Check it out man, I just got the latest Nukes

Original AP By SCOTT LINDLAW
Mar. 2, 2007— he Bush administration selected Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's design for a new generation of atomic warheads, two officials familiar with the decision said Friday.

The decision, to be announced later in the day, came a year after the administration ordered a competition between Lawrence Livermore near San Francisco and Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because it had not been formally announced.

more:
abcnews.go.com...

Now we will have a new and improved way to blow are selves to kingdome come.

Lets just hope that not everyone is trying to get the new Nike Air "Nukes"

It fascinates me how people will spend time and money making better weaponry... rather than findng a way to colonize other planets. Or travel the universe.

"lets travel the universe", "no, I'd rather build a better bomb to blow the sh*t out of my future enemy, whoever that lucky country might be"

I both agree and disagree. While everyeon wants to find out more about the universe and is anxious to learn about it, we still need to build better weaponry so that were not overpowered by other countries if a nuclear war should break out.

Sorry but if or when a Nuclear War breaks out, there will not be a country left to over power another.
My fear is that we (US) use low yield nukes in Iran, which will open the door for other countries to use them, Russia against the Chechnyans, Chinese against Taiwanese, eventually leading to all out war and M.A.D.

Originally posted by Maniac1548
I both agree and disagree. While everyeon wants to find out more about the universe and is anxious to learn about it, we still need to build better weaponry so that were not overpowered by other countries if a nuclear war should break out.

So much money spent on but a single warhead, That will most likely never be used, Yet so many poor die every day in this country do to lack of food and shelter, So many live in poverty.

Originally posted by C0le
So much money spent on but a single warhead, That will most likely never be used, Yet so many poor die every day in this country do to lack of food and shelter, So many live in poverty.

Too true my friend. I am afraid that is something I can never fully understand about governments such as you have in the USA.

I recently watched the BBC 2's 'Top Gear' where our intrepid presenters had to purchase a vehicle in the USA for $1000 or less and drive from Florida to New Orleans.

When they eventually got to New Orleans, they could not believe that the place had not been rebuilt a year after 'Katrina' had hit.

In this case, the money being spent on nuclear weapons, would have a better use in the rebuilding of New Orleans!

Originally posted by fritz

Originally posted by C0le
So much money spent on but a single warhead, That will most likely never be used, Yet so many poor die every day in this country do to lack of food and shelter, So many live in poverty.

Too true my friend. I am afraid that is something I can never fully understand about governments such as you have in the USA.

I recently watched the BBC 2's 'Top Gear' where our intrepid presenters had to purchase a vehicle in the USA for $1000 or less and drive from Florida to New Orleans.

When they eventually got to New Orleans, they could not believe that the place had not been rebuilt a year after 'Katrina' had hit.

In this case, the money being spent on nuclear weapons, would have a better use in the rebuilding of New Orleans!

The place is still a war zone. Its hilarious that any people in the country still believe that the government will help them in any way if it were to happen in their part of the U.S. That should have been a huge warning sign telling people your on your own if something happens.

Originally posted by leafer

Originally posted by fritz

Originally posted by C0le
So much money spent on but a single warhead, That will most likely never be used, Yet so many poor die every day in this country do to lack of food and shelter, So many live in poverty.

Too true my friend. I am afraid that is something I can never fully understand about governments such as you have in the USA.

I recently watched the BBC 2's 'Top Gear' where our intrepid presenters had to purchase a vehicle in the USA for $1000 or less and drive from Florida to New Orleans.

When they eventually got to New Orleans, they could not believe that the place had not been rebuilt a year after 'Katrina' had hit.

In this case, the money being spent on nuclear weapons, would have a better use in the rebuilding of New Orleans!

The place is still a war zone. Its hilarious that any people in the country still believe that the government will help them in any way if it were to happen in their part of the U.S. That should have been a huge warning sign telling people your on your own if something happens.

No, my friend, I don't think so. It just illustrates to me at least, that the USA is still racist at heart because let's face the facts - if New Orleans was an upper middle class white suburban city, it would have been rebuilt months ago.

Instead of spending untold $Billions on defence, nuclear weapons and black ops, if the Administration took just $1 per head from every citizen in the USA that is in full time work, New Orleans would probably be rebuilt by now.

Instead of playing the world's policeman, the USA needs to get it's own house in order.

How much more powerfull do we need nuclear warheads to be.

Didn't we already have the power to turn the Earth into Mars back in the 80's under Reagan?

Why do we need more powerful warheads.

I could see updating the systems, etc. to make them safer to store,etc

But all and all what the point.

It's not about being more powerful. It's about meeting the long-desired goal of a "wooden warhead", one that you can put away and not need to maintain actively.

Current warhead designs require maintenance about once a year. Each and every one. And that maintenance requires tritium, which we don't actively make at the moment. We recycle all we can, but there's a limit.

There's been some talk about restarting a tritium producing reactor. We've been buying it from Canada for the most part when we needed extra. But the endless need for tritium and the endless maintenance work is just a big load.

A more modern design can (finally) be maintenance free, yet be no larger in yield. There's a limit to "large" where you start running into diminishing returns and we hit that long ago. Larger yields are not a goal.

Actually, getting the design to work makes possible smaller ones, cleaner ones and ones you could squirrel away in places you can't reach for maintenance later.

I think they're also talking about upgrading the PALs to something more modern and less bypassable, so they'd be safer.

That would not need the maitenence of the ones now.

I just get the feeling that our government is trying to one up the developing countries who are testing nukes here and there.

Also it seems like they are trying to instill a little fear in Iran, which isn't a bad thing.

As long as we don't get to the point where one bomb could melt the earth.

[edit on 5-3-2007 by Royal76]

Originally posted by Royal76

As lond as we don't get to the point where one bomb could melt the earth.

I'm pretty sure that's not in the realm of reality with nuclear weapons.

I read a sort of jokey article where they calculated the energy needed to reliquify the crust, it was amazingly high. You'd have to do something amazing like seed the crust with anti-neutronium pellets to get enough energy. You couldn't begin to start the job with the entire nuclear arsenal of the Earth right now.

However, give them time, after all, nukes are 60 years old.

When they finally build that bomb witht the power of a nuke but isn't radioactive so there no reason to not use it. Then the world should truly be afraid. The radioactivity is the only thing that keeps this from being a regularly used weapon by anyside who has a soul.

Any D-D or D-T fusion weapon produces radioactivity by neutron activation, so until they get the boron-lithium bomb it's not an issue.

Now, what you might worry about is any weapon that produces primarily gammas or x-rays. After it fries up the area, it's gone. So you get a lot of radiation deaths up front but nothing for later.

Started with a F ended with ission like fussion but not that.

I remember it being in that movie the "Saint" with Kilmer.

I was based on real technology about a reaction that was clean and didn't give off radiation.

That thing in "The Saint" was supposed to be some sort of cold fusion.

There are some exothermic aneutronic fusion reactions, there's a boron-lithium one I like, but they take so much energy to toggle off that you probably couldn't start one in a bomb, which all pretty much use D-T, the easiest one to do.

The boron-lithium reaction puts out hellaciously energetic alphas, if you could do it it would make a nice "bang" and that's about it. Lots of electrical effects. Some residual helium.

Originally posted by leafer
The place is still a war zone. Its hilarious that any people in the country still believe that the government will help them in any way if it were to happen in their part of the U.S. That should have been a huge warning sign telling people your on your own if something happens.

Ronnie Reagan said it best.

"The scariest 9 words a person can hear are; "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."

The scariest seven words are "The VA dentist will see you now"

the scariest 7 words were " The VA Genocologist will see you now"