Reply to: Apocalypse Now

[wendigo100]

ALM - As I said to Ladymuck earlier, that you cannot uninvent the nuclear bomb. Therefore it would be silly not to maintain your own arsenal while there is a reasonable possibility of a potential enemy obtaining them and holding them against you.

LM - You are delving deep into conspiracy theories. Nobody is in any doubt where you stand on this by the way you earlier completely mis-represented the effect of these tests.

If you have any equipment, whether it it is a nuclear bomb, a fire engine, or a bouncy castle, the professional thing to do is monitor and test it. We soon jump on any lapses at Sellafield. Sure there have been very few problems so far, if any, but that doesn't mean there never will be. Tony Blair hasn't had cancer yet, but that doesn't mean that he is immune.

[Dundeegeorge]

And if there were no nuclear weapons

and the middle-east could somehow find a path to peace and black, and white men could live in peace and harmony......
you're still going to die, so what the **** does it matter?

[ladymuck]

That wasn't really nuclear testing, was it. It was a subcritical test. No nuclear explosion. Subcritical tests are carried out to investigate the safety and reliability of old weapons.

Furthermore, they are carried out underground, and would hardly register at the desert surface, let alone blow up huge swathes [sic] of it.

<sigh>
Subritical tests are a loophole in the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, involving shocking plutonium with explosives. You are correct that there is no nuclear explosion (my comment about blowing up deserts being in a different post).

Such a 'test' can be used to aid in the development of nuclear weapons and sends completely the wrong message to the rest of the world. The CND certainly believe that the test was not purely for safety purposes.

In May 1996 the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research released a report which showed that there has not been a single aging-related nuclear safety problem in the U.S. arsenal and that nuclear safety problems arose in the context of warhead design, not aging, despite the DoE maintaining they are required to ensure the reliability and safety of the stockpile they are supposed to be disarming.

Very few people get to hear about these tests. I wonder why?

[ALM]

That wasn't really nuclear testing, was it. It was a subcritical test. No nuclear explosion. Subcritical tests are carried out to investigate the safety and reliability of old weapons.

Furthermore, they are carried out underground, and would hardly register at the desert surface, let alone blow up huge swathes [sic] of it.

I think you might be arguing technicalities and missing the general point of the mucky lady. Do you not think it is slightly hypocritical on our part to object to other nations acquiring nukes when we ourselves already posses and plan on spending £billions more on developing new arsenals?

Sure, if we could have everything our way we would be the only power in the world which held nukes. That would be very nice indeed but how realistic is this aspiration? How long can we keep this cat in the bag? How many nations are we realistically supposed to police and go to war with in order to prevent proliferation? I'm not sure whether Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons or not but it must look at it's neighbours, Pakistan and India, and observe that not only have they acquired the ultimate insurance policy against invasion but also command a great deal more respect and political clout in the international community since doing so.

IMO as long as the US continues it's aggressive foreign policy, nations (especially in the oil rich middle east) will seek to develop nukes more in defence than attack.

[wendigo100]

So nuclear testing in the Nevada desert in Feb had nothing to do with the US? Hmm...

That wasn't really nuclear testing, was it. It was a subcritical test. No nuclear explosion. Subcritical tests are carried out to investigate the safety and reliability of old weapons.

Furthermore, they are carried out underground, and would hardly register at the desert surface, let alone blow up huge swathes [sic] of it.

[threaded]

definitely.

But everyone knows I try and spell definately wrong in tribute to some anal type at the PCG who used to get upset about it.

Other words are fair game tho'

[Gold Dalek]

Ain't Google great!

After the disintegration of the USSR, Ukraine found itself in possession of the world's third largest nuclear arsenal. There were 176 launchers of intercontinental ballistic missiles with some 1,240 warheads on Ukrainian territory. This force consisted of 130 SS-19s, each capable of delivering six nuclear weapons, and 46 SS-24s, each armed with ten nuclear weapons. An additional 14 SS-24 missiles were present in Ukraine, but not operationally deployed with warheads. Several dozen bombers with strategic nuclear capabilities were armed with some 600 air-launched missiles, along with gravity bombs. In addition, as many as 3,000 tactical nuclear weapons rounded out an arsenal totalling approximately 5,000 strategic and tactical weapons.
From the first days of its independent development, Ukraine affirmed three basic principles -- not to accept, manufacture or acquire nuclear weapons. The West remained concerned with the nuclear aspects of Ukraine's problems with weapons proliferation. Western sensitivity over nuclear issues convinced Ukraine's leaders that they could influence the West by using the nuclear lever.


The Declaration on State Sovereignty adopted by the Parliament of the Ukrainian SSR on 16 July 1990 defined the building of the army as a major task and a natural right of the future Ukrainian independent state. By announcing the right to maintain its own army, Ukraine took a significant step toward independence from the USSR. The military coup in Moscow in August 1991 and fears that Soviet troops on Ukraine's territory would act aggressively against the Ukrainian state led the official leadership in Kiev to subordinate these troops to the control of Ukrainian authorities. Ukraine also announced as its own the Soviet military property on the soil of the newly independent state.

Ukraine initially announced its intention to obtain operational control over the strategic nuclear weapons deployed in its territory. Responding to these intentions, Russian military officials responded that attempts to interfere with, or to damage the command and control systems of, Russian strategic troops located abroad would constitute a direct military threat to Russian Federation.

Originally Ukrainian leader Leonid Kravchuk was "not worried" if nuclear weapons went to Russia for decommissioning. Gradually, however, his worries developed sufficiently to lead to him to reverse his position and on 12 March 1992 to suspend temporarily the transfer of tactical nuclear weapons to Russia. However, in conformity with the 16 July 1990 "Declaration of State Sovereignty" and other agreements signed at the creation of the CIS, by May 1992 Ukraine voluntarily removed all tactical nuclear weapons [approximately 3000] inherited from the former Soviet Union.


The trilateral agreement signed in Moscow on 14 January 1994 by the United States, Russia, and Ukraine was seen as a significant Western success in disarming Ukraine of nuclear weapons. Under the agreement, the Russian Federation undertook to send 100 tons of fuel to Ukraine for its nuclear-power plants. The United States agreed to pay $60 million to the Russian Federation in support of that process. For its part, Ukraine agreed to transfer 200 nuclear warheads over a 10-month period.

As of May 1994, 120 SS-19 Stiletto and 60 SS-24 Scalpel intercontinental ballistic missiles had been shipped out of Ukraine for reprocessing in Russia.
Ukraine announced in June 1996 that all warheads bad been removed from the country. A problem arose in the removal of SS-19s, which use large amounts of a toxic substance known as heptyl. The United States sent storage tanks to hold 2,200 metric tons of the substance. After the SS-19 missiles were removed from combat duty, 19 were re-used in Russia.

In May 1997 Ukraine agreed to destroy its SS-24 missiles, in addition to SS-19 missiles, silos and launch sites, utilizing $47 million provided through the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction program. Withdrawal from combat duty of the SS-24 (RS-22) missiles started on 01 July 1998. Complete liquidation of intercontinental ballistic missiles in Ukraine is planned to be completed by 04 January 2001. In September 1998 a US Department of Defense delegation, headed by Assistant Secretary of Defense Edward Warner, took part in the decommissioning of a SS-24 silo launcher in Pervomaisk, the Nikolayev region, Ukraine. The Pervomaisk base comprises 46 silos with SS-24 solid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missiles. Decommissioning of a single silo launcher is estimated to cost about US$ 1 million, and the US Government is allocating a total of US$399.2 million. The Bechtel company is the main contractor in the decommissioning program of the Ukrainian silo launchers.


Ukraine inherited about 30 percent of the Soviet military industry, which included between 50 and 60 percent of all Ukrainian enterprises, employing 40 percent of its working population. Ukraine was, and remains, the leader in missile-related technology, especially guidance systems, navigation electronics for combat vessels and submarines, and radar for military jets. Strong competition in the world's weapons market forced Ukraine to look into exporting arms to politically unstable or even aggressive regimes. Ukraine established its own network for arms export and, in so doing, did not fully recognize international rules and bans.

The Ukrainian military traded conventional arms on the black market and signed contracts with commercial firms. The first contracts on weapons deliveries to Iran, signed in the middle of 1992, and caused negative reaction in the West (particularly in the US).

[Fleetwood]

definitely.

[threaded]

"Desperately trying to break the launch codes" Definately sounds like a management issue. If they'd asked the techies they could have just hot wired them. I mean, it ain't exactly rocket science.

[Gold Dalek]

If my Dalek memory serves me well .. at the time of the USSR breakup the Ukraine was deperately trying to break the launch codes on the nukes left behind and based in Ukraine because control = ownership

The West was desperately trying to stop them attempting to do this offering large amounts of wonga to give up the nukes to the West

It all went quiet so I'm assuming either the west bought them or they could not crack the codes but sold the missiles anyway

[ladymuck]

They do make some good deserts though.

Creme brulee! Yummy yum yum!

[VectraMan]

Blowing up deserts and atolls? Ah, then it's the French you want, not the US.

Bloody French. They use our motorways for free, yet we have to pay for their atolls.

They do make some good deserts though.

[ladymuck]

Blowing up deserts and atolls? Ah, then it's the French you want, not the US.

So nuclear testing in the Nevada desert in Feb had nothing to do with the US? Hmm...

[wendigo100]

Why do you still need to blow up atolls and huge swathes of desert? That was the general point I was aiming at.

Blowing up deserts and atolls? Ah, then it's the French you want, not the US.

[Central-Scrutiniser]

I think we should invade Iran and search for the warheads.

Doubleplusgood

Can I interest you in a postition with the Ministry Of Peace