Skip to comments.
U.S. back in nuclear warhead business
UPI via ET ^
| July 03, 2007
| Staff
Posted on 07/03/2007 7:56:51 AM PDT by jdm
LOS ALAMOS, N.M., July 3 -- The Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico has resumed production of plutonium detonators, the first production since 1989.
The first detonator, known as a "pit," was completed last month and shipped to Texas, but on Monday, the laboratory hosted a ceremonial stamping of approval of a second pit for dignitaries, including U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., The Albuquerque (N.M.) Journal reported.
The devices are designed for W88 warheads used on nuclear submarines and the lab intends to produce 10 of them a year to replace older ones in rotation, lab Director Michael Anastasio told the Journal.
The United States hasn't produced nuclear warheads since 1989 when a facility in Rocky Flats outside Denver was closed due to environmental problems.
As the ceremony concluded, the Physicians for Social Responsibility group had a news conference at a Los Alamos hotel denouncing the resumption.
"Nuclear weapons development is just not needed," spokesman Mike McCally said in the Journal report. "We rather should be moving toward reducing our weapons stockpile."
TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events; US: New Mexico
KEYWORDS: armstrade; losalamos; miltech; newmexico; nuclear; proliferation; warhead
"Nuclear weapons development is just not needed," spokesman Mike McCally said in the Journal report. "We rather should be moving toward reducing our weapons stockpile."Pansies.
1
posted on
07/03/2007 7:56:53 AM PDT
by
jdm
To: jdm
We need the nuclear penetrator. I’m glad to see this. Go nukes!
2
posted on
07/03/2007 7:58:37 AM PDT
by
pissant
(Duncan Hunter: Congressman with pyschotic supporters)
To: jdm
Good news, but how quickly will secrets be passed on to our enemies?
3
posted on
07/03/2007 8:00:08 AM PDT
by
mtbopfuyn
(I think the border is kind of an artificial barrier - San Antonio councilwoman Patti Radle)
To: jdm
Need them now more than ever
4
posted on
07/03/2007 8:01:41 AM PDT
by
NonValueAdded
(Brian J. Marotta, 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub, (1948-2007) Rest In Peace, our FRiend)
To: jdm
Nuclear weapons development is just not needed," spokesman Mike McCally said in the Journal report. "We rather should be moving toward reducing our weapons stockpile."
BS, the Ruskies have been continuing to develop nuclear weapons technology through China, North Korea, and now Iran.
Sitting on our laurels for the past 15 years was a huge mistake.
It's time to let Russia know that their so called unilateral weapons moratorium is not fooling us anymore.
5
posted on
07/03/2007 8:02:17 AM PDT
by
HEY4QDEMS
(Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.)
To: jdm
"We rather should be moving toward reducing our weapons stockpile."Through use...
6
posted on
07/03/2007 8:03:42 AM PDT
by
null and void
(A large gov't agency is more expensive than a smaller agency with the same mission, yet does less)
To: jdm
the Physicians for Social Responsibility The mad bombers of Britain wouldn't happen to be members of this group, would they?
7
posted on
07/03/2007 8:04:02 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(It's Brecht's donkey, not mine)
To: pissant
8
posted on
07/03/2007 8:13:13 AM PDT
by
Diogenesis
(Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
To: Diogenesis
What a waste of oxygen the UN has been.
9
posted on
07/03/2007 8:16:41 AM PDT
by
pissant
(Duncan Hunter: Congressman with pyschotic supporters)
To: jdm
I know of several perfect places that we could use to test them......just to make sure that they work properly....
10
posted on
07/03/2007 8:19:54 AM PDT
by
sfvgto
(is Marion Barry a democrat?)
To: mtbopfuyn
“Good news, but how quickly will secrets be passed on to our enemies?”
How long does it take to print up the New York Times?
11
posted on
07/03/2007 8:23:13 AM PDT
by
Bigh4u2
(Denial is the first requirement to be a liberal)
To: jdm
12
posted on
07/03/2007 8:24:08 AM PDT
by
Stallone
(THE FENCE - Build it, and they won't come)
To: jdm
10 per year? That’s IT? We have thousands of warheads, and replacing 10 detonators per year (if they’re needed to replace unreliable ones, and presumeably they are) will only scratch the surface.
Either they’re not needed for old stuff and we’re producing new nukes (penetrators), or they’re lying about the numbers, or we’re damned fools.
To: jdm
"Nuclear weapons development is just not needed," spokesman Mike McCally said in the Journal report. "We rather should be moving toward reducing our weapons stockpile."
Mr. McCally, why don't you try and go sell crazy in Pakistan and Iran and see how far it gets you. /sarcasm.
14
posted on
07/03/2007 8:38:03 AM PDT
by
jackieaxe
(This one hour pre-flight security screening is brought to you by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia)
To: mtbopfuyn
Depends if Algore or Hillary wins the Presidency.
15
posted on
07/03/2007 8:57:07 AM PDT
by
Still Thinking
(Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
To: jdm
"Nuclear weapons development is just not needed" ...to replace older ones in rotation.
This isn't a buildup, they eventually need maintenance. And we may yet reach a day when fresh ones will be needed.
16
posted on
07/03/2007 9:34:53 AM PDT
by
Sender
(Success in warfare is gained by carefully accommodating ourselves to the enemy's purpose.)
To: jdm
The Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico has resumed production of plutonium detonators, the first production since 1989.I'm assuming by "plutonium detonator" they mean the fission primary for a fusion weapon?
17
posted on
07/03/2007 9:38:34 AM PDT
by
lesser_satan
(FRED THOMPSON '08)
To: Ancesthntr
You are right that 10 is not very many in comparison to the size of our present stockpile. My guess is that this small program is meant to keep a skill set alive that was slowly disappearing. It might be years before we have another full scale nuclear weapons production run, and the junior scientists involved in this effort now might be in charge then. If that is the case, then it is a very good investment.
18
posted on
07/03/2007 4:32:55 PM PDT
by
the lone wolf
(Good Luck, and watch out for stobor.)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson