BLOG purpose

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

Saturday, February 3, 2018

Pentagon unveils new nuclear weapons strategy

Big events are in store for the nuclear weapon research labs over the next few years. Advanced low-yield weapons and other Trump desired weapons are being planned to modernize the US nuclear arsenal. After decades of neglect, you are going to see a lot of growth at these labs to support this dramatic buildup in strategic policy. This is far more concrete than Obama's pathetic RRW non-starter. Start working out your equipment wish lists and prepare your hiring needs:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pentagon unveils new nuclear weapons strategy, ending Obama-era push to reduce U.S. arsenal

Washington Post - Feb 2, 2018

The Pentagon released a new nuclear arms policy Friday that calls for the introduction of two new types of weapons, effectively ending Obama-era efforts to reduce the size and scope of the U.S. arsenal and minimize the role of nuclear weapons in defense planning. 

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said in an introductory note to the new policy — the first update to the military’s nuclear strategy since 2010 — that the changes reflect a need to “look reality in the eye” and “see the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.”

The previous administration’s policy hinged on what President Barack Obama called a moral obligation for the United States to lead by example in ridding the world of nuclear weapons. Officials in the Trump administration and the U.S. military argue that Obama’s approach proved overly idealistic, particularly as relations with Moscow soured. Russia, China and North Korea, they say, all advanced their nuclear weapons capabilities instead of following suit.

“Over the past decade, while the United States has led the world in these reductions, every one of our potential nuclear adversaries has been pursuing the exact opposite strategy,” Deputy Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette said at a Pentagon news conference, explaining why the United States is changing course. “These powers are increasing the numbers and types of nuclear weapons in their arsenal.”

The new nuclear weapons policy follows on Donald Trump’s promise before taking office to expand and strengthen U.S. nuclear capabilities. President Trump also vowed during his State of the Union address Tuesday to build a nuclear arsenal “so strong and powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression.” 

The threats have changed dramatically since the last time the Pentagon updated its nuclear weapons policy, with Russia reemerging as a geopolitical foe. North Korea, meanwhile, has edged closer to possessing a missile capable of striking the U.S. mainland with a nuclear warhead, bringing the prospect of nuclear war back to the forefront of the American psyche for the first time since the Cold War ... (article continues) 

www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/pentagon-unveils-new-nuclear-weapons-strategy-ending-obama-era-push-to-reduce-us-arsenal/2018/02/02/

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am happy to see the Lab's being modernized. Also it is an interesting strategy to go with the Sub launched smaller Nukes. Thank you for posting the article.

Anonymous said...

Finally, US getting some grit.

Anonymous said...

Huh. A US Govt official nuclear weapon policy statement and no one from LLNL or LANL sees fit to comment in substance? Wow. What a damning indictment of this blog and its seriousness. Anyone want to discuss NIF???

Anonymous said...

February 8, 2018 at 5:47 PM

I did comment but somehow it did not make it. In short: it is not clear that any of this will come pass for various reasons one of which is that Trump may get thrown out before long, so why comment on something that probably will never come to pass.

Anonymous said...

Trump may get thrown out before long, so why comment on something that probably will never come to pass.

February 9, 2018 at 12:46 PM

Your advanced case of TDS is obviously skewing your reasoning. So sad to see in so many of our citizens, with no apparent treatment or even palliative care available.

Who, exactly, is going to "throw him out"???

Anonymous said...

I didn't vote for Trump but I'm betting he gets reelected. The Dems are going nowhere with their extreme left-wing Socialist garbage.

Anonymous said...

"Trump may get thrown out before long, so why comment on something that probably will never come to pass. "

Fat chance, you listen to MSDNC to much, way too much !

Anonymous said...


Look the stock market is crashing due to Trump, the people are turning on him because of how is changing the country. Will he be impeached, maybe yes maybe no, but as long as it is a question he will have no power to change anything.

Anonymous said...

Trump is actually rising in the polls. He is now above where Obama was at the same point in Obama's Presidency.

You were not correct when you claimed that people are turning on him.

Anonymous said...

There are many steps between the NPR's publication and various implementations, especially if talking about new systems. We'll see what happens. The NNSA yoyo will bob along.

Anonymous said...

You were not correct when you claimed that people are turning on him.

Excuse but the entire but people like Colbert are against him, who do you think counts more you or Colbert.

Anonymous said...

February 9, 2018 at 9:07 PM

Your cognitive dissonance is stunning, and not a litle funny. In two consecutive sentences you say of Trump "the people are turning on him because of how is changing the country" and "as long as it [impeachment] is a question he will have no power to change anything." So which is it? You hate what he does but you think he has no power to do anything? This is what passes for "progressive" logic?

Anonymous said...

By all means, start the study into a smaller nuke. Maybe $2-3 million. Make some view graphs. Dig up the RRW and deap earth penetrator stuff. Then have congress cancel the program in 2 years. We’ve been here before. The curators of the nuclear weapons museum will be happy to play along.

Anonymous said...

If you think the US can deter small-time nuke states like Pakistan and NK, and big-timers like Russia which has no compunction about small nukes, without any small nukes of our own, you are delusional. If Russia or NK uses a small nuke to gain a tactical advantage in Syria, or in SK, do we respond with multiple city-destroyers, MAD-style?

Anonymous said...

February 11, 2018 at 6:21 PM

How would you know?

Anonymous said...

"Excuse but the entire but people...." (sic).

My answer is the polls count much more than Colbert.

Scooby, why did you censure this comment the first time I submitted it???????

Anonymous said...

February 11, 2018 at 6:21 PM

How would you know?

How would I know what?

scooby said...

Must not have complied with blog rules.

Anonymous said...

Scooby, do you even know what posts you are responding to? Yours made no sense. Besides, "must not have"??? Aren't you "the decider"??

scooby said...

I dont recall every rejected comment. So , that is why I am saying , I deleted it because it must have violated a rule. Why else?

Anonymous said...

How would you know?

How would I know what?

February 12, 2018 at 6:01 PM

Good you making some progress admitting you do not know something is a good first step. Keep this up and before long you realize that you know nothing. Keep up the good work.

Anonymous said...

Scooby does anonymous posts!

Anonymous said...

I know you don't like to hear theories about "extraterrestrials" or "ET" physics, but the plain fact is that the DOD knows that they are here (at least in some form) and has known this since the '50's. "ET" vehicles have harassed our NORAD and USAF bases and pilots, and NATO installations, and US Navy. The stack of classified paper on this subject must be at least as tall as Pres. Trump's 2016 tax return. The generals and admirals don't need to personally believe it, or the DOD and DOE scientists have answers about the physics, but they better have answers if the "ET" craft get hostile. I don't think we have anything to answer the potential threat except low yield, miniaturized nukes that can be fitted to hypersonic kill vehicles. Don't laugh, there are very credible rumors that the top people at both Livermore and Los Alamos labs have worked on this subject over the last 6 decades.

Anonymous said...

I don't think we have anything to answer the potential threat except low yield, miniaturized nukes that can be fitted to hypersonic kill vehicles. Don't laugh, there are very credible rumors that the top people at both Livermore and Los Alamos labs have worked on this subject over the last 6 decades.

February 18, 2018 at 11:23 PM

What a load of crap. In case you missed it, due to several treaties, the US has no "low yield, miniturizd nukes." They've all been dismantled many years ago. You can cite all the "rumors" you want but I've been there, and it ain't happening.

P.S.; The "top people" don't work on unfunded made-up BS "subjects."

Anonymous said...

It is high time that we resurrected research on the Hafnium Hand-grenade.

SUGGEST NEW TOPICS HERE

Submit candidates for new topics here only. Stay on topic with National Labs' related issues. All submissions are screened first for ...