U.S. ponders resumption of nuclear weapons tests

The San Jose Mercury News ^ | Sat, Nov. 16, 2002 | Dan Stober and Jonathan S. Landay Mercury News

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is laying the groundwork for the resumption of nuclear testing and the development of new nuclear weapons, according to a memo obtained by the Mercury News.

The memorandum circulated recently to members of the Nuclear Weapons Council, a high-level government body that sets policy for nuclear weapons. The two-page memo urges the U.S. nuclear weapons laboratories to assess the technical risks associated with maintaining the U.S. arsenal without nuclear testing, which President Bush's father halted in 1992. In addition, the memo suggests that the United States take another look at conducting small nuclear tests, a policy rejected by the Clinton administration.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

OFFICIAL BUMP(TOPIC)LIST

[Batrachian]

Now we're talking. If we rely on a nuclear deterrent, which we do, then we must test the current stockpile for reliability, as well as test to develop new weapons. The desirability of this is inversely proportional to how much the left dislikes it.

[demlosers]

Cool. About time.

[The Great RJ]

I suggest Bagdad or perhaps Mecca as good places to test nuclear weapons -particularly the large ones.

[The Other Harry]

It seems hypocritical to me for us to be calling on Iraq to disarm if we are going the opposite direction.

[bulldogs]

Yeah, well it's hipocritical to call Islam a religion of peace.

[ContentiousObjector]

Oh yeah, this is going to make us popular,

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

We will share the products with Mecca.....hehe and Bagdad!

[nomad]

The first thing on the R&D list, an ultra-clean, lightweight, low-yield nuke warhead for our missle defense interceptors. "Hit to Kill" is fine and dandy, but when the $#*t really hits the fan, we need as close to 100% assured probability of a kill per shot as possible. A choice of kinetic and, or low-yield nuke warheads makes plenty of sense.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Yes, good idea!

[rickmichaels]

It seems hypocritical to me for us to be calling on Iraq to disarm if we are going the opposite direction.

You must be a card-carrying Democrat.

[Morrigan]

Ordinarily it would, but there is one thing you must take into consideration: WE ARE NOT INSANE!

[Monty22]

This isn't a question. Do it. Do it now. Test. Fire. Do not hold back. Ever.

[Scully]

It seems hypocritical to me for us to be calling on Iraq to disarm if we are going the opposite direction.

I believe Teddy Roosevelt remarked that we needed to, "Walk softly and carry a big stick"...or something to that effect.

This is a BIG stick.

[The Other Harry]

> It seems hypocritical to me for us to be calling on Iraq
> to disarm if we are going the opposite direction.

You must be a card-carrying Democrat.

Not at all.

I just don't understand how we divide things up. Let's see here... Pakistan, India, France, the UK, Israel, and the Russians are all allowed to have nukes and other toys. Maybe North Korea too. The US, of course.

Saddam is not.

Now, I agree that he is a very bad boy, and that makes a difference.

But regimes change. What is the criteria for deciding who is allowed to have WMD and who is not?

I don't any of us should have them.

[seeker41]

Do you realize what you are saying? If we hadn't nuked Japan WWII would have had a very different ending and it would NOT have been a happy one for the USA.

[rickmichaels]

But regimes change. What is the criteria for deciding who is allowed to have WMD and who is not?

The criteria are:

1) No previous use of WMD on one's own citizens,

2) Trust,

3) No statements professing support - moral or tangible - to groups such as Al-Qaeda, Islamic Jihad, Hizballah, and Hamas.

Countries such as those you've mentioned have normal to "somewhat-improving" relations with the US and can therefore be trusted to some degree with WMD. North Korea and Iraq cannot.

I don't think any of us should have them.

Gee, that's an awfully nice and romantic thought. But nice and romantic thoughts usually only help to get your ass blown away by enemies who don't have views as sweet as yours.