tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post856311738613673310..comments2023-08-27T06:53:36.768-06:00Comments on LANL: The Rest of the Story: Frank Younghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02134775226991383924noreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-2576597925296570432008-04-26T14:46:00.000-06:002008-04-26T14:46:00.000-06:004/26/08 1:30 PMAs of the May 2002, Treaty of Mosco...4/26/08 1:30 PM<BR/><BR/>As of the May 2002, Treaty of Moscow, i.e. the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT), between the United States and Russia, both countries are required to reduce their strategic nuclear arsenals to 1,700 - 2,200 operationally deployed warheads by 2012.<BR/><BR/>(www.nti.org/e_research/official_docs/inventory/pdfs/sort.pdf)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-73334625539471870922008-04-26T13:30:00.000-06:002008-04-26T13:30:00.000-06:001:07 pm: "There is no need for a buildup of the US...1:07 pm: "There is no need for a buildup of the US nuclear arsenal."<BR/><BR/>No one is talking about a "buildup." In case you don't know, the US has signed and ratified a treaty with Russia to reduce warheads to around 1700, which will be a very significant reduction from today's numbers, for both countries. No one is talking about junking that treaty. Get real. RRW and testing don't mean a "buildup." The earlier poster said "NW design and engineering is a dead business. Forever." THAT'S disarmament.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-17047881067743071182008-04-26T13:07:00.000-06:002008-04-26T13:07:00.000-06:00So, 9:55 PM, you equate not restarting underground...So, 9:55 PM, you equate not restarting underground testing or producing the RRW with US nuclear disarmament? How telling and how stupid.<BR/><BR/>We have thousands of good nukes in our strategic arsenal. Anyone who threatens the US can be evaporated from the face of the earth in a single afternoon. There is no need for a buildup of the US nuclear arsenal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-78808206512945679862008-04-25T21:55:00.000-06:002008-04-25T21:55:00.000-06:006:44 pm: "Poster 9:53/2:08 has no intellectual hon...6:44 pm: "Poster 9:53/2:08 has no intellectual honesty. He's an old dinosaur who just wants to keep the good times rolling for the nuclear weapons industry and uses fear-mongering in place of good, solid arguments."<BR/><BR/>Well, I'm only one of the two posters you think are the same (I'll leave it to you to guess which). It's not about "the good times rolling"; it's about the fact that nuclear nonproliferation has now completely failed. Any of the world's states that want nuclear weapons now have them or are about to have them. Nuclear disarmament by the US now would be suicide, which I suppose is what you want.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-61866079029095822522008-04-25T18:44:00.000-06:002008-04-25T18:44:00.000-06:00Both North Korea and Syria could be taken out with...Both North Korea and Syria could be taken out with less than a dozen US nukes. None of this makes a case for spending billions for RRW and starting up underground testing. <BR/><BR/>Poster 9:53/2:08 has no intellectual honesty. He's an old dinosaur who just wants to keep the good times rolling for the nuclear weapons industry and uses fear-mongering in place of good, solid arguments. <BR/><BR/>Next, I suppose he'll stoop to using the good ol' Mustang car analogy for our nuclear arsenal. Yeah, that's the ticket! US nukes are just like a mid-60's Mustang that has been sitting in a garage just waiting for someone to turn the key to see if it works. The public will easily swallow that whopper.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-83126836702397992052008-04-25T14:08:00.000-06:002008-04-25T14:08:00.000-06:00Director Michael R. Anastasio´s Statement before t...Director Michael R. Anastasio´s Statement before the U.S. Senate, April 16, 2008, page 8:<BR/><BR/>"Recent Los Alamos Threat Reduction Accomplishments<BR/><BR/>/---/<BR/><BR/>We rapidly and effectively supported the national response to the North Korean nuclear test. We provided the sole technical support from the Department of Energy at the Six-Party talks in Beijing on implementation of the North Korean denuclearization commitments."<BR/><BR/>/---/<BR/><BR/>But, this statement is outdated only 8 days later, April 24, 2008:<BR/><BR/>"Smoking Gun Images Of Syria Nuke Reactor?<BR/><BR/>Video Made By U.S. Intelligence Claims N. Korea <BR/>Secretly Helped Syria Build A Reactor, Which Was Nearly Operational.<BR/><BR/>Washington, April 24, 2008<BR/><BR/>(CBS/AP) The White House said Thursday that North Korea´s secret work on a nuclear reactor with Syria was "a dangerous and potentially destabilizing development for the world," raising doubts about Pyongyang´s intention to carry through with a promised disclosure of its nuclear activities.<BR/><BR/>Seven months after Israel bombed [September 6, 2007] the reactor, the White House broke its silence and said North Korea assisted Syria´s secret nuclear program and that the destroyed facility was not intended for "peaceful purposes."<BR/><BR/>The disclosure could undermine six-party negotiations to try to resolve the nuclear standoff with North Korea. The White House issued a two-page statement after lawmakers were given details about the reactor in a series of briefings on Capitol Hill. The White House said the International Atomic Energy Agency also was being briefed on the intelligence.<BR/><BR/>While calling North Korea´s nuclear assistance to Syria a "dangerous manifestation" of Pyongyang´s nuclear weapons program and its proliferation activities, the U.S. said it remained committed to the talks.<BR/><BR/>The administration said that after the reactor was damaged beyond repair, Syria tried to bury evidence of its existence.<BR/><BR/>"This cover-up only served to reinforce our confidence that this reactor was not intended for peaceful activities," White House press secretary Dana Perino said. "The Syrian regime must come clean before the world regarding its illicit nuclear activities."<BR/><BR/>CIA Director Michael Hayden, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley briefed lawmakers, who were shown a video presentation of intelligence information that the administration contends establishes a strong link between North Korea´s nuclear program and the bombed Syrian site. It included still photographs that showed a strong resemblance between specific features of the plant and the one near Yongbyon."<BR/><BR/>/---/<BR/><BR/>(www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/24/national/main4040170.shtml)<BR/><BR/>And further:<BR/><BR/>"Syria´s Covert Nuclear Reactor<BR/><BR/>This handout video produced by U.S. intelligence describes the "nuclear reactor Syria was building secretly" at Al Kibar. The video also claims N. Korea "assisted Syria´s covert nuclear activities."" (CBS News Video; 11:34)<BR/><BR/>And further:<BR/><BR/>"Korea Helps Syria Go Nuclear<BR/><BR/>Members of Congress are up in arms over ground-level photos just released by the Bush administration showing a North Korean nuclear reactor in Syria.<BR/><BR/>David Martin reports." (CBS News Video; 2:32)<BR/><BR/>(Key understanding post Cold War, post 9/11:<BR/><BR/>Assymetric Warfare, (Nuclear) Terrorism, Rogue States, Non-State Actors, Nonlinear, Unpredictable, Preemptive Strike, Rise of the Irrational, Globalization, et cetera.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-19735620847252989992008-04-25T08:29:00.000-06:002008-04-25T08:29:00.000-06:009:53, you are a jerk. You quoted half the 9:33's s...9:53, you are a jerk. You quoted half the 9:33's sentence about adversaries attacking the US in the belief that our stockpile would not function.<BR/><BR/>So, if you are so smart 9:53, explain how a nuclear deterrence is supposed to work against non-state adversaries. And be sure to tell the Pentagon your theory, because it will be news to them.<BR/><BR/>While you are at it, learn some intellectual honesty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-78904609802568998912008-04-24T21:53:00.000-06:002008-04-24T21:53:00.000-06:009:33 pm: Like I said, you obviously aren't aware o...9:33 pm: Like I said, you obviously aren't aware of the current state of "concern".<BR/><BR/>I am also amused that you think this is about somebody "attacking the US." In case you forgot, that already happened on Sept. 11, 2001.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-89566009356197714752008-04-24T21:33:00.000-06:002008-04-24T21:33:00.000-06:00bullshit. Nobody will attack the US in the hope t...bullshit. Nobody will attack the US in the hope that all the W76s won't fire, despite what Dick Morse says. Deterrence does not depend on 99% yield assurance. NW design and engineering is a dead business. Forever.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-77719013143872445842008-04-23T21:57:00.000-06:002008-04-23T21:57:00.000-06:008:02 pm: "Nuclear testing may resume in the US, bu...8:02 pm: "Nuclear testing may resume in the US, but it won't happen until at least another 20 years have passed and the military planners begin to get more concerned about our aging nukes."<BR/><BR/>I have no clue where you came up with "another 20 years" but you obviously aren't aware of the current state of "concern".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-131096541370326032008-04-23T20:02:00.000-06:002008-04-23T20:02:00.000-06:00Nuclear testing may resume in the US, but it won't...Nuclear testing may resume in the US, but it won't happen until at least another 20 years have passed and the military planners begin to get more concerned about our aging nukes. The current W-88 warhead is only 20 years old, so more time is required to build up a greater uncertainty factor. <BR/><BR/>When the uncertainty gets large enough, Congress will finally take action and we may see some very limited underground testing. This very limited testing will be negotiated between the US and the major nuclear powers and will come with clauses that strictly limit further nuclear weapons development.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-49430804619554396542008-04-22T21:49:00.000-06:002008-04-22T21:49:00.000-06:00Nuclear testing will return when 1) Iran tests; 2)...Nuclear testing will return when 1) Iran tests; 2) Pakistan tests again, under the new regime; 3) China makes a serious threatening move towards Taiwan; 4) North Korea tests again; 5) Russia tests again.<BR/><BR/>The latter is the most probable. Europe will be paralyzed, China will be horrified, and the US will, of course, blame itself, but will test nonetheless.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-7933163756267105362008-04-22T15:56:00.000-06:002008-04-22T15:56:00.000-06:004/22/08 12:00 PMMy objective was to outline a stra...4/22/08 12:00 PM<BR/><BR/>My objective was to outline a strategic rationale, (summarized as: (1) An outlived US voluntary test moratorium since 1992, (2) Technical, (3) Strategic, (4) Political, (5) Knowledge transformation, (6) Change of Worldview, (7) The long time scale without nuclear testing), for future nuclear testing, whenever needed in the near future, or the far future, and to understand the reasons why you can return to nuclear testing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-31248700788660883362008-04-22T12:00:00.000-06:002008-04-22T12:00:00.000-06:00Give it up, 5:32 PM. A return to underground test...Give it up, 5:32 PM. A return to underground testing will not happen, new RRW designed warheads will never go into production, and the weapon labs are set on a NNSA planned path of big downsizing. <BR/><BR/>It's not a pretty future for those who work at LANL, but it is what it is. Denial won't change a thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-2844187397646290162008-04-22T08:51:00.000-06:002008-04-22T08:51:00.000-06:00Statements by Mike Anastasio (LANL), Tom D´Agostin...Statements by Mike Anastasio (LANL), Tom D´Agostino (NNSA), George Miller (LLNL), Tom Hunter (SNL) can be found here:<BR/><BR/>1) www.lanl.gov/news/newsbulletin/pdf/Anastasio04_16_08.pdf<BR/><BR/>2) www.lanl.gov/news/newsbulletin/pdf/DAgostino04_16_08.pdf<BR/><BR/>3) www.lanl.gov/news/newsbulletin/pdf/Miller04_16_08.pdf<BR/><BR/>4) www.lanl.gov/news/newsbulletin/pdf/Hunter04_16_08.pdfAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-79189461627170628822008-04-20T17:32:00.000-06:002008-04-20T17:32:00.000-06:004/17/08 4:32 PM and 4/18/08 6:24 PM, I agree in yo...4/17/08 4:32 PM and 4/18/08 6:24 PM, I agree in your comments.<BR/><BR/>Reasons to address nuclear testing as of April 2008, post Cold War, post 9/11:<BR/><BR/>1) The US voluntary test moratorium since 1992 has outlived itself. (It has almost become like a NW Religion that only serve the enemy(s) as of April 2008.)<BR/><BR/>2) Technical: SSP, LEP, RRW, et cetera.<BR/><BR/>3) Strategic: Proof of nuclear superpower status.<BR/><BR/>4) Political: From policy of the weak to policy of the strong.<BR/><BR/>5) Knowledge transformation.<BR/><BR/>6) Change of Worldview: From Idealism to Realism.<BR/><BR/>7) The long time scale without nuclear testing: 2008 (16 years), 2012 (20 years), 2017 (25 years), 2022 (30 years), 2027 (35 years), 2032 (40 years), 2037 (45 years), 2042 (50 years), 2067 (75 years), 2092 (100 years) - the further you arrive on this time scale, without nuclear testing, the clearer it become that the voluntary test moratorium since 1992 doesn´t benefit US interest.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-62151944823935893342008-04-20T14:54:00.000-06:002008-04-20T14:54:00.000-06:009:44 am: I was simply trying to point out that the...9:44 am: I was simply trying to point out that the concern attributed to Sen. Feinstein: "she is very concerned about the national security implications of putting 500 unemployed weapon scientists on the street out at LLNL" applies to all Q cleared people, not just "weapon scientists."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-38728683131184743592008-04-20T14:20:00.000-06:002008-04-20T14:20:00.000-06:004/19/08 9:30 AMTo you actually.4/19/08 9:30 AM<BR/><BR/>To you actually.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-80329061609705651372008-04-20T09:44:00.000-06:002008-04-20T09:44:00.000-06:008:22, the statement was "weapon scientists", not e...8:22, the statement was "weapon scientists", not everyone who has a Q. If you want to include proven security failures like JQ, and everyone who has a Q in the "weapon scientists" category, feel free to do so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-17290132820864303872008-04-19T20:22:00.000-06:002008-04-19T20:22:00.000-06:006:52 pm: "Not all that many are really "weapon sci...6:52 pm: "Not all that many are really "weapon scientists"?"<BR/><BR/>Sorry, most have Q clearances and therefore potentialy, at least, have detailed weapon design information. They're all fair game for the foreign agents out there. Get a clue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-63142707153887214212008-04-19T18:52:00.000-06:002008-04-19T18:52:00.000-06:00"2:01 - Sen. Feinstein makes it very clear she is ..."2:01 - Sen. Feinstein makes it very clear she is no friend of nuclear weapons work. However, she is very concerned about the national security implications of putting 500 unemployed weapon scientists on the street out at LLNL."<BR/><BR/>Do these people know:<BR/><BR/>That not all the people at the Labs work on weapons?<BR/><BR/>Not all that many are really "weapon scientists"?<BR/><BR/>That LLNL's own media releases say most of those likely to be let go are in administrative and non-science and engineering areas?<BR/><BR/>Just amazing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-8930063773741837292008-04-19T17:40:00.000-06:002008-04-19T17:40:00.000-06:00Neither Sen. Dorgan nor Sen. Feinstein seem to hav...Neither Sen. Dorgan nor Sen. Feinstein seem to have much love for the weapon labs from the sound of that audio presentation. These Senators are the people who will be holding much of the political power after the next election. Yikes!!!<BR/><BR/>Also, I thought it was interesting when Sen. Feinstein questioned whether fired LLNL employees might be given jobs out at either LANL or SNL since these labs haven't yet had a big RIF. As if we don't already have enough budgetary problems out here at our New Mexico labs!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-232552634214584462008-04-19T09:30:00.000-06:002008-04-19T09:30:00.000-06:00Anonymous Anonymous said... 4/18/08 8:39 AM ...Anonymous Anonymous said...<BR/><BR/> 4/18/08 8:39 AM<BR/><BR/> Go away. The most pointless wasteful comment posted to this string.<BR/><BR/> Asshole<BR/><BR/> 4/18/08 9:32 PM<BR/><BR/>9:32,<BR/><BR/>8:39 seemed to be pretty much right on the mark. Does your last five-letter word refer to 8:39 or yourself?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-61598622506135474112008-04-19T00:15:00.000-06:002008-04-19T00:15:00.000-06:00(Pinky, please consider putting this post on the b...(Pinky, please consider putting this post on the blog's front page)<BR/><BR/><BR/>***** LISTEN TO THIS AUDIO *****<BR/><BR/>Audio from the Congressional Appropriations meeting held this week is now online. It is 2 hours and 21 minutes long. You can find it here:<BR/><BR/>----------------------------------<BR/>appropriations.senate.gov/Media/<BR/>2008_04_14_<BR/>Listen_to_the_April_16_<BR/>Energy_and_Water_Hearing.ram<BR/>----------------------------------<BR/><BR/><BR/>I would urge all staff at LANL to take the time to listen to it. You will find it very interesting.<BR/><BR/>In particular, you can safely skip the first hour and concentrate on the sections past the 1:00 HR mark.<BR/><BR/><BR/>* 1:05 - Sen. Feinstein discovers the the LLC profit fees for LLNL of $46 million are going to private companies. She seems to have known about the LLC but was unaware that the money was to go to private companies like Bechtel, Washington Group, etc. She is obviously upset on finding this out.<BR/><BR/><BR/>* 1:20 - Anastasio gives his talk (his voice has a warble quality to it; he sounds scared)<BR/><BR/><BR/>*** THIS SECTION BELOW IS CLASSIC! ***<BR/>* 1:44 - Sen. Dorgan asks Miller (LLNL) about the full cost for the LLNS LLC. Miller says the full annual cost is $130 million and you can hear Sen. Dorgan in the background suddenly gasp: "Geeze!!!" <BR/>**************************************<BR/><BR/>* 2:01 - Sen. Feinstein makes it very clear she is no friend of nuclear weapons work. However, she is very concerned about the national security implications of putting 500 unemployed weapon scientists on the street out at LLNL.<BR/><BR/><BR/>* 2:06 - Miller says health care costs at LLNL went up $47 million over the previous UC costs with the creation of the new LLC (!!!!)<BR/><BR/><BR/>* 2:14 - Sen. Feinstein attacks D'Agostino for his comments<BR/><BR/><BR/>In general, there is a lot of discussion during the second half regarding concerns about the loss of science at the labs. All the Senators seem concerned about it and want to hear answers from NNSA. The Senators are also very angry and concerned about the quickly rising costs brought about by the creation of the LLCs. It is also clear that the Senators feel that the staff layoffs that have been occurring are largely being driven by the new LLC fees and they are not happy about it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-55223599834936527722008-04-18T21:39:00.000-06:002008-04-18T21:39:00.000-06:00"Good grief; your spelliing is bad."Your proofread..."Good grief; your spelliing is bad."<BR/><BR/>Your proofreading is worse!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com