Nuclear Technology Countdown 2030
Department of Energy seeks to implement Complex 2030 weapons goals
The US Department of Energy via the National Nuclear Security Administration proudly moves forward on a plan to implement a new and dangerous future, earmarked for 2030.
It's hardly a surprise that the world is going through a nuclear revolution of some sort. What with constant news, actions, reactions and confusion coming from Iran and from those otherwise interested in the use or abuse of all the atom as a "friend" or "foe." But lest anyone forget, not all changes and challenges are coming from those garbed in evil. The US, under a blueprint developed by the National Nuclear Security Administration within the Department of Energy (http://www.nnsa.doe.gov/index.htm) is in the process of exploring ways to upgrade its weapons arsenal by using technology as a cover for making more sophisticated and, some say, easier to use destructive potentials. And in this day and age that bodes poorly for a warring mentality being guided, if nothing else, by the actions or inactions of the US.
Complex 2030, with component proposals such as the Reliable Replacement Warheads, is an effort by the Bush Administration to have it both ways when it comes to future atomic designs and delivery systems. Knowing that they are prohibited from certain desired moves-such as creating totally new weapons that would need to be tested in someway-government experts have found a way to convince themselves that they can continue to use and even make better core elements under the guise of making existing stockpiles longer lasting, safer and, at least to some degree, capable of inflicting a whole new generation of destructiveness through full-scale tactical (battlefield) uses as opposed to grander strategic (deterrence) uses.
Upgrading old weapons to the point where they bear little resemblance to their past relatives sounds good when cloaked in term of enhance safety and security. We love to find out that our next software "upgrade" is actually much handier than the past version!
But these changes are deceptive. Our security systems to date have been effective at keeping such weapons safe (as far as we know) from theft or terrorist manipulation-at least within the US. But what happens when these improved weapons find themselves in the hands of individual soldiers or units being asked to guide them with much greater precision to smaller targets? Might not we simply be making them more available to all the "good" or "bad" forces that find themselves dresses in war-making garb?
Leading military and political experts the concerns are enormous. A recent Wall Street Journal opinion piece suggests no less with these cautionary thoughts: "Nuclear weapons were essential to maintaining international security during the Cold War because they were a means of deterrence. The end of the Cold War made the doctrine of mutual Soviet-American deterrence obsolete. Deterrence continues to be a relevant consideration with regard to threats from other states. But reliance on nuclear weapons for this purpose is becoming increasingly hazardous and decreasingly effective." And these are the opinions of people like George Shultz and Henry Kissinger.
At the same time, the underlying moral issues have not escaped the notice of the guardians of our spiritual morality. Thousands of faithful congregants and religious leaders of many denominations have presented their case on the pages of FaithfulSecurity.org, calling into question the entire underlying foundation for weapons escalation at all. As Rev. William Sloane Coffin Jr. put it in a 2005 Call To Action in this regard: "When the cold war ended, many thought the nuclear danger had ended with it. It did not, and now, having assumed a more sinister shape, it is mounting again. Scores of admirals and generals from many countries have come to believe that nuclear weapons invite far more than they deter catastrophic conflict. They agree that the possession of nuclear weapons by some states is the strongest incentive for other states to acquire them."
Yet, under the shroud of all-technology-improvements-are-good-improvements, the US continues in a venture to seriously redefine our nuclear future. Be faithful to your own thoughts and see what others have to say about a moral basis in our FaithfulSecurity.org.
