Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

LAT: Bush Administration Unveils Nuclear Weapons Complex Blueprint

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-05-06 11:20 PM
Original message
LAT: Bush Administration Unveils Nuclear Weapons Complex Blueprint
Bush Administration Unveils Nuclear Weapons Complex Blueprint
By Ralph Vartabedian, Times Staff Writer
April 6, 2006

The Bush administration on Wednesday unveiled a blueprint for rebuilding the United States' decrepit nuclear weapons complex, including restoration of a large-scale bomb manufacturing capacity.

The plan calls for the most sweeping realignment and modernization of the nation's massive system of laboratories and factories for nuclear bombs since the end of the Cold War.

Until now, the nation has depended on carefully maintaining aging bombs produced during the Cold War arms race, some several decades old. The administration, however, wants the capability to turn out 125 new nuclear bombs per year by 2022, as the Pentagon retires older bombs that it claims will no longer be reliable or safe.

Under the plan, all of the nation's plutonium would be consolidated into a single facility that could be more effectively and cheaply defended against possible terrorist attacks. The plan would remove the plutonium now kept at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory by 2014, though transfers of the material could start sooner. In recent years, concern has sharply grown that Livermore, surrounded by residential neighborhoods, could not repel a terrorist attack.

But the administration blueprint is facing sharp criticism, both from those who say it does not move fast enough to consolidate plutonium stores and from those who say restarting bomb production will encourage aspiring nuclear powers across the globe to develop weapons....

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-nuke6apr06,0,5989419.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Duer 157099 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-05-06 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. Just when you think it can't get any worse
I mean really
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-05-06 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Yep -- buildin' nukyuler bombs. nt
Edited on Wed Apr-05-06 11:24 PM by DeepModem Mom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Newsjock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-05-06 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
2. The Bush Doctrine
The administration, however, wants the capability to turn out 125 new nuclear bombs per year by 2022

I guess that gives Iran the go-ahead to pre-emptively attack us, doesn't it.

And who exactly benefits from that? Follow the money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #2
37. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-05-06 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
4. Evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil
:wow:
no other word comes to mind
i weep for my lost nation

Hekate

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-05-06 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Came back to give this post its first Recommend
this needs to be seen

Hekate

Evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neverforget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-05-06 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. Because the thousands of nukes already on hand just aren't enough....
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-05-06 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
7. "no longer reliable or safe" - a "safe" bomb? wtf is a safe bomb? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chimichurri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 06:48 AM
Response to Reply #7
34. Maybe it's like healthy forests, no child left behind, PATRIOT ACT,
Clean Air Act, Health Savings Accounts and Homeland Security -

:argh:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-05-06 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
8. Wouldn't it be easier to take out in one swoop!!!
:nuke: Sometimes I think Bush is out to destroy America...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-05-06 11:51 PM
Response to Original message
9. What part of "don't put your eggs all in one basket" don't they understand
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-05-06 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
10. "It's ok for us to build nucular bombs. We are the good doers."
FUCKING NUTCASES!!!


Bombs > people
Money > people
Power > people
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 12:26 AM
Response to Original message
11. There is no end to the madness of those maniacs.
This has to stop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 12:34 AM
Response to Original message
12. Group links Nevada bomb test to nuclear plans
By LAUNCE RAKE
Las Vegas Sun
05-APR-06

LAS VEGAS -- The Defense Department's plan to detonate 700 tons of explosives at the Nevada Test Site is intended to simulate a nuclear blast as part of Pentagon research into development of low-yield nuclear weapons, a science advisory group charged this week.

The Pentagon refused to confirm or deny the claim, made by the Federation of American Scientists, a Washington-based liberal policy group opposed to development of nuclear weapons.

But if the charge is verified, debate over the blast seems certain to shift beyond environmental effects on Nevada to international concerns over nuclear weapons proliferation.

The federation said it based its statement on a review of Pentagon budget requests since 2002 showing that the blast, scheduled for June 2, would serve as a "low-yield nuclear weapon simulation." Hans Kristensen, an analyst for the federation, said the Pentagon's Defense Threat Reduction Agency has carefully ducked the issue of whether the test was nuclear-related. <snip>

http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=BOMBTEST-04-05-06


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 12:53 AM
Response to Original message
13. Is there a case for a preemptive strike? A regime that imprisons ...
.. people without trials and tortures them, led by a madman whose pointless war has killed tens of thousands of innocent people, threatens the world with its WMD program ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Theduckno2 Donating Member (905 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 12:57 AM
Response to Original message
14. What's next? "Nuclear war is winnable."?
Hekate is right, these people are pure evil. They claim to be concerned about proliferation and turn around to start bomb production.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wake.up.america Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 04:54 AM
Response to Original message
15. U.S. Rolls Out Nuclear Plan A safer world or not?
Edited on Thu Apr-06-06 02:56 AM by wake.up.america
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-nuke6apr06,0,5989419.story?coll=la-home-headlines

What's the thought here from the BA & Co.'s point of view?

More money for defense contractors = more money for Bush and friends.

From a practical perspective, I would say, "here we go again." The Russian went broke trying to keep up with the US. Now the Americans are going broke trying to keep up with Bush' voracious appetite for war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
file83 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Well, I say...
...that the parallels that America has now with what Russia was like in the 80's is sick. We are not in a good situation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #16
39. by design maybe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. "125 new nuclear bombs per year by 2022"
If we nuke 125 cities per year there will be no net increase in nuclear weapons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peter Frank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. This is Really Scary & Crazy Shite!...
Edited on Thu Apr-06-06 04:16 AM by Peter Frank
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-nuke6apr06,0,5989419.story?coll=la-home-headlines

"Under the plan, all of the nation's plutonium would be consolidated into a single facility that could be more effectively and cheaply defended against possible terrorist attacks."

What sane American wants our entire national stockpile of plutonium to be consolidated in a single facility -- and cheaply defended???!!!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peter Frank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #15
19. Who doesn't get that...

...our nuke materials are about to be stored "cheaply" in one place (facility) so that they can be used in Pearl Harbor War III?

One can only imagine this death toll.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peter Frank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. Profound Catch wake.up.america...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wake.up.america Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 05:53 AM
Response to Reply #20
27. Sorry about the apparent replication. I am 6 hours ahead of East Coast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DLnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #15
21. Hate to say it, but I feel like the sooner we (US) go broke the better
for human evolution. The later we go broke, the better for cockroaches.

A society that produces beautiful pottery can't be all bad. A society that produces a great big pile of plutonium probably sucks. IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. sometimes I feel the same way. :( nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peter Frank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. And why do you feel differently other times?...

Going to bed now -- I'll respond to your response (if you submit one) in the near future...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DLnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 05:23 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. Kind of a euphemism, really.
I do have a vision of the world evolving to a better place after the collapse of the US empire. But I can also see a lot of people getting hurt on the way down.

I do think the parallel to the collapse of the Soviet Empire is quite accurate and I agree that it's quite ironic that we are going down from trying to outdo our own military spending.

And, incidentally, I think we are going down--I see the whole house of cards falling in a dramatic way.

Just not sure what follows. I like to imagine a world where greed and violence are no longer the religion.

"You might think that I'm a dreamer,
but I'm not the only one" --John Lennon

Hope you slept reasonably well.

Peace, Love and a pack of Marlboro's (don't know what that means, but it was a saying once.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 06:12 AM
Response to Reply #24
29. Psychological balance and reasonable hope. :)
I don't want to feed this subthread too much, so I'll leave it at that for now. Let me know if you start a new thread about it.

Btw, concerning your take on the OP, I think it's a bit extreme. There are benefits to consolidating the plutonium stores, and it's not necessarily a bad thing that something is less expensive. The phrase "on the cheap" is a bit hyperbolic because it implies shoddy corner-cutting.

I think the entire nuclear arms industry is reprehensible - a la Helen Caldicott - so weighed against that, this issue seems minor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peter Frank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. True, but you're missing the immediacy of this development... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DLnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 05:37 AM
Response to Reply #23
26. To be honest, I agree
I lived with the whole nuclear weapons industry growing up and I don't believe there is anything more sickly diseased than playing games with this level of destructive power. That's why I hope the system collapses before it can get any sicker. Didn't mean to make light of the issue, just a little bitterness from old psychic scars. Sorry.

By the way, I've heard it said that cockroaches are predicted to be one of the creatures that might survive human nuclear madness. Also, I believe 125 is around the number of nuclear devices needed to remove humans from the evolutionary chain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peter Frank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 07:52 AM
Response to Reply #26
36. Everyone's lived with the nuclear industry growing up... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 06:00 AM
Response to Reply #21
28. these monsters will keep at their death and destruction
until the last fund is dried up and the last US tax dollar is spent. We are so fucked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donkeyotay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #21
41. Wahoo! We get a new nuclear arms race! Y'all get to pay for it!
This is really good news...
I think you're right DLnyc, the sooner we go broke the better off the world may be, even tho there's lots of strongman nutjobs globally probably willing to carry on the race to oblivion.

We didn't want schools, health care, a sustainable environment, or a peaceful world to raise or children in anyway.

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 06:29 AM
Response to Reply #15
32. Little Napolean Bush strikes again.
Still trying to pretend he is saint Ronnie (who neocons claim single-handedly felled the Soviet Union) but little no-nothing jr didn't realize the reagan script was to get the other side to bankrupt themselvess in the arms race - but little tyrant goes topsy turvy in what appears to be a rush to bankrupt the United States.

Never thought of it before - but perhaps he IS the Manchurian Candidate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #15
38. Whatever happened to nuke cleeear nonproliferation? Did I just dream
that or was that something from the Mesolithic period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 06:17 AM
Response to Original message
30. Everything else aside, how can they possibly pay for it? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 06:22 AM
Response to Reply #30
31. They will borrow the $$$$$$$$$$$$$
From the Oil Barons
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 06:33 AM
Response to Original message
33. They are MADD
This neocons war machine is getting way out of hand with this shit!@!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whosinpower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 07:24 AM
Response to Original message
35. No frackin way!
Just what we need....MORE nuclear bombs.......

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-06-06 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
40. Well.
All I'm gonna say is I don't want these bastards to be making these decisions. Thats not to say some upgrading of facilities doesn't need to be done or that some weapons can not be maintained and need to be replaced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC