Image via Wikipedia
President Barack Obama is seeking increased funding for nuclear weapons research and security programs next year, even as his administration promotes nonproliferation and has pledged to reduce the world's stockpile of nuclear arms.The administration on Monday asked Congress for more than $7 billion for activities related to nuclear weapons in the budget of the National Nuclear Security Administration, an increase of $624 million from the 2010 fiscal year.
NNSA Administrator Thomas D'Agostino defended putting more money into the programs, saying the U.S. needs the best nuclear weapons facilities, scientists, technicians and engineers as it moves toward eventual disarmament.
Anyone else think D'Agostino is cracked? That's not much money, but I expected cuts. The real import here is the hard recognition that a world without nuclear weapons IS a world which will have a world war. A cynic's recognition. They cannot reject the idea that they have to have a world without nukes so 'the children' don;t have to live in fear., but what they do tells all. Our warheads are probably approaching 30 years old. You can't just leave the things.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_a.png?x-id=bc1c2589-c35d-4055-b757-2a2f7affab25)
9 comments:
You're saying we haven't produced warheads since the Reagan Administration?
That is correct, our newest warheads are from the 1980s and most our stockpile dates back to the 60s and 70s. We haven't tested a nuke since 1992 and the last ground-based delivery system we created (LGM-118 Peacekeeper) was first deployed in 1986 and has since largely been removed from service. Our land based deterrent mainly consists of Minuteman I, II, and III missiles; relics of the 60s and early 70s. The U.S. nuclear response is primarily based on submarines with Trident II ICBMs, a relatively modern and effective warhead delivery system. The Russians have since been modernizing their ground-based ICBMs with new Topol-M missiles and are attempting to upgrade their submarine delivery systems with their new Bulava ICBM (now in testing phase).
Well, I knew Clinton effected massive cuts in military spending, but I thought that mostly had to do with downsizing the size of the military and base closings. I didn't know we had stopped building nuclear systems entirely.
That is stupid, isn't it?
Especially since we could be developing more sophisticated weapons which could be more targeted, less dirty, etc.
Didn't Bush get those bunker buster nukes pushed through?
I'm completely with you there, Pasto; build new, modern, accurate, and reliable nukes that are fewer in number and more effective in their roles than the old stockpile. Right now we don't even know if the triggers on the older nukes we possess are reliable at all and nobody likes to point out the elephant in the room. The bunker-busting nuke plan was scrapped, however, there is a rumor that the program is secretly continuing under another name.
Many triggers are made of highly radioactive materials (like Polonium). Because of their high radioactivity, they have a short "half-life", which, of course, means they decay quickly.
As I recall, Polonium, as an example, only lasts about six months.
Therefore, if the nukes are not being constantly refurbished, they are not in working condition.
If this is an elephant about which no one wants to talk, or do anything about, then we're up shit creek.
Certainly, our enemies would know we lack the ability to respond in kind.
Here's some info on Polonium from Wiki:
Ninety seven percent of the world's legal polonium-210 (210Po) production occurs in Russia in RBMK reactors[34][63] About 85 grams (450,000 Ci) are produced by Russia annually. According to Sergei Kiriyenko, the head of Russia's state atomic energy agency, RosAtom, all of it goes to U.S. companies through a single authorized supplier. The production of polonium starts from bombardment of bismuth (209Bi) with neutrons at the Ozersk nuclear reactor, near the city of Chelyabinsk in Russia. The product is then transferred to the Avangard Electromechanical Plant in the closed city of Sarov.
Polonium-210 has a half-life of 138 days and decays to the stable daughter isotope of lead, 206Pb. Therefore the source is reduced to about one eighth of its original radioactivity about 18 months after production.
We buy the Polonium to keep it off the open market, but one would assume that, if we buy it, we would use it.
Makes one wonder WTF is actually going on with our nuclear deterrent, no?
Makes one wonder, how without a test ever now and then one can KNOW they will work as half lives approach and pass, no?
I know we test a minuteman about once a year, but warheads? NOPE.
"If this is an elephant about which no one wants to talk, or do anything about, then we're up shit creek."
We're already rowing for miles down shit creek.
Post a Comment