I am like a meteorologist for pant-shitting. Based on what I am seeing on the Tri-County Super Doppler Shit Radar, I have asked the National Weather Service, in cooperation with the Oversight Committee on Pantular Integrity, to issue a severe pant soiling watch for the next three days. As soon as Defense Secretary Gates announced some changes to our national nuclear strategy on Tuesday afternoon it was readily apparent that the forthcoming torrent of explosive wingnut diarrhea would have all of us seeking shelter and filling sandbags.
We can't show any weakness in front of the Russians!!!!!
111!!!
The changes are pretty prosaic, of course. The DoD will no longer pursue "next generation" nuclear technology, which essentially means smaller warheads made with more accessible materials. Imagine the horror of a world without the proliferation of smaller, cheaper nukes. We're also committing to refrain from using nuclear weapons against non-nuclear nations, although I'm sure the next Republican president will take care of that one. Overall the aim appears to be a more reasonably sized, less expensive stockpile rather than the Cold War-sized the-Russkies-are-acomin' arsenal on which we currently sit.
I mean, whatever nuclear threats we face would fall under the umbrella of terrorism, not World War III scenarios from Caspar Weinberger's wet dreams.
The funny thing about this is that the U.
buy Premarin generic buy Premarin online over the counter
S. doesn't really have a nuclear weapons infrastructure anymore. We outsourced that years ago. Bechtel, the privately-held "engineering services" company that exists solely off of Federal contracts (bang-up job on the Katrina trailers, champs!) has the nuclear arsenal. The DoD merely gets access to it. In theory.
As has been the case since the Manhattan Project, nuclear weapons are developed at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Los Alamos National Laboratory, neither of which is run by the Federal government. Both are operated under contract by Bechtel. Our nuclear materials and waste reprocessing takes place at the Hanford Site in Washington, the Y-12 Complex at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and the Savannah River Site in Georgia, which are run under contract by Bechtel, Bechtel, and Bechtel, respectively. Pantex, which is and always has been the nation's sole nuclear weapons assembly, maintenance, and disassembly facility, has been auctioned off to Bechtel (with an assist from Lockheed Martin, to whom Sandia National Laboratory was sold). And nuclear testing, which is all subcritical since the abandonment of nuclear testing in 1991, takes place at the vast Nevada Test Site controlled by…that's right. Congratulations, Bechtel, for being the first kid on your block to collect the entire industry.
You have to give the Boomers a little credit for consistency, though: when they decided to privatize everything, they didn't exclude the one government program they actually care about. Certainly the free market, and specifically a fiercely secretive, privately held conglomerate of former Bush/Reagan administration officials, can maintain a nuclear arsenal better than the military can.
Mudshark says:
You're retarded, right?
Zeb says:
Oh Mudshark, you make me laugh. Please write more comments.
Crystal says:
Yes, yes, our country's most deadly and horrific weapons are controlled by a single company owned, or at least controlled, by a cartel of amoral thieves. While our actual soldiers are out fighting wars which benefit, to the extent they benefit anyone, those same thieves or at least their thieving friends–with less in the way of quality equipment and support than they really need to do their jobs effectively. This is news because…?
Jude says:
Also, hilariously, the money for the production and upkeep of nukes isn't in the DoD budget. It's stashed in the Department of Energy.
Bugboy says:
Is anyone ready to use the "F" word yet? That one some smart guy said would come wrapped in a flag and carrying a bible?
C says:
actually, considering all the recent failing assessments of the USAF's nuke command, Bechtel may actually be able to handle it better than the military.
Misterben says:
Actually, Crystal, it was news to me that ONE company controlled the ENTIRE nuclear infrastructure of the United States; WHICH company it was, was also news to me. Furthermore, I would be willing to bet real money that it was news to you, too.
I'm no peacenik, but I've never been able to wrap my head around the value of a nuclear arsenal. What is the point of a weapons system that will essentially trigger the end of the world if it's ever used? It's like we're the world's biggest suicide bomber. (The "deterrence" argument seems utterly contrived and phony to me. If we hadn't started the nuke race in the first place, there'd be no other nuclear powers to deter.)
Cassie says:
I really didn't realize the extent of private control over world-ending weapons. I just assumed places with the words "National Laboratory" that built bombs for the government would be controlled by, you know, the government. Silly me.
Pan Sapiens says:
Well, Bechtel is no dark secret to anyone who shows a casual interest in this topic. Since 1951, they've built more than half the world's reactors. They are building a whole of new fleet of reactors in China as we speak. In fact, they got the contract for the containment of Chernobyl, and all the containment bunkers for Russia's plutonium waste in Chelyabinsk. Not to mention the environmental remediations here in the US, including southeastern Idaho, which is, for the faint-of-heart, wow, a really fucked up landscape.
And I'd really love for the Boomers to take credit for all the nukes. You know, that average .5 picograms of plutonium in your bones? Ah, but shit. Credit where credit is due. Kudos to the Greatest generation.
Not that I'm worried. Life evolved in a radioactive universe. Your body kills off five, six cancers a day, easy. Hell, I got exposed in the womb during the worstof the atmospheric tests. The only thing that happened to me is now I can read our mind, and telekinetically explode your head. So fucking be nice!
Robert Bigger says:
You paint with a rather broad brush vis a vis the "boomers" don't you think?
Jimcat says:
Misterben posted: "If we hadn't started the nuke race in the first place, there'd be no other nuclear powers to deter."
There's no way to prove that, and reason would lead one to doubt it. The potential of nuclear fission was known at the beginning of the 20th century, and even without the race for superweapons in WWII (a huge counterfactual in itself), it's almost certain that some country would have seen the weapons potential. And once one started, no matter which one it was, others would have followed in order not to be outclassed.
Erin says:
I've liked the last two days here, T.eabagging A.sshole R.acist D.ingbats included.
Robert says:
Jimcat – good post. I'm reminded of the ongoing controversy (at least I think still ongoing) regarding Heisenberg's involvement in the German A-bomb research during WWII. Allegedly, he deliberately made it look less feasible than it really was, as he didn't want the Nazi regime having atomic weapons. Nice to think, whether it's true or not. A V2 with even a crude atom bomb could have a difference right about '44 or so.
Obscure tangent – according to a factoid rattling around in my brain, by the beginning of 1945, Germany was spending a larger fraction of its GDP on the Final Solution than the USA was spending on the Manhattan Project. It's fortunate for us (for a given value of 'us') that their priorities were in that order. Speaking just for myself, I'm glad the Allies won.
displaced Capitalist says:
True that Robert, but then again, the US never used nukes on the Third Reich so I guess we'll never know its affect on the European front.
neal says:
@Erin: your cute/creative acronym "T.eabagging A.sshole R.acist D.ingbats" assumes a lot, doesn't it? i'll even give you dingbat (though that's outright dismissive of another's point of view), but i've yet to see any evidence of teabagging or racism. and as of yet, you're the rudest commenter around, so perhaps the a-hole moniker ought to be reserved for you.
Rocketman says:
Well, I admit that I am a bitter boomer, but I do enjoy the rants. Unfortunately Ed, you got your facts wrong on this one. First, outsourcing the nuclear production capability began as far back as World War II and immediately afterwards (blame the greatest generation) when the government reached out to companies like AT&T and Dupont to build and manage Sandia and Savannah River respectively. This practice has been used at all DOE nuclear production sites since before I was born (1958). These management & operations contracts provide maximum flexibility for the companie to efficiently manage the infrastructure while operating under the direction of DOE. Sorry, but Bechtel really is not deciding what weapons to design, build, or destroy.
And, your list showing Bechtel running all of the sites is wrong. Bechtel is the managing partner for two sites–Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamost National Laboratory. Honeywell runs the Kansas City Plant. Northrop Grumman is the managing partner for the Nevada Test Site. URS is the managing partner for Savannah River. Pantex is run by Babcock & Wilcox. Sandia is indeed run by Lockheed. Hanford is completely shut down and being environmentally remediated. I didn't check, but I'm sure the contractor isn't Bechtel.
I'm certainly in favor of reducing the nuclear inventory, and I'm not lying awake worrying about the relatively minor changes in the new nuclear posture. I do think it would be smart to design and prepare to build next generation nukes since they aren't going awy any time soon.
Rocketman says:
Hanford's two M&O contractors are Fluor and CH2M Hill–they are reasonably peaceable engineering firms.
truth=freedom says:
@Jimcat: This doesn't necessarily diminish the value of the rest of your position, but fission was discovered only in 1938 (albeit by [Jewish in at least one case] Germans). It was only hypothesized as possible in 1934.
Nevertheless, fission was an extremely new fact, and the fact that enormous (possibly historically incomparable) resources were necessary to proceed to building a weapon in the time available based on the technology probably made it likely than only a few nations had the resources to contemplate the effort, never mind bring it to fruition in the midst of a war.
FWIW, if the rest of the political developments post-war had proceeded apace without the US having developed and used a nuclear weapon in WWII, I feel confident we would have had a nuclear war circa the Cuban Missile Crisis. Why? Curtis LeMay wouldn't have seemed so insane– no one would have known just how bad it would be, and some one would have pushed the button, which would likely have meant everyone pushing all their buttons.
All of which is to say: @Misterben: I think you're mistaken regarding deterrence. It is exactly because deterrence works through mutually assured destruction that you are correct to say that, "[i]t's like we're the world's biggest suicide bomber." Only "we" is anyone who starts a nuclear war with another nuclear power, and we aren't "like" the world's biggest suicide bomber– we *are* the worlds biggest suicide bomber.
The real question you have to ask yourself is, "would I submit to nuclear blackmail if I couldn't respond in kind?" If the answer is yes, then you may find yourself never understanding those of us who prefer the tension of possible conflagration to the reality of submission.
I'm not suggesting this is a perfect result. It isn't. It's just the least bad result given the cards in play. Someday, probably after my atoms have dispersed permanently, maybe we'll find a way to resolve this problem. Maybe it'll be through that dreaded one-world government (Oooh! Scary!). Maybe not.
Which brings me back to Ed's actual point: the Rs are *just* *sure* that if they look like their shitting their pants thoroughly enough, people will be scared of a change that will, 1) cost their political contributors a few bucks, 2) have no other meaningful result. Because, honestly, all this really says is we won't obliterate Venezuela, or Cuba, Somalia, or some other country full of brown-skinned folks no matter how much fun their juvenile troglodyte supporters might think it'd be when they get uppity. Iran and North Korea? Well, you just never know, now do you?
Elder Futhark (formerly Pan Sapiens) says:
@Rocketman,
I think Ed intentionally plays stupid for entertainment purposes. At least, that's what I'm going with.
Rocketman says:
Ed can't know everything, and I enjoy the site. One last note that should be mentioned. Livermore and Los Alamos were run by the University of Califormia for 40+ years under sole source (no bid contracts). The string of security breaches and other problems forced them into a minority role (under Bechtel) for the current management of the site. Let's make sure academia takes the hit as well.
bb in GA says:
In discussing the nuke situation in WW2, perhaps you have not heard of the "Heroes of Telemark" (Hollwood movie about in 1965) The Nazis had a heavy water plant in Norway that they were working on producing fissionable material with. Those Scandinavian rednecks blew that sucker up and set the Nazi nuke program back far enough that the war went North on 'em before they could recover. I assume Herr Hitler would have fried London with a nuke if he had succeeded, No? //bb
beau says:
Hi bb. Not trying to be antagonistic here, but wouldn't a nuclear strike on London mean fallout for (Nazi occupied) France, if not the rest of Greater Germany (pretty much Europe, from a nazi perspective)?
Jimcat says:
The above couple of posts are into the realm of alternative history, which is fun, but probably beyond the scope of this blog.
But remember that the "V" in V-1 and V-2 stood for "Vergeltungswaffe" or "weapons of retaliation". The objective at that point was not to win the war, but to make the Allies suffer as much as possible. In those last desperate months, it's possible that Hitler would have ordered just about anything.
Robert says:
Jimcat – hell, in those last desparate months, Hitler wanted the _Germans_ to suffer as much as possible.
Also, I don't think a Little Boy/Fat Man style fission bomb set off over London would spread much fallout to Germany Proper, and a few thousand coastal French or Dutch leukemia cases would not have distressed the German High Command all that much.
beau says:
Intelligent answers to stupid question. Cheers.