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.
A better question is if anyone from one of the labs has ever gone to a Chinese restaurant and not reported it on the next clearance paper work. Anyone could be guilty....even you. The enemy is us not in Russian.
While it is true the US Senate has failed to ratify the CTBT, it is nonetheless written in clear language that the US, at least, has adhered to. Yes, those facts are, “obvious”. What is less obvious is Russia’s intent with respect to that document, and indeed testing in general.
The CTBT treaty language is so vague that it is objectively impossible to enforce the US interpretation across the full possible range.
Keep in mind that the soil beneath your feet is likely fissioning, albeit at a low rate. To outlaw all fissions by political fiat is a ridiculous fantasy.
Then it comes down to the definition of a nuclear explosion, which is not what is happening under most people's feet. I suspect that line of reasoning underlies the logic of some foreign scientists, and their leaders. Whether or not they act on such reasoning is a separate issue.
Use better language in a treaty next time. CTBT was doomed by the compromised wording of Article 1.
Well, given your profound insights into treaty language, and the fact that the treaty is updated every ten years, it seems to me you should advise on the updated language immediately. Or, you could make random and incorrect pronouncements on a blog. Your call.
C'mon folks, what moron would sign a treaty prohibiting "nuclear explosions" that did not even so much as define what constituted a "nuclear explosion." ?
This so-called "treaty" is fundamentally un-enforcible. If the Russians choose to ignore a worthless piece of paper, then they are provably smarter than the average policy wonk advising our elected politicians.
Here’s a pretty insightful podcast on this whole issue.
“The United States intelligence community, or a portion of it, has concluded that Russia is conducting very low-yield nuclear tests. Aaron Stein and Dr. Jeffrey Lewis discuss past allegations of nuclear testing, open source monitoring of Russia’s nuclear test site at Novaya Zemlya and how the Trump Administration might change its mind on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.”
Actually if you listen to their discussion they talk about how the administration might find focusing on definitions (eg what does zero yield mean) and test site access, as opposed to testing vs non-testing.
Attempting "points" while using lousy grammar and sentence structure was something that was drilled out of me in high school. Sloppy speech/writing = sloppy thought.
Attempting "points" while using lousy grammar and sentence structure was something that was drilled out of me in high school. Sloppy speech/writing = sloppy thought.
28 comments:
Who cares?
A better question is if anyone from one of the labs has ever gone to a Chinese restaurant and not reported it on the next clearance paper work. Anyone could be guilty....even you. The enemy is us not in Russian.
Insanity is everywhere these days.
Russia never quit nuclear testing!
Nor did the US quit nuke testing!
Russia is suspected of actual nuclear testing above zero yield. US sub-nuclears are not the same thing.
if only we could agree on the definition of the word "is"
8:48, “we” don’t matter. The treaties are quit clear on the subject.
What ratified treaty in force are you referring to?
What ratified treaty in force are you referring to?
6/07/2019 4:20 AM
Obviously, there is none. CBTB was never ratified by nuclear states US, China, Israel, NK, India, Pakistan. Source: cbto.org.
While it is true the US Senate has failed to ratify the CTBT, it is nonetheless written in clear language that the US, at least, has adhered to. Yes, those facts are, “obvious”. What is less obvious is Russia’s intent with respect to that document, and indeed testing in general.
While it is true the US Senate has failed to ratify the CTBT...
6/08/2019 10:43 AM
It did not not "fail." It did well not to ratify.
The CTBT treaty language is so vague that it is objectively impossible to enforce the US interpretation across the full possible range.
Keep in mind that the soil beneath your feet is likely fissioning, albeit at a low rate. To outlaw all fissions by political fiat is a ridiculous fantasy.
Then it comes down to the definition of a nuclear explosion, which is not what is happening under most people's feet. I suspect that line of reasoning underlies the logic of some foreign scientists, and their leaders. Whether or not they act on such reasoning is a separate issue.
Use better language in a treaty next time. CTBT was doomed by the compromised wording of Article 1.
6/09/2019 9:52 PM
Well said.
Well, given your profound insights into treaty language, and the fact that the treaty is updated every ten years, it seems to me you should advise on the updated language immediately. Or, you could make random and incorrect pronouncements on a blog. Your call.
I suspect more than one very experienced CTBT technical advisor may be lurking in the vicinity of this blog.
C'mon folks, what moron would sign a treaty prohibiting "nuclear explosions" that did not even so much as define what constituted a "nuclear explosion." ?
This so-called "treaty" is fundamentally un-enforcible. If the Russians choose to ignore a worthless piece of paper, then they are provably smarter than the average policy wonk advising our elected politicians.
Critical thinking is a lost art in the US!
Apparently, so is nuanced thinking.
Apparently, so nuanced that nobody else understood. Failed diplomacy.
6/15/2019 9:12 AM should have said that the Ruskies are definitely smarter than the wannabe policy wonks commenting on this blog!
Here’s a pretty insightful podcast on this whole issue.
“The United States intelligence community, or a portion of it, has concluded that Russia is conducting very low-yield nuclear tests. Aaron Stein and Dr. Jeffrey Lewis discuss past allegations of nuclear testing, open source monitoring of Russia’s nuclear test site at Novaya Zemlya and how the Trump Administration might change its mind on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.”
https://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1207600/low-yield-nuclear-testing-in-russia/
Trump has never weighed in on the CTBT. As far as the US is concerned, it is not in force. Not so "insightful."
Actually if you listen to their discussion they talk about how the administration might find focusing on definitions (eg what does zero yield mean) and test site access, as opposed to testing vs non-testing.
Speak English much? "..might find focusing.."??
6/18/2019 5:48 PM
You don't seem to following the major point, which is actually the point after all.
Attempting "points" while using lousy grammar and sentence structure was something that was drilled out of me in high school. Sloppy speech/writing = sloppy thought.
Attempting "points" while using lousy grammar and sentence structure was something that was drilled out of me in high school. Sloppy speech/writing = sloppy thought.
6/20/2019 6:52 PM
Still not getting it, are you. Sigh
Grammar errors are only allowed by the grammar police when they agree with your point. It’s called trolling or deflecting, etc
No "point" except that poor grammar is an indication of poor education. Did you get what you paid for?
Post a Comment