Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US plan for new nuclear arsenal
The Guardian (U.K.) ^ | 02/19/03 | Julian Borger

Posted on 02/18/2003 7:01:17 PM PST by Pokey78

Secret talks may lead to breaking treaties

The Bush administration is planning a secret meeting in August to discuss the construction of a new generation of nuclear weapons, including "mini-nukes", "bunker-busters" and neutron bombs designed to destroy chemical or biological agents, according to a leaked Pentagon document.

The meeting of senior military officials and US nuclear scientists at the Omaha headquarters of the US Strategic Command would also decide whether to restart nuclear testing and how to convince the American public that the new weapons are necessary.

The leaked preparations for the meeting are the clearest sign yet that the administration is determined to overhaul its nuclear arsenal so that it could be used as part of the new "Bush doctrine" of pre-emption, to strike the stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons of rogue states.

Greg Mello, the head of the Los Alamos Study Group, a nuclear watchdog organisation that obtained the Pentagon documents, said the meeting would also prepare the ground for a US breakaway from global arms control treaties, and the moratorium on conducting nuclear tests.

"It is impossible to overstate the challenge these plans pose to the comprehensive test ban treaty, the existing nuclear test moratorium, and US compliance with article six of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty," Mr Mello said.

The documents leaked to Mr Mello are the minutes of a meeting in the Pentagon on January 10 this year called by Dale Klein, the assistant to the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, to prepare the secret conference, planned for "the week of August 4 2003".

The National Nuclear Security Administration, which is responsible for designing, building and maintaining nuclear weapons, yesterday confirmed the authenticity of the document. But Anson Franklin, the NNSA head of governmental affairs, said: "We have no request from the defence department for any new nuclear weapon, and we have no plans for nuclear testing.

"The fact is that this paper is talking about what-if scenarios and very long range planning," Mr Franklin told the Guardian.

However, non-proliferation groups say the Omaha meeting will bring a new US nuclear arsenal out of the realm of the theoretical and far closer to reality, in the shape of new bombs and a new readiness to use them.

"To me it indicates there are plans proceeding and well under way ... to resume the development, testing and production of new nuclear weapons. It's very serious," said Stephen Schwartz, the publisher of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, who added that it opened the US to charges of hypocrisy when it is demanding the disarmament of Iraq and North Korea.

"How can we possibly go to the international community or to these countries and say 'How dare you develop these weapons', when it's exactly what we're doing?" Mr Schwartz said.

The starting point for the January discussion was Mr Rumsfeld's nuclear posture review (NPR), a policy paper published last year that identified Russia, China, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria and Libya as potential targets for US nuclear weapons.

According to the Pentagon minutes, the August meeting in Strategic Command's bunker headquarters would discuss how to make weapons to match the new policy. A "future arsenal panel" would consider: "What are the warhead characteristics and advanced concepts we will need in the post-NPR environment?"

The panel would also contemplate the "requirements for low-yield weapons, EPWs [earth-penetrating weapons], enhanced radiation weapons, agent defeat weapons".

This is the menu of weapons being actively considered by the Pentagon. Low-yield means tactical warheads of less than a kiloton, "mini-nukes", which advocates of the new arsenal say represent a far more effective deterrent than the existing huge weapons, because they are more "usable".

Earth-penetrating weapons are "bunker-busters", which would break through the surface of the earth before detonating. US weapons scientists believe they could be used as "agent defeat weapons" used to destroy chemical or biological weapons stored underground. The designers are also looking at low-yield neutron bombs or "enhanced radiation weapons", which could destroy chemical or biological weapons in surface warehouses.

According to the leaked document, the "future arsenal panel" in Omaha would also ask the pivotal question: "What forms of testing will these new designs require?"

The Bush administration has been working to reduce the amount of warning the test sites in the western US desert would need to be reactivated after 10 years lying dormant.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: miltech
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 02/18/2003 7:01:17 PM PST by Pokey78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
That our current arsenal was designed for a very different threat environment is undeniable.

An overal; review is certainly past due.



2 posted on 02/18/2003 7:05:42 PM PST by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: Pokey78
Sounds like good stuff to me...Where's the problem ?
4 posted on 02/18/2003 7:08:13 PM PST by RS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
I have always wondered if Neutron bombs could be used to destroy biological agents. Seems like a great idea, but could lead to some dificult decision-making in a crisis.
5 posted on 02/18/2003 7:08:47 PM PST by Blackyce (Who woulda thunk it 2 years ago???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
.


R E A L L Y

O L D

N E W S


.
6 posted on 02/18/2003 7:10:45 PM PST by vannrox (The Preamble to the Bill of Rights - without it, our Bill of Rights is meaningless!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
The 'yellow flag' on the nuclear race has been lifted...

Come on in, one and all...the waters "warm"!
7 posted on 02/18/2003 7:12:40 PM PST by RCW2001 (We come in Peace but shoot to kill...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RS; Pokey78; *miltech
The problem is , we would be able to better defend ourselves!

OFFICIAL BUMP(TOPIC)LIST

8 posted on 02/18/2003 7:13:20 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Nuke Saddam ( Bush is thinking about it ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Oh Goody ! I love the smell of burning Beryllium in the morning.
9 posted on 02/18/2003 7:19:22 PM PST by SSN558
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Something in the order of 10-100 tons of TNT would be very useful.
10 posted on 02/18/2003 7:20:51 PM PST by LibKill (Hegemony Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege
An overal; review is certainly past due.

Don't tell the JCS and STRATCOM that...they still prefer a world where they target 2,500 nukes on the XUSSR. It's much neater and more orderly.

11 posted on 02/18/2003 7:22:18 PM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RCW2001

Saddam Hussein, call you office!...ummm, I mean any office but the one in this picture. The phones there are "out of order"

12 posted on 02/18/2003 7:23:10 PM PST by Orangedog (Accept No Substitutes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LibKill
The boys at Los Alamos will have to work on that one for a while. The problem is, the smaller the desired yeild, the less chance of having critical mass that makes the big hole in the ground. I don't know if they have done any research before now on sub-critical mass designs.
13 posted on 02/18/2003 7:26:46 PM PST by Orangedog (Accept No Substitutes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Jimmy (NO GUTS) Carter was the wus who ordered the neutron bomb taken off our shelves and it's about FREAKIN' time they put it back! NUKE their A** and TAKE the GAS!
14 posted on 02/18/2003 8:01:43 PM PST by ExSoldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: belmont_mark
Hurrah for G.W.
15 posted on 02/18/2003 8:21:32 PM PST by Orion78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78

16 posted on 02/18/2003 8:26:41 PM PST by Orion78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog
The boys at Los Alamos will have to work on that one for a while. The problem is, the smaller the desired yeild, the less chance of having critical mass that makes the big hole in the ground. I don't know if they have done any research before now on sub-critical mass designs.

There were recommendations in the 1980s to arm US submarine torpedoes with SKINC (sub-kiloton insertable nuclear component) warheads in the .01-.1 KT range. Also, the W-51 design yielded .022 KT in the late 1950s.

17 posted on 02/18/2003 8:32:30 PM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Nuclear Strategy and Small Nuclear Forces: The Conceptual Components (6/22/00)
Nuclear experts warn against implementation of START II Treaty and US Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament (2/6/01)
Russian Defector Warns US against Planned Unilateral Disarmament Measures (7/19/01)
DoD News: Special Briefing on the Nuclear Posture Review (1/15/02)
Report: Military Plans Nuke Hits on 7 Countries (3/9/02)
Coming Soon to Baghdad – The Preview of the E-Bomb (2/17/03)
18 posted on 02/18/2003 8:32:37 PM PST by Orion78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
How about a nuclear weapon designed to spread microscopic particles of pork over a 1,000,000 square mile area, covering every square inch?
19 posted on 02/18/2003 8:34:59 PM PST by merak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: merak
about a nuclear weapon designed to spread microscopic particles of pork over a 1,000,000 square mile area, covering every square inch?

That's almost four times the area of Texas!

20 posted on 02/18/2003 8:47:16 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson