Skip to main content

Are we more secure?


Article by Diane Randall of Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL)

Comments

Anonymous said…
Are we more secure? Yes. Are we invulnerable? No. Can we be perfectly secure? No. Did Operation Iraqi Freedom contribute to our security? Not nearly in proportion to the price tag.
Anonymous said…
Did Operation Iraqi Freedom contribute to our security? Not nearly in proportion to the price tag.

September 10, 2011 11:52 AM

Ok, genius, how much security is worth how much money? What a stupid argument. Compare a subjective feeling (security) with a (reasonably) definite number (cost). An absolutely fallacious line of reasoning. Try another blog where no technical people hang out and you can get away with that crap. The cost is measured most appropriately by goals accomplished. If the goals weren't specified in a measurable way, blame your politicians.
Anonymous said…
Cheney was the perfect foil for Osama. Fact acting, unscrupulous coward, looking to send others children to fight.

Bush senior, Scowcroft and Schultz counseled less sweeping gestures, but Wormtongue prevailed. Those with fight in their background were much less willing to commit anyone's children.

Lots of heros resulted. God Bless them.

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

LLNL un-diversity

Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!