This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA.
The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore,
The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them.
Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted.
Blog author serves as a moderator.
For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com
Blog rules
Stay on topic.
No profanity, threatening language, pornography.
NO NAME CALLING.
No political debate.
Posts and comments are posted several times a day.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
More details please?
Anonymously contributed:
A budget deal has been reached, does anyone know how NNSA did?
8 comments:
Anonymous
said...
As is typically the case, at this point, no one has a clue, not even Congress, let alone the President.
The Debt Limit Deal and the Nuclear Weapons Budget Kingston Reif - Aug 01, 2011
Word is that the deal reached between the White House and Congressional leadership to raise the debt limit includes significant cuts to defense (at least $350 billion over the next decade) - though how significant depends on which security programs will bear the brunt of the cuts and how much defense will be cut as part of the second stage of the deal.
How will this impact current plans to modernize and replace U.S. nuclear delivery systems (i.e. missiles, submarines, and bombers) and U.S. nuclear warheads and their supporting infrastructure?
Time will tell, but it seems highly unlikely that the huge budget increases we've seen the last two years as part of the so-called ten-year plan can be sustained - it seemed unlikely even before we started talking about major defense cuts. Apparently the GOP cares more about protecting tax cuts for the wealthy than the Pentagon budget.
Also of interest is that the Department of Energy's defense programs (i.e. the National Nuclear Security Administration) will be considered security spending. In FY 2012 and FY 2013, there would be separate caps ("firewalls") for security and non-security spending. Note that NNSA oversees U.S. nuclear warhead maintenance and modernization activities as well as vital nuclear terrorism prevention programs.
It's worth recapping what senior U.S. military leaders and a Republican U.S. Senator who did not vote for the New START treaty have said in recent months about the exploding costs of nuclear modernization and the impact of likely defense cuts:
"All elements of the triad need to be modernized. You may have to make some choices there." Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, April 21, 2011
"I would just repeat, in essence, what I said before on the budget issues. If the political leadership of this country decides that it must reduce the investment in defense by hundreds of billions of dollars, then I don't think we can afford to have anything that's off the table." Robert Gates, May 18, 2011
"The challenge here is that we have to recapitalize all three legs and we don't have the money to do it." Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. James Cartwright, July 14, 2011
"Reduce Nuclear Weapons Force Structure ($79 billion)" Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), July 18, 2011
"We're not going to be able to go forward with weapon systems that cost what weapon systems cost today…. Case in point is Long-Range Strike. Case in point is the Trident replacement. ... The list goes on." STRATCOM Commander Gen. Robert Kehler, July 26, 2011
Any information older that 2-minutes on the debt limit and associated budget is either likely to change or has already changed. Also, a 12-person, House-Senate committee evenly divided between the political parties will be charged with producing up to $1.5 trillion more in deficit cuts over the next 10 years. I also understand these so called "firewalls" to protect NNSA funding have been "vaporized".
Senator Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma) proposed a plan this week (July 20) for reducing the deficit that includes $79 billion in cuts from the U.S. nuclear weapons budget over the next ten years. In specifying the individual components of a reduced strategic force structure, Coburn deserves credit for helping to break the strait jacket of Cold War thinking, which still burdens considerations of 21st century defense needs.
As Ben Loehrke of the Ploughshares Fund noted in his July 19 analysis, Coburn’s proposal “is already raising eyebrows around Washington.” Whereas many in the Republican Party are reticent to consider reductions in the U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal below the ceilings established by the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), Coburn is proposing significant cuts in the arsenal. His “Back in Black” deficit reduction plan calls for “reduc[ing] the size of the nuclear weapons stockpile to levels within the [New] START treaty limits” by making the following changes:
Reduce the size of the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) force from 500 to 300. Maintain a 1,100 nuclear weapon reserve. Reduce the size of the ballistic nuclear submarine fleet from 14 to 11. Maintain 40 strategic bombers and delay the purchase of new bombers until the mid-2020s.
People can post whatever fantasy budget scheme they want, but Congress has just punted to yet another deficit commission whose recommendations will be ignored. Any future congress can disable the consequences of the "trigger" at any time. More smoke and mirrors from our elected representatives and our President. This crap has got to stop. I don't care what party people run under, but ALL, and I mean all incumbents, need to be voted out in 2012, including the President. I'll vote for any Democrat or Republican who challenges the incumbent in any district.
The US can no longer afford nuclear weapons. Nor conventional weapons, nor the fighters that know how to use them.
We must instead fund the maniacal ideas of egotistical congressional wastrels.
Perhaps we can retarget out of work warfighters and solve two problems at once?
In such times as these, Caesar crossed the Rubicon, Christianity emerged, Attila surveyed the Tiber, Muslim emerged, the Reich stag fell, the Czar was deposed, Louis XVI fell, Tojo rose, Napoleon arose, Churchill rose, Roosevelt rose, Lincoln emerged.
Money troubles and incompetent leadership are unstable bedfellows; leading to dangerous, unpredictable outcomes for which the subservient population pays the price.
Time to replace elected officials with competent elected ones before something more sinister occurs.
Perhaps we can retarget out of work warfighters and solve two problems at once?
What "warfighters" do you know who are "out of work"??
The ones in your dreams, who are not trained to fight, but trained to feed poor people? Go live on a different planet - you are fouling mine with crap for brains.
8 comments:
As is typically the case, at this point, no one has a clue, not even Congress, let alone the President.
The Debt Limit Deal and the Nuclear Weapons Budget
Kingston Reif - Aug 01, 2011
Word is that the deal reached between the White House and Congressional leadership to raise the debt limit includes significant cuts to defense (at least $350 billion over the next decade) - though how significant depends on which security programs will bear the brunt of the cuts and how much defense will be cut as part of the second stage of the deal.
How will this impact current plans to modernize and replace U.S. nuclear delivery systems (i.e. missiles, submarines, and bombers) and U.S. nuclear warheads and their supporting infrastructure?
Time will tell, but it seems highly unlikely that the huge budget increases we've seen the last two years as part of the so-called ten-year plan can be sustained - it seemed unlikely even before we started talking about major defense cuts. Apparently the GOP cares more about protecting tax cuts for the wealthy than the Pentagon budget.
Also of interest is that the Department of Energy's defense programs (i.e. the National Nuclear Security Administration) will be considered security spending. In FY 2012 and FY 2013, there would be separate caps ("firewalls") for security and non-security spending. Note that NNSA oversees U.S. nuclear warhead maintenance and modernization activities as well as vital nuclear terrorism prevention programs.
It's worth recapping what senior U.S. military leaders and a Republican U.S. Senator who did not vote for the New START treaty have said in recent months about the exploding costs of nuclear modernization and the impact of likely defense cuts:
"All elements of the triad need to be modernized. You may have to make some choices there."
Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, April 21, 2011
"I would just repeat, in essence, what I said before on the budget issues. If the political leadership of this country decides that it must reduce the investment in defense by hundreds of billions of dollars, then I don't think we can afford to have anything that's off the table."
Robert Gates, May 18, 2011
"The challenge here is that we have to recapitalize all three legs and we don't have the money to do it."
Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. James Cartwright, July 14, 2011
"Reduce Nuclear Weapons Force Structure ($79 billion)"
Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), July 18, 2011
"We're not going to be able to go forward with weapon systems that cost what weapon systems cost today…. Case in point is Long-Range Strike. Case in point is the Trident replacement. ... The list goes on."
STRATCOM Commander Gen. Robert Kehler, July 26, 2011
Any information older that 2-minutes on the debt limit and associated budget is either likely to change or has already changed. Also, a 12-person, House-Senate committee evenly divided between the political parties will be charged with producing up to $1.5 trillion more in deficit cuts over the next 10 years. I also understand these so called "firewalls" to protect NNSA funding have been "vaporized".
Senator Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma) proposed a plan this week (July 20) for reducing the deficit that includes $79 billion in cuts from the U.S. nuclear weapons budget over the next ten years. In specifying the individual components of a reduced strategic force structure, Coburn deserves credit for helping to break the strait jacket of Cold War thinking, which still burdens considerations of 21st century defense needs.
As Ben Loehrke of the Ploughshares Fund noted in his July 19 analysis, Coburn’s proposal “is already raising eyebrows around Washington.” Whereas many in the Republican Party are reticent to consider reductions in the U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal below the ceilings established by the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), Coburn is proposing significant cuts in the arsenal. His “Back in Black” deficit reduction plan calls for “reduc[ing] the size of the nuclear weapons stockpile to levels within the [New] START treaty limits” by making the following changes:
Reduce the size of the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) force from 500 to 300.
Maintain a 1,100 nuclear weapon reserve.
Reduce the size of the ballistic nuclear submarine fleet from 14 to 11.
Maintain 40 strategic bombers and delay the purchase of new bombers until the mid-2020s.
People can post whatever fantasy budget scheme they want, but Congress has just punted to yet another deficit commission whose recommendations will be ignored. Any future congress can disable the consequences of the "trigger" at any time. More smoke and mirrors from our elected representatives and our President. This crap has got to stop. I don't care what party people run under, but ALL, and I mean all incumbents, need to be voted out in 2012, including the President. I'll vote for any Democrat or Republican who challenges the incumbent in any district.
Need to cut everything by 40%.
Torquemada
The US can no longer afford nuclear weapons. Nor conventional weapons, nor the fighters that know how to use them.
We must instead fund the maniacal ideas of egotistical congressional wastrels.
Perhaps we can retarget out of work warfighters and solve two problems at once?
In such times as these, Caesar crossed the Rubicon, Christianity emerged, Attila surveyed the Tiber, Muslim emerged, the Reich stag fell, the Czar was deposed, Louis XVI fell, Tojo rose, Napoleon arose, Churchill rose, Roosevelt rose, Lincoln emerged.
Money troubles and incompetent leadership are unstable bedfellows; leading to dangerous, unpredictable outcomes for which the subservient population pays the price.
Time to replace elected officials with competent elected ones before something more sinister occurs.
Perhaps we can retarget out of work warfighters and solve two problems at once?
What "warfighters" do you know who are "out of work"??
The ones in your dreams, who are not trained to fight, but trained to feed poor people? Go live on a different planet - you are fouling mine with crap for brains.
Post a Comment