Skip to main content

Hagel and NNSA

The President nominating former Sen.Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) as Defense Secretary, could be interesting for NNSA.

Hagel is a board member of Global Zero (international movement for the elimination of all nuclear weapons).

He coauthored last year a report that called for the US (through negotiations with Russia) to reduce over a ten year period the US arsenal to a maximum of 900 total nuclear weapons. This included going from the delivery system triad to a dyad (10 Trident subs and 18 US based B-2 bombers). Eliminating tactical nukes deployed overseas and converting US nuclear ICBMs to non-nuclear prompt global strike ICBMs (with conventional warheads). Also a downsized NWC; no PF-4,CMRR, or UPF. Only 4 types of nuclear weapons would be kept; W-76 and W-88 on Trident SSBNs, and the B61 (mods 7 and 11) and B83 on B-2 bombers.

I wonder what would now happen if NNSA got moved into DOD.Don't really think this will happen, but it looks like there will be a customer (SecDef) that has a really different vision and smaller future in mind for the NWC and DOD nuclear forces.

It could really really get interesting if they put another Global Zero member (like former LLNL and DOE nuclear weapons executive Philp Coyle) over NNSA.

The full report is at:
http://www.globalzero.org/en/us-nuclear-policy-commission-report

Comments

Anonymous said…
Eliminating tactical nukes overseas (mostly the B-61 gravity bombs held by NATO) would mean that there is little hope that the costly B-61 refurbishment program will go forward as planned.

I take it as a given that this $10 billion program will soon be mothballed, much like the CMRR. With its removal, large layoffs will be necessary at LLNL, LANL and SNL unless the massive funding allocated for this program is redirected to other lab programs.

Anonymous said…
not enough. should be 5 -10x more. if we have 'em at all, have enough.

Anonymous said…
900 is enough. 300 different targets with 3 nukes assigned to each. I think DOD would be hard pressed to come up with an OpsPlan that could list 300 things on this planet worth destroying with a nuclear strike.
Anonymous said…
Misses, misfires, breech bursts, prefires, separation mistakes, misplaced keys, tumbling, guidance errors, communications breakdowns, delayed maintenance, maintenance cycles, sad sacks, missed orders, cowards, heros, saints, sinners...

As Hiawatha used to tell the Iroiqois,

You need a few more bullets than targets, and there are a lot of targets.
Anonymous said…
Yep. Admiral Kimmel and General Short knew the plan, had radar stations operating, knew the enemy fleet was in motion, had plenty of search aircraft deployed, had plenty of fighter cover and the fleet was in the best protected anchorage 3000 miles from the enemy. One was secure riding a horse and the other was playing golf at 8:55 am Hawaii time on December 7, 1941.

Semper paratus or not.

I vote for 10000.
Anonymous said…
December 7, 1941.

Followed by a couple of years of our torpedoes bouncing off Japanese shipping because they had not been tested under realistic conditions. Oh well, we have computers and NIF now, so we don't need no testing.

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!