Bush Administration Plans to Bring Back Nuclear Testing
by Union of Concerned Scientists on 01.15.07
The Bush administration is proposing to rebuild the entire U.S. nuclear arsenal, recreating the type of design, development, and production capability for nuclear weapons used in the United States during the Cold War. These new weapons, would ultimately replace the entire U.S. nuclear arsenal in a program called “Complex 2030.” This initiative would risk a return to underground nuclear testing, create more nuclear waste, and undercut efforts to limit the acquisition of new nuclear weapons by other countries.
The sad fact is that the United States has not cleaned up the waste generated by producing tens of thousands of nuclear weapons the first time around. Hazardous waste and radioactive contamination remains at many locations throughout the United States. A decision to resume nuclear warhead production would involve a huge commitment of human and environmental resources and increased contamination of the environment.
Fortunately, under U.S. law, proposed projects like Complex 2030 must undergo a review of the environmental impact of the plan. That review must consider alternative options and must take public comments. In what is called the Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment, which is taking place now, the scope of the proposed review is open to comment, including the types of alternatives that should be reviewed.
Please send a letter today urging the Department of Energy to examine an alternative it is currently not considering: dramatic reductions in the U.S. nuclear arsenal and consolidation and cleanup of the enormous U.S. nuclear weapons complex.
Like a re-make of Dr. Strangelove. There may be a synergy in terms of raw material and expertise for escalating weapon and new nuclear power capabilty in parallel. Very likely there have been strategic discussions of this at high levels of government.
Has anyone made a Google map of where all the previous tests were carried out. I’m sure it would be pretty interesting to people living near by or for people intending to move from one state to another, who might not know about the past history of these places. I was planning on going on a road trip through the USA; I don’t want to go near any of these spots. Better safe then sorry
i am consistently blown away (no pun intended) by this administrations ability to do the least logical, most corrupt action, and to completely break my heart.
i'm sure at this point my senators and my representative are sick to death of hearing from me, but they'll be getting fresh new emails on this. thanks for the heads up.
Kio, I don't think it is a big deal traveling near test sites (or even living near them). A number of years ago I visited Trinity Site, location of the very first nuclear test. There is still radiation there, but it isn't enough to be significant.
Good News.
I'm sure the people who have responded before me didn't even read the actualy article...they just read Bush & Nukes, and threw in there left political view.
I will post a few read worthy quotes from the article (that tree-hugger 'forgot' to mention)...and hopefully you will come around to relizing that this is a good thing.
"The new weapon would not add to but replace the nation's existing arsenal of aging warheads with a new generation meant to be sturdier, more reliable, safer from accidental detonation and more secure from theft by terrorists. "
"As the administration tries to persuade the world to put sanctions on North Korea and Iran to halt their nuclear programs, those critics argue, any move to improve the American arsenal will be seen as hypocritical, an effort by the United States to extend its nuclear lead over other countries. Should the United States decide to conduct a test, officials said, China and Russia - which have their own nuclear modernization programs under way"
"Administration officials and military officers like General James Cartwright, head of the Strategic Command, which controls the nation's nuclear arsenal, argue that because the United States provides a nuclear umbrella for so many allies, it is critical that its stockpile be as reliable as possible. "
The problem here is the testing of the nukes, not replacing old nukes with new, more reliable ones (though of course having less nukes around would be better than replacing them -- it's not like you need as much as the US has now (except if you are the industrial-military complex $$$)).
In the old days of the Cold War a large nuclear stockpile was useful because mutally assured destruction was likely the major factor limiting nuclear war. These days the old red dog digging in the back yard is gone and rogue states represent the greatest nuclear risk. A large stockpile of arms is ineffective as a deterrent against terrorists and rogue states. As such the nuke that would be
"sturdier, more reliable, safer from accidental detonation and more secure from theft by terrorists"
would be the nukc that does not exist. We need to dismantle the our current stockpile now. The best way to prevent rogue states and terrorists from adopting nuclear technology is to not further that technology and destroy the existing templates.
What are we all worried about here? Haven't you heard? Nuclear is green!!! The "peaceful" atom is back in swing, with full page ads, all over New England... GREEN, not greenhouse gases... that's what Entergy says, and who are we to disagree? Now that they got us sold on nu-cu-lar as the solution to global warming, hey, what the heck, might as well sell them a spankin' brand nuke weapons program while we're at it, cause they'll swallow anything... Green consumer movement, asleep at the switch... while building green cities, we forgot the sleeping giant, the tons of nuke waste, the radiation leaks, the high cancer rates, the billions in clean up... at tax payers expense... which could all be invested in saving this earth... yep, my soap box, kick me off it... a letter? what will another letter do? what has any letters done while humanity nose dives into oblivion... the only thing that can stop this... the only thing... is the love of a good woman. That or GE really turning green, not just GreenOrder saving the corporations from themselves.
First, this is not good news, and find it very upsetting...this explains why the nuclear clock tomorrow is MOVING FORWARD.
That being said, where is the same outrage on new nuclear reactors, or the outrage against old aging reactors with serious health and safety issues being relicensed? What, it's OK to ask one community to play host to a reactor so that you can watch your MTV, but not OK to test nuclear bombs in your neighborhood?
You are either pro nuke, or anti nuke...this is not a diner, you do not get to choose one from colume A, and none from colume B.
Nice ignorance pushing remy. Nice comparing apples to oranges.
actually, i live within a 20 mile radius of 2 nuclear power plants, and while im sure my home is probably one big cancer cluster between those and the huge exxon refinery also within 20 miles, nobody is dropping these nuclear power plants on third world citizens, or entertaining the possibility of doingso.my issue with this isnt an environmental issue, its a concern with violence, escalating violence,war mongers in positions of power, and a wish for peace. obviously i would prefer to be surrounded by windfarms instead of refineries and nuclear power plants, but that isnt the issue here. as jilted said, you are comparing nuclear apples to nuclear oranges.
and i may be ignorant to believe so, but i do believe that if my respresentatives in congress are inundated by letters from their constituents expressing concern about issues, they will listen and take heed, as their political careers rely on our votes. afterall, they are in washington to represent the voters. while i tend to be skeptical of US policy, and our government in general, i prefer to be hopeful that my voice may make a difference, when combined with the voices of others.
Get you facts strait before you make things up and try to sway peoples thinking. nice try at making a beleivable artical however.
--
editor note: You think Military.com is also making it up? See link in the post above.