MrFirst

by Staff Writers
Washington (AFP) Jan 6, 2007
The United States is expected to announce next week a major step forward in the building of the country's first new nuclear warhead in nearly two decades, The New York Times reported on its website Saturday. The newspaper said the US government will propose combining elements of competing designs from two weapons laboratories in an approach that some experts argue is untested and risky.

The new weapon would not add to but replace the nation's existing arsenal of aging warheads, with a new generation meant to be sturdier, more reliable, safer from accidental detonation and more secure from theft by terrorists, the report said.

The announcement, to be made by the interagency Nuclear Weapons Council, avoids making a choice between the two designs for a new weapon, called the Reliable Replacement Warhead, which at first would be mounted on submarine-launched missiles, The Times said.

The effort, if approved by President George W. Bush and financed by Congress, would require a huge refurbishment of the nation's complex for nuclear design and manufacturing, with the overall bill estimated at more than 100 billion dollars, the report said.

But the council's decision also raises the question of whether the United States will ultimately be forced to end its moratorium on underground nuclear testing to make sure the new design works, The Times pointed out.

On Friday, Bryan Wilkes, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration of the Energy Department, said the government would not proceed with the Reliable Replacement Warhead "if it is determined that testing is needed," the paper said.

But other officials in the administration, including Robert Joseph, the under secretary of state for arms control and international security, have said that the White House should make no commitment on testing, according to the report.

If Bush decides to deploy the new design, he could touch off a debate in a Democrat-controlled Congress and among allies and adversaries abroad, who have opposed efforts to modernize the arsenal in the past, The Times said.

At a time when the administration is trying to convince the world to impose sanctions on North Korea and Iran to halt their nuclear programs, critics argue, any move to improve the US arsenal will be seen as hypocritical, the paper pointed out.

Source: Agence France-Presse

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_T...rhead_999.html

joey2

lol 100 billion for a warhead

gamercube

Isn't that against the NPT, in which the P5 agreed to make "good faith negotiations to ultimately aim for nuclear disarmament?"

__________________
Hasta la Victoria siempre!

highsea

On what grounds?

The US nuclear arsenal is set by treaty. If we choose to replace aging warheads with a safer and more secure one, who cares? These things do have a shelf live, you know.

Yeah, Joey. It's all for one warhead. Don't you know we're rich? We Americans all light our cigars with $100 bills and drive $60,000 gas-guzzling SUV's...

__________________
My baby called me up. She said- Why don't you ever take me out? Pick me up in your brand new car....You shake the short change from the old fruit jar...

Shipwreck

LOL

__________________
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God" (Matthew 5:9)

gunnut

Wow where do you find one that cheap?

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

highsea

Well gunnut, I ordered it without floormats.

You see, I knew I was going to have custom floormats made from the skins of animals off the endangered species list anyway, so I thought I would save a little money up front.

Archer

Thats just because you went and got floormats made out of cuddly pandas and endangered civets for the undersea submersible hidden beneath your boat.

Ooops!

But seriously, the US is rich, its all relative.

__________________
Karmani Vyapurutham Dhanuhu

My bow is stretched for its task

highsea

That's necessary sound-deadening. I had to install it preparatory to my planned invasion of Canada.

(I'm returning Celine Dion )

xrough

But the irony is that US campaigning to disarm other countries but then they are upgrading themselves..so how do you think they can convince the NK's to disarm?or the Iranians to stop the enrichment?

usplanefan67

Why do you think we are upgrading, Russia just did and I dont hear any of you guys saying anything bad about them doing it, or are the russians the only ones able to upgrade and maintain their nukes. Keep in mind we arent adding just upgrading what we have, which is totally different from what the Iranians and Nk's are doing.

rickusn

"Russia just did and I dont hear any of you guys saying anything bad about them doing it."

Nor will you ever because the international community for the most part is scared to death of the Russians(even their so-called allies) not the US.

And therefore the US is seen as an easy mark and open game for all sorts of insane nonsense.

Not to mention the US is to blame for every problem in the world. BS of course.

And if it wasnt for the US this world would be far,far different and not for the better either but how soon they all conveniently forget that little fact.

But its always the same on these discussion forums.

omon

$100 b that sounds like a lot of money, how much usd is there in the world at all, does anyone know?

glyn

__________________
Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

Major Dad

Tritium has a half-life of 12.3 years and is used in the triggers of nuclear weapons.

__________________
The more I think about it, ol' Billy was right.
Lets kill all the lawyers, lets kill 'em tonight.
- The Eagles