nuclear-news

Nuclear weapons now an incentive to terrorism , says Dick Cheney

Cheney: Nuclear Terrorism Is ‘Most Dangerous Threat’ We Face, The American, By Bridget Johnson, September 9, 2011, Former Vice President Dick Cheney said that the “most dangerous threat” we face is nuclear materials falling into the hands of terrorists.

September 10, 2011 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

USA to cut military spending: will it be jobs cut or nuclear arsenal cut?

Factbox: For cuts, Pentagon must choose among weapons, personnel (Reuters) Reporting by David Alexander; Editing by Warren Strobel and Kieran Murray, 15 Aug 11– A decision to cut $350 billion in security spending over the next decade will force the Pentagon to make difficult trade-offs that could lead to layoffs, canceled weapons systems or a smaller nuclear arsenal……

—

August 16, 2011 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Need to rewrite U.S. President’s guidance for use of nuclear weapons

Although the administration’s Nuclear Posture Review is widely said to reduce the role of nuclear weapons, it doesn’t actually reduce the role that nuclear weapons have today because all the adversaries in the current strategic nuclear war plan are exempt from the reduction. They are either nuclear weapon states, not members of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, or are in violation of their NPT obligations and have chemical or biological weapons. The new guidance would have to remove some of these adversaries from the war plan to reduce the role, or reduce the role that nuclear weapons are required to play against each of them. There are many ways this could be done:

•  Reduce the numer of target categories that are held at risk with nuclear weapons.
• Reduce the damage expectancy to be a achieved against individual targets.
• Reduce the number of adversaries in the plan.
• Reduce the number and types of strike options against each adversary.
• Remove the requirement to plan for prompt launch of nuclear forces.
• Remove any requirement to plan for damage limitation strikes.
• End counterforce nuclear planning.
• End the requirement to maintain standing fully operational strike plans…….

we have a new op-ed in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists that describes what a new presidential directive could look like: A Presidential Policy Directive for a new nuclear path.        http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2011/08/nuclearguidance.php

August 13, 2011 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

USA to cut social welfare, health, but increase spending on nuclear weapons

Some say Social Security and Medicare are under the gun, yet nobody’s talking about the $185 Billion increase to “modernize” America’s Nuclear arsenal and delivery systems…..

President ‘Nuclear Free World’ Obama and the Tea Party have resurrected policies that led to America’s First Great Depression.

The FY 2012 budget for the National Nuclear Security Administration includes 7.6 billion for nuclear weapons research and production.

66 Years of Nuclear Insanity and Real Change will do US good, Eileen Fleming Salem-News.com (CLERMONT, Fla.) 8 August 11,  – This August 6th and 9th mark the 66th anniversaries of the most brutal acts of terrorism upon innocent people; America’s atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

It has been spun ad’nauseum those actions “saved thousands of American lives” but the Pentagon and White House knew that Japan was ready to surrender and all they wanted was to “save face” and retain their emperor.

But the Manhattan Project was the steamroller for the Industrial Military Complex Continue reading →

August 9, 2011 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

USA to spend $185 billion on nuclear weapons

How to Save a Quarter of a Trillion Dollars, HUFFINGTON POST, Lawrence Wittner, 8 Aug 11 In the midst of the current stampede to slash federal spending, Congress might want to take a look at two unnecessary (and dangerous) “national security” programs that, if cut, would save the United States over a quarter of a trillion dollars over the next decade.

The first of these is the Obama administration’s plan to spend at least $185 billion in the next ten years to “modernize” the U.S. government’s nuclear weapons arsenal. At present, the U.S. government possesses approximately 8,500 nuclear warheads, and it is hard to imagine that this country would be safer from attack if it built more nuclear weapons or “improved” those it already possesses. Indeed, President Barack Obama has declared — both on the 2008 campaign trail and as President – that he is committed to building a world without nuclear weapons. This seems like a perfectly sensible position — one favored by most nations and, as polls show, most people (including most people in the United States). Therefore, the administration should be working on securing further disarmament agreements — not on upgrading the U.S. nuclear arsenal in preparation for future nuclear confrontations and nuclear wars…….

by scrapping plans for nuclear weapons “modernization” and for national missile defense — programs that are both useless and provocative — the United States would save $271 billion (well over a quarter of a trillion dollars) in the next ten years. Whether used to balance the budget or to fund programs for jobs, healthcare, education, and the environment, this money would go a long way toward resolving some of the nation’s current problems.– …http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-wittner/budget-cuts-nuclear-missile_b_921157.html

August 9, 2011 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment