Posted on 10/25/2011 7:35:17 AM PDT by Scythian
AMARILLO, Texas (AP) — The last of the nation's most powerful nuclear bombs — a weapon hundreds of times stronger than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima — is being disassembled nearly half a century after it was put into service at the height of the Cold War.
The final components of the B53 bomb will be broken down Tuesday at the Pantex Plant near Amarillo, the nation's only nuclear weapons assembly and disassembly facility. The completion of the dismantling program is a year ahead of schedule, according to the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration, and aligns with President Barack Obama's goal of reducing the number of nuclear weapons.
Thomas D'Agostino, the nuclear administration's chief, called the bomb's elimination a "significant milestone."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
So all the press hoopla about dismantling this thing is just Obama's press corpse (pun intended) trying to make people believe he is following through on a campaign promise, when in reality it was begun under the Bush admin.
There is a fundamental difference between a weapon that propels a piece of metal at high speed in a specific direction, and a weapon which is designed to inflict fatal burns across a thousand square miles. Surely you can agree on that point, yes?
And I do own a number of firearms, but that's irrelevant.
A generation of Americans who would not have been born had their fathers taken part in a land invasion of Japan would find you immoral.
And I do own a number of firearms, but that's irrelevant.
A handgun held by a homeowner protecting his family is no more moral then the handgun used by a rapist. It's a tool, just like a nuclear weapon.
Don't you have some whales to save?
Here’s the real deal: Tsar Bomba.
Tested on October 30th, 1961. It was planned as a 100 megaton device, however for the test, it was scaled down to 50 megatons.
The fireball reached nearly as high as the altitude of the release plane, 6.5 miles (10 km) and was seen almost 1,000 kilometres (620 mi) from ground zero. The subsequent mushroom cloud was about 64 kilometres (40 mi) high (nearly seven times the height of Mount Everest), which meant that the cloud was well inside the Mesosphere when it peaked. The base of the cloud was 40 kilometres (25 mi) wide. All buildings in the village of Severny (both wooden and brick), located 55 kilometres (34 mi) from ground zero within the Sukhoy Nos test range, were completely destroyed. In districts hundreds of kilometers from ground zero, wooden houses were destroyed, and stone ones lost their roofs, windows and doors; and radio communications were interrupted for almost one hour. One participant in the test saw a bright flash through dark goggles and felt the effects of a thermal pulse even at a distance of 270 kilometres (170 mi). The heat from the explosion could have caused third-degree burns 100 km (62 mi) away from ground zero. A shock wave was observed in the air at Dikson settlement 700 kilometres (430 mi) away; windowpanes were partially broken to distances of 900 kilometres (560 mi). Atmospheric focusing caused blast damage at even greater distances, breaking windows in Norway and Finland. The seismic shock created by the detonation was measurable even on its third passage around the Earth.[8] Its seismic body wave magnitude was about 5 to 5.25.[7] The energy yield was around 7.1 on the Richter scale but, since the bomb was detonated in air rather than underground, most of the energy was not converted to seismic waves.
Now THAT’S a bomb.
Wow, they really nuked themselves!
I am PRETTY SURE that we had at least one deployed 24 megaton bomb. See below.
B41 Y1 NGB Sep 1960 1960 1976 Jul 1976 3-stage TN, dirty 4840 ~25 500
There is also a fundamental difference between an 80 kiloton bomb and a 9,000 kiloton bomb. The firebombing of Tokyo killed more people than either atomic bomb. Note that I said "THIS weapon" not "THESE weapons."
A number of smaller nukes will wreak the same havoc.
So what’s your point? Total nuclear disarmament? Good luck convincing the Chicoms, Norks, and Imadinnerjacket, peacenik.
Tested on October 30th, 1961. It was planned as a 100 megaton device, however for the test, it was scaled down to 50 megatons.
~~~~~~
Now THAT’S a bomb.
Want to know the real kicker? It was to be used as a TACTICAL bomb.
It was really excessively powerful as a strategic weapon, but if the situation in Europe went nuclear, the Russian generals figured 3 or 4 would pretty much sanitise NATO forces in W Germany.
That's one wrinkle Robert Oppenheimer didn't consider when he pushed the idea of battlefield nukes in the early 50s
I imagine they have pretty decent security.
Aside from that, I'm inspired by the words of a great American President:
If the Soviet Union will join with us in our effort to achieve major arms reduction we will have succeeded in stabilizing the nuclear balance. Nevertheless, it will still be necessary to rely on the specter of retaliation, on mutual threat. And that’s a sad commentary on the human condition. Wouldn’t it be better to save lives than to avenge them? Are we not capable of demonstrating our peaceful intentions by applying all our abilities and our ingenuity to achieving a truly lasting stability? I think we are. Indeed, we must.What if free people could live secure in the knowledge that their security did not rest upon the threat of instant U.S. retaliation to deter a Soviet attack, that we could intercept and destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reached our own soil or that of our allies? I know this is a formidable, technical task, one that may not be accomplished before the end of this century. Yet, current technology has attained a level of sophistication where it’s reasonable for us to begin this effort. It will take years, probably decades of effort on many fronts. There will be failures and setbacks, just as there will be successes and breakthroughs. And as we proceed, we must remain constant in preserving the nuclear deterrent and maintaining a solid capability for flexible response. But isn’t it worth every investment necessary to free the world from the threat of nuclear war? We know it is. - President Ronald Reagan, March 23, 1983
Was Reagan a "peacenik," too?
Indeed, shooting down ballistic missiles is a very formidable technical task, but we are equal to it. We shot down two ballistic missiles just three weeks ago, in fact. We should be proud that we have brought Reagan's grand prophetic vision to fruition.
I imagine they have pretty decent security.
We'll see.
With all due respect, even the smaller, remaining nukes are WMDs, and should they ever be used (which I dearly hope will never happen) anything, whether military or civilian, within radius "x" will be obliterated indescriminately. Nukes are not surgical instruments. So the 'big one' is dismantled. The ICBMs with MIRV warheads remain...same, same...IMO. (And 100% reliable missile interception - not the only way to deploy a nuke, mind you - is still a ways off.) Peace, nik. ;-)
No, it's not a ways off, actually.
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.