Two US Labs Race To Build Next Nuclear Bomb For US (lt)

[Secret Azn Man]

Tue Jun 13, 2:26 PM ET
LOS ANGELES - The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the San Francisco Bay area and the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico are competing to design the nation's first new nuclear bomb in two decades.

Scientists at both facilities are working around the clock on plans that will be presented to the Nuclear Weapons Council, a federal panel that oversees the nation's nuclear weapons. The council will choose a winner later this year.

"I have had people working nights and weekends," said Joseph Martz, the head of the Los Alamos design team. "I have to tell them to go home. I can't keep them out of the office."

Congress approved the new bomb, known as the reliable replacement warhead, with bipartisan support in 2005 as part of a defense spending bill. The weapon would, by law, have the same explosive power as existing warheads.

Proponents of the project say the U.S. would lose its so-called "strategic deterrent" unless it replaces its aging arsenal of about 6,000 bombs, which will become potentially unreliable within 15 years. A new, more reliable weapon, they say, would help the nation reduce its stockpile.

Critics say the project could trigger a new arms race with Russia and China, and undercut arguments that countries such as Iran and North Korea must stop their nuclear programs.

The United States and Russia signed a treaty in 2002 calling for the countries to each cut nuclear inventories to between 1,700 and 2,200 warheads by 2012.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060613/...mb_competition

After reading this article, what do you guys think? Two United States labs are competing to create the first next-generation nuclear bombs. Metal Gear REX ain't got shit on these.

Personally, I don't like it. I mean, true, we ended World War II with nuclear bombs but pretty much everyone agreed that such weapons of mass destruction should never be used again. Yeah, you can argue that nuclear capable countries only developed nuclear armaments as a deterrent against attacks, but as the article states, if the US is building newer, more advanced nuclear weapons, you think the other super powers are gonna sit there and let the US have the sole advantage? Of course not. You know they're gonna try to do the same and we're gonna have another arms race and possibly another cold war.

At the moment, ironically, none of the super powers really want to openly go to war with each other due to for the most part, nuclear weapons and the imminent mutual destruction caused by these weapons. But if one super power gains a significant tactical military advantage, you know this uneasy truce will destabilize.

Now I'm well aware of a possible arms race already occurring now. I mean
it is not unexpected to see Russia and China secretly building their own advanced nuclear armaments for the same strategic advantage we, the US are doing. So, yes, in this particular issue, I suppose it is a necessary evil. IF, Russia and China are building advanced nuclear bombs and missiles, which realistically, should be assumed.

However, are nuclear armaments the only effective deterrent against attacks? I mean, look at Japan or Singapore. You know they don't have nuclear weapons or even a significant military. Yet, no country is stupid enough to declare a war on these country. It's political and economical suicide. If for example North Korea attacks Japan, which it can, the entire international community will not tolerate it. Not only could allies attack North Korea in retribution, but all political relations, economic trades will be cut off to NK. North Korea will die if it manages to survive the retaliation and fail whatever reason it had for attacking Japan. The same can be said if the blatantly United States attacks another country without no real reason.

Now what about the other points that critics have raised in the article? If the United States is urging North Korea and Iran to cease their nuclear programs, how the Hell do you think that looks when at the same time we're building more advanced nuclear bombs?

I don't know about Iran, but North Korea pretty much is only trying to create nuclear weapons as a deterrent. They haven't shown any intentions of attacking the US. North Korea is just scared. They just want to reunite with South Korea and be left alone. As a communist state, they feel the US and the world will try to interfere and bully against them from reuniting and turning South Korea into a Communist state. There's no denying that NK hates the US. But only because they feel that the US is a Capitalist Imperial bully throwing its weight around, butting into people's businesses, spreading Capitalism and Democracy with disregard to whether or not other countries want them. Whether or not that's true, getting the world to put pressure on NK to cease developing what it feels is its only means of deterrent against a US invasion and turning NK into a puppet democratic government as they feel that Japan, Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea, and attempted to do on South Vietnam, calling NK an "Axis of Evil," all while building bigger, better, nuclear bombs, does NOT help dissuade NK from seeing otherwise. This "do as I say and not as I do" message is not what we should be sending.

Finally, once we build these advanced nuclear bombs, who are we gonna use it on? Like I said, no super powers including the United States really wants to go to war with another super power. Many believe in the future, wars will not be fought among nations. Meaning the US won't or can't go into war with another country. Instead, wars will be fought against a more smaller, less tangible enemy such as radical groups and terrorists, who will NOT be deterred by nuclear retaliation because we can't use them. The latest conflicts the US are involved with already shows that. We're not at war against Iraq or Afghanistan. But we're fighting in their land. Such wars requires more surgical strikes, not strikes that can destroy entire regions. No nation will ever allow nuclear weapons be used on their soil. Not without consequences.

Any way I look at it, I see no real positives in doing this; in creating more advanced weapons of mass destruction.

It's your turn now. What do you guys think? Is this a good idea or a bad idea?

[OnOneRyder]

America is like the big kid down the block who secretly knows the combonation to his dads gun locker so no one on the street ****s with him. I'm not in fear that N. Korea, China or Iran will cause mass devisation, I'm terrified the US will justify using a nuke because of another 9/11 type incident and provoke one of these countries into using them because they just killed hundred's of thousands of innocent lives.

The US government is what I believe to be our most likely cause of mass deaths on our planet (millions). Global warming or a meteor will obviously cause huge casualties at some point, but the US has the means to end all unsheltered human life in a matter of months. And if comes down to war, I'm not so sure it won't happen.

I'm not saying the US is going to unleash 6000 nukes, but what is the point of having 6000 nukes to begin with? Wars have been stoped with a single 10cent bullet.