House halts funds for new nuclear warhead

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by identity-X, Jun 21, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Jun 16, 1999
    Shhh...don't tell Iran our the President's plans...

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday moved to block President George W. Bush from developing a new generation of atomic warheads, as Democratic and Republican opponents said the administration had not developed an adequate post-Cold War nuclear strategy.

    A fiscal 2008 bill funding Department of Energy weapons programs that is moving through the House provided none of Bush's nearly $89 million request for continuing to develop the new warheads over the next few decades at a multibillion-dollar cost.

    A vote on passing the overall bill was delayed until sometime after a July 4 holiday recess so lawmakers can review a series of unrelated projects that will be attached to the legislation.

    The bill, which faces a White House veto threat because it would spend $1.1 billion more than Bush requested, still must be debated by the Senate.

    "I don't think it is asking too much for a comprehensive nuclear strategy before we build a new nuclear weapon," said Rep. Peter Visclosky, the Indiana Democrat steering the money bill through the House.

    Rep. David Hobson, an Ohio Republican, also voiced opposition, saying that while "The concept of RRW (Reliable Replacement Warhead) has merit if it allows us to have a smaller stockpile of more reliable weapons ... all we have right now is a vague promise."

    The proposed warheads would replace some that are 30 years old and could deteriorate if not properly maintained. Some supporters of the new warhead argue that small changes might be needed to extend the life of the existing ones and that could lead to nuclear testing for the first time in more than a decade. They also say the large existing stockpile could be replaced with fewer, more efficient warheads.

    But opponents challenge assertions that testing would not be needed for the new warhead. They also say the existing stockpile could be maintained indefinitely and there is no military need for a new, costly weapon.

    A House Appropriations Committee report said that going ahead with the program also would present diplomatic problems because "of the U.S. policy position of demanding other nations give up their nuclear ambitions while the U.S. aggressively pursues a program to build new nuclear warheads."

    The Bush administration has been trying to pressure Iran to abandon a nuclear program that Tehran insists is aimed at energy production and not producing weapons. For a long time, the United States also has been cajoling North Korea to end its nuclear weapons program.

    In a statement last week, the White House said it "strongly opposes the committee's decision to eliminate funding for the Reliable Replacement Warhead." But it did not say Bush would veto the bill over this issue.

    Rep. Heather Wilson, a New Mexico Republican whose district includes the Sandia National Laboratories that works on nuclear weapons projects, called the House provision "devastating to American nuclear weapons capabilities" and said it was "rubbish" that the United States had not developed a post-Cold War strategy for nuclear weapons.

    The House bill would spend $5.9 billion on Energy Department weapons programs, $632 million below Bush's request and $396 million below this year's level. It would cut 37 weapons program accounts.

    The legislation would significantly increase nuclear nonproliferation activities, including money to secure nuclear weapons and materials in the former Soviet Union and to increase efforts to keep them from entering the United States.
  2. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Oct 13, 2004
    RRW's are created, so these nuclear warheads have to go somewhere.
    We could have a problem with our nuclear war-heads deterating.
    If that is the case, a could-be would become a we-need. Therefore, no place
    better to send RRW's than to America rather than them suspiciously finding
    their way to the Black market for enemy consumption.

    Oh and if you think I care if America looks hypocritical for not allowing
    IRAN a nuclear proliferation program inorder to destory Israel your wrong.


    Newsflash, Iran is fighting a proxy-war against american troops in Iraq by providing Revolutionary guards men and weapon Stock-piles mostly made up of Anti-tank missles and incendiary explosive devices sold to them years ago on the black market by the Russians and Chinese.

    What this really boils down to is hating the decision that these funds could go to improving weapons america may need in the future or instead going to help out jobless treasures with no healthcare who don't deserve it anyway just because wealthy Socialist pricks feel the system has put these poor people in their current Position do to their Race, class, and gender while my tax dollars are rasied and my income tax stolen from me inorder to pay for these worthless treasures like i'm their life support. WHY? because it's humane? Isn't it inhumane for these jobless teasures to rob me from putting food in my famlies mouth just because their weak, slothful, and allergic to work in some Psychological manner? What about the fact these parasites of our social-structure are weak useless bottom feeders with nothing left in them!!!!! I'm displaying some very very dark humor here.

    However seriously, Who are we to say our retrospective nukes couldn't deterate, Therefore we might need current nuclear war-heads? Or that these Nukes wouldn't help us Survive if some country who chants-death to america and Israel Like Iran does got their hands on these Nuclear war-heads because we couldn't.

    Never know once bush leaves office Hilary could take office next and Iran could be given nuclear proliferation and blow us all to hell, Because Hilary thought it was a Good show of faith to the rest of the world that America apologize for bush's Mistakes.

    It's something to think about.
  3. BeEgEe

    BeEgEe El Warm Shot

    Mar 1, 2001

    to much glen beck for you sir
  4. KingMenace

    KingMenace YOU MAD.

    Sep 27, 2004
    So we are building and constructing new warheads while we threat places like Iran because they dare to develope nuclear power for electricity and general power demands? Are Americans aware that some of the money allocated to fund our "soldiers" more accurately goes to arms manufacturers to defeat the restrictions that lead to the end of the cold war?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)