Nuclear weapons strange myths:
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-top-5-strange-myths-about-americas-nuclear-triad-are-wrong-81466
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-top-5-strange-myths-about-americas-nuclear-triad-are-wrong-81466
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...
Comments
So basically.
(1) The military does care about NW.
(2) There is no possible use for them in the modern age
(3) No one wants to be charge of stuff that will never ever be used
(4) It is really expensive to maintain stuff no will use.
(5) This stuff is very dangerous and something could go wrong.
Ok that about sums it up. I say get rid of the all the weapons, the military will not care, we will free up god people, save money that could be used for other weapons and it will be safer. It is kind of insane to think we are spending so much money on something we cannot use because there is no possible use for it.
Rock solid article.
If we got rid of the weapons there is no guarantee that the cost savings would go to the military or the taxpayers. More than likely other social boondoggles would grab the dough.
There is also the problem of convincing Russia, China, France, England, Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Iran to give up their nukes. It's that old problem of trying to stuff the genie back into the bottle.
The point that it is really expensive to maintain and will not be used is also an argument about insurance or firearms. I hope you don't need it, but if you do you'll need it more than you've ever needed anything else in your life.
Weak argument, at least some social boondoggles are good. We could use it to rebuild Baltimore or help the homeless in California.
"There is also the problem of convincing Russia, China, France, England, Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Iran to give up their nukes. It's that old problem of trying to stuff the genie back into the bottle."
I think this is the real issue. The moment we give up nukes, China will start mass producing them and test. Not to mention Europe would go back to conventional warfare. If the US gets rid of its arsenal you will have WWIII in less then 10 years but with conventional weapons or Chinese and Russian nukes.
Or Pakistani nukes, or NK nukes, or India nukes. No policeman, no check on the bad guys.
9/25/2019 7:34 PM
Baltimore baby! But with nukes! What could possibly go wrong.
I mean maybe a better solution would for Google or Microsoft to control the biggest arsenal.
9/25/2019 7:34 PM
Yeah, Germany did that really well in the 1930's. Also Cambodia in the 1960's and 70's. History is just full of people "policing themselves." Then the grownups have to clean it up.
9/26/2019 4:58 PM
Actually, the "grownups" sent their sons and daughters to clean it up. Many are still there.
10/05/2019 5:57 AM
Why in the world would you think that??