return for.in November, Iran agreed to freeze parts of its nuclear program in return for.in return for...

In 2007, the success of Israeli Air Force's Operation Orchard against a Syrian nuclear installation was largely attributed to effectiveness of the Israeli Electronic Warfare platforms that supported the air strike and made the Syrian radars blind: some sources believe that Operation Orchard saw the baptism of fire of the Suter airborne network system against Syrian radar systems.

The government's rhetoric is no more convincing in this case than in its dubbing of missiles of first - strike nuclear capability as «Peacekeepers.»

Over the past year, Pyongyang has made big advances in being able to strike the US with a nuclear weapon.

Don't forget as well the potential epidemic of nuclear proliferation as other nations attempt to adjust to and defend themselves against Bush's preventive wars, while our own already staggering nuclear arsenal expands toward first - strike primacy and we expend unimaginable billions on futuristic ideas for warfare in outer space.

So there are zero uses of nuclear weapons that have ever been used in a way that violates the policy that you are calling «no - first - strike» (the North Korean policy).

Added to these over-arching responsibilities are individual powers to operate the Royal Prerogative (as the de facto chair of the Privy Council)- to declare war (including single - handedly authorising the launch of a nuclear strike), to sign international treaties and to represent the UK at the highest level in international and European negotiations.

-LSB-...] For example, the United States» nuclear force exceeds the requirements of minimal deterrence, and is structured to strike numerous targets in multiple countries and to have the ability to conduct successful counterforce strikes with high confidence.

Like I pointed out in the comments, the United States assumed that if they were in a Second Strike scenario, they would lose 97 % of their nuclear forces on First Strike.

For example in North Korea, the max range of their nuclear arsenal, is very unlikely further than South Korea, which means, that they can't reach all the powers, which would, in a potential nuclear attack, would start nuclear strikes back against them.

They have stated that they can, and if necessary, will go ahead with a nuclear strike on the US, thus bringing into action, a US counteraction in the pacific, as a deterrent against nuclear warfare.

Assuming that decision - makers make cost - benefit analyses when deciding to use force, China's doctrine calls for acquiring a nuclear arsenal only large enough to destroy an adversary's «strategic points» in such a way that the expected costs of a first strike outweigh the anticipated benefits.

The most striking beneficiary from the phasing out of nuclear power in Germany is the coal (and especially lignite) industry.

Yes, the United States have 28,500 soldiers stationed in South Korea, they supported South Korea in the last Korean War (60 years ago) and continuously side with South Korea diplomatically, but it is far from given that the United States would be willing to perform a nuclear strike on behalf of their South - Korean allies if push comes to shove.

William Hague, in his brief stay in the Foreign Office, had to deal with a major foreign policy crisis as Israel carried out military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.

Maybe you have a different definition of «friend» than I do, but mine does include a general interest in my friends not being struck with nuclear weapons.

But if Russia were to use nuclear weapons against NATO troops then there would be many countries who would be willing at that point to use them against Russia in retaliatory strikes.

Corbyn's recent remarks, in which he undermined Labour policy by stating that he would never sanction a nuclear strike, and more recently when he changed his mind over the so - called «shoot - to - kill» policy in the event of a potential Paris - style attack in the UK, have deeply angered many members of the parliamentary group.

While American Defence Secretary Gates took an optimistic line about North Korea and its nuclear programme, a very different tone was struck in the presentations from Fumio Kyuma, the Japanese Defence Minister and Brendan Fraser, the Australian Defence Minister.

The precise details of how a British Prime Minister would authorise a nuclear strike remain secret, although the principles of the Trident control system is believed to be based on the plan set up for Polaris in 1968, which has now been declassified.

«It is perfectly legitimate for the United States to respond to the current «necessity» posed by North Korea's nuclear weapons by striking first,» he argued in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece last month.

Cameron's move comes amid extraordinary movements in North Korea, which reportedly moves mid-range missiles into position for launch and warning it had authorised plans for a nuclear strike against the US.

Mr Hague also announced that the UK's declaration policy, which maps out the condition in which it would be willing to launch a nuclear strike, was being re-examined.

The US wouldn't use a nuclear weapon to destroy a bioweapon site in a first strike, they would (by declared policy of decades) use one to retaliate once that bioweapon has been used against them.

The target in Vietnam that was vulnerable to nuclear strikes was the US, who had large assemblies of troops in nice neat targetable locations, not the Vietcong who the US was already effectively bombing in those few cases where we had a decent target to bomb.

Jeremy Corbyn said his views are well known on nuclear weapons in response to criticism that he had «undermined» party policy by saying he would never launch a nuclear strike if he was prime minister.

«A U.S. strike on Iran would be costly, causing significant loss of American life, likely lead to attacks and loss of life in Israel, yet would only postpone Iran's nuclear weapons development by a few years,» her office wrote.

A relatively small 150 - foot asteroid that struck Tunguska, Siberia, in 1908 packed the punch of 15 million tons of TNT, equivalent to the largest nuclear bomb ever detonated by the United States.

Eventually, commercial moon landers may help carry a diverse library of cultural and biological records to the lunar surface, where they would be preserved in case Earth suffers a pandemic plague, nuclear holocaust or lethal asteroid strike.

The U.S. has enough nukes in enough locations — including, crucially, our roving, nuclear - armed submarines — that nuclear strategists now agree it would not be possible to take out all of the nation's weapons with a first strike.

Backup power was needed at Fukushima after the magnitude - 9.0 quake struck and the six power lines bringing in offsite electrical power to Fukushima Daiichi were severed, says Michael Weightman, Britain's chief nuclear installations inspector and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency's International Nuclear Safetynuclear installations inspector and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency's International Nuclear SafetyNuclear Safety Group.

If most of us expect to live possibly indefinitely in good health, there is a strong motivation to help protect humanity from long - term risks like extinction from a new pandemic, the exhaustion of key nonrenewable resources, global nuclear warfare — or a meteor strike.

A group of nuclear power experts and former regulators from 11 nations, responding to Japan's nuclear disaster, is calling for «stress tests» on the world's reactors to determine their ability to withstand extreme earthquakes, flooding or other natural disasters that strike singly or in combination.

When the earthquake and tsunami struck in 2011, Japan had 54 operating nuclear reactors which produced about one - third of its electricity supply.

Yet Graham Allison, assistant secretary of defense in the first Clinton administration and now director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University, places the odds of a nuclear strike within the next decade at 51 — 49 — slightly worse than the toss of a coin.

It will raise serious worries in many world capitals that Pyongyang has moved another step closer to its goal of a nuclear - armed missile that could one day strike the US mainland.

Six years from now, a fossil - fuel - free carrier strike group — including a nuclear - powered aircraft carrier, hybrid electric ships, and biofueled aircraft — will begin missions in international waters.