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.
This is old news... its just the Bill from 2007 on the Nuclear Policy Review.
------ SUMMARY AS OF: 8/1/2007--Introduced. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Nuclear Policy and Posture Review Act of 2007 - Directs the President to conduct a nuclear policy review to consider a range of options on the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. security policy.
Requires the Secretary of Defense to conduct a comprehensive review of the U.S. nuclear posture to clarify U.S. nuclear deterrence policy and strategy.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the President's review should be used as the basis for establishing future U.S. strategic arms control objectives and negotiating positions.
Prohibits the appropriation or availability of funds for the Reliable Replacement Warhead Program for FY2008-FY2010 until reports on the above reviews have been submitted to Congress.
----
There's nothing in it about doing away with nuclear weapons.
I believe Feinstein is requesting a review of strategy/policy before committing to construction of new nukes. That seems reasonable enough.I don't see anything in her proposed legislation that suggests "no new nukes". You should try to be more accurate (and honest) when you post.
Zealots will tell you "to keep us safe" for a variety of reasons. One of my favorites is we need to modernize our weapons so that in the event they fall into the hands of terrorists they can't be used against us. And you might ask,is it cheaper to redesign our entire stockpile or improve security to make it impossible to allow one of our weapons to get swiped in the first place.Hmm...
4 comments:
This is old news... its just the Bill from 2007 on the Nuclear Policy Review.
------
SUMMARY AS OF:
8/1/2007--Introduced. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Nuclear Policy and Posture Review Act of 2007 - Directs the President to conduct a nuclear policy review to consider a range of options on the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. security policy.
Requires the Secretary of Defense to conduct a comprehensive review of the U.S. nuclear posture to clarify U.S. nuclear deterrence policy and strategy.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the President's review should be used as the basis for establishing future U.S. strategic arms control objectives and negotiating positions.
Prohibits the appropriation or availability of funds for the Reliable Replacement Warhead Program for FY2008-FY2010 until reports on the above reviews have been submitted to Congress.
----
There's nothing in it about doing away with nuclear weapons.
I believe Feinstein is requesting a review of strategy/policy before committing to construction of new nukes. That seems reasonable enough.I don't see anything in her proposed legislation that suggests "no new nukes". You should try to be more accurate (and honest) when you post.
Why do we need new nukes anyway??
Why do we need new nukes anyway??
Answer: To keep people employed at national labs.
Zealots will tell you "to keep us safe" for a variety of reasons. One of my favorites is we need to modernize our weapons so that in the event they fall into the hands of terrorists they can't be used against us. And you might ask,is it cheaper to redesign our entire stockpile or improve security to make it impossible to allow one of our weapons to get swiped in the first place.Hmm...
Post a Comment