Labs compete to make new nuclear bomb

[deadparrot]

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.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/nuclear_bomb_competition

[endarkenment]

1. In direct violation of our obligations under the NPT.

Yet another impeachable offense by the cabal.

[seriousstan]

3. Could you show me exactly where it is a violation?

http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/text/inf153.html
http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/text/index.html

[sweetheart]

5. Right here:

Declaring their intention to achieve at the earliest possible date the cessation of the nuclear arms race and to undertake effective measures in the direction of nuclear disarmament,

There is no genuine effort to disarm, none whatsoever. The treaty is become a farce.

[endarkenment]

7. thanks that is it exactly

The Bush administration reversed ten years of progress on disarmament in direct violation of the npt.

[katty]

10. absolutely-a blatant F/U to the treaty and thus, the world

[MrPrax]

8. Preamble, Article 6

Can't read?

[Teaser]

11. Dag! You got schmacked!

nt

[Rex]

13. Right here

Article VI

Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.

[uppityperson]

2. Does this mean UN sanctions? Bringing the War against Terror Home!

Isn't this against the anti-new-nuc agreement?

[struggle4progress]

16. It means the "Iran! Nukes!" noise is a smokescreen for US nuke development

[saigon68]

4. Wait til these Nukes are dropped

[oneighty]

6. Curious

Plutonium, Tritium, Deuterium are going to decay over a period of of time no matter what.

It is my understanding that is the reason why the older in stock weapons are not known to be completely reliable after years of natural decay.

180

[daleo]

17. Why would they have to design a new weapon though?

It should be sufficient to just build some more according to the old specs if it is only a matter of reliability. A brand new design certainly seems to go against the U.S. NPT promise to disarm.

[katty]

9. U.S. hypocrisy on display-Nukes for U.S.-but NO Nukes for you!!

[nealmhughes]

12. I thought we and Sakharov had pretty much got it down pat by now.

How much finnesse does one need for an H-bomb?

[htuttle]

14. I think the problem is that they aren't expensive enough yet

[atomic-fly]

15. I give up....time for these guys to pay is a visit.

[Vidar]

18. The criminial nation surges forth in all its shame.

[saigon68]

19. The seven headed monster ready for the rapture

[NuttyFluffers]

20. a kinder, gentler doomsday device? aww, how thoughtful!

and here i was losing sleep wondering if they could ever improve on a stupendously horrifying weapon of mass destruction.

that pina colada by the beach sounds better and better each day...