Home | About | Donate

The U.S. Is Stockpiling Nuclear Arms, and the Cost Is Astonishing


#1

The U.S. Is Stockpiling Nuclear Arms, and the Cost Is Astonishing

Harry Blain

We're spending $1.2 trillion on weapons that invariably make the world a more dangerous place.


#2

Nothing screams “duopoly” like the MIC and perpetual warfare.

On a side note: I appreciate the author calling out the flim-flammery of the NYTimes,


#3

“People who don’t read newspapers are uniformed. People who read newspapers are misinformed”

  • Mark Twain

#4

Nuclear weapons involve a great deal of secrecy and so are great vehicles for graft under the “need-to-know” clause. They’ll be here as long as there is greed.


#5

Thanks to Harry Blain for putting nukes into the context of Post-WW2 US imperial policy and calling out the NYT for its (increasingly frequent) fake news reporting.

They receive today’s Judith Miller Award for Perverting Journalism. She sponsors it with her fat NYT pension for doing their (and the CIA’s) dirty work for years.


#6

There is no good reason for the majority to have a bigger stockpile of nuclear weapons. Either the world gets destroyed far before all those extra nukes get used or the entire stockpile doesn’t get used at all and just sits there sucking up money. John Oliver in one of his earliest episodes puts it best, that when it comes to nuclear weapons the U.S. acts like a hoarder.


#7

Posted elsewhere on CD:

Sarah Huckabee gave a press conference today and reiterated Trump’s decision to declare NK a terrorist country because it won’t give up its nuclear weapons.

I cannot help but think that we have absolutely no moral right to demand that NK do this. We and many countries in the world have had nuclear weapons and delivery systems for decades, since .Nagasaki and Hiroshima for the US. Despite treaties forbidding their development after WWII and during the Vietnam War, Israel developed them anyway. So did Iran, unless I’m mistaken. Maybe others that I cannot recall right now. For a while in the late 60s there was a strong push to limit nuclear proliferation, but Ronald Reagan effectively killed that with his Star Wars and war-mongering.

Anyway, it appears that America has moved on and is now in full proliferation mode and still trying to control other countries’ nuclear development. It is terribly terribly wrong, unless the US is willing to forgo all its nuclear weapons.


#8

Time to re-watch Dr. Strangelove. The military brass around JFK all wished to nuke Cuba during the missile crisis. At other times the USA has seriously considered using nuclear weapons against the Soviet Union (!), Korea and Vietnam. They are simply warmongers…

When Ronald Reagan’s “Star Wars” cannot even defend against a couple of puny nuclear warheads in North Korea, that is (to me) proof that back in the day the experts were right. They said that there was no way to develop a foolproof system that could reliably stop hundreds or thousands of incoming missiles from the Soviet Union or China. Just another boondoggle for the MIC.


#9

Posted on another site:

Oh, Orange-Butt LOVES him some nuclear weapons. He gets a full half-inch erection when he thinks of them!


#10

America is the world’s greatest terrorist threat


#11

I’m pretty sure you’re mistaken. After the US/UK coup against the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953 and the installation of Shah Reza Pahlavi by the US there, the US gave Iran much nuclear energy technology (ie, when the US inherited the role of colonial oppressor in Iran formerly held by the UK.) All military and security assessments, from the US, Israel, and the IAEA of the last several decades have concluded that Iran does not have, and has never had an active program to develop a nuclear weapon.

Perhaps you’re thinking of Pakistan, or India? Please be more careful because that is how fake news gets spread around. If what you said had been true then the agreement that the P5+1 negotiated and Trump is trying to scuttle, would have been without purpose or meaning.

Actually it is preposterous - outrageous - for the US to label anyone as a sponsor of terrorism, when the US itself is by far the greatest instigator and supporter of terrorism in the world today. What an awesome accomplishment of propagandizing to make virtually an entire population “noseblind” to its own stink.


#12

Our elected officials have no answer to the simplest and most important question in our early and often use of warfare by choice and not as a last resort after all possible diplomatic solutions have been exhausted and an immanent threat to the US remains and a response is required by necessity.

The question: ‘Then what? Why no acnswer to that question? Because by smugly refusing to tell us what they are doing, they can never fail. The voters are expected to shut up and accept seven simultaneous wars against sovereign nations without end at the cost of 6 trillion of our tax dollars with virtually no explanation.

And what about the conservatively estimated cost of more than two million lives of impoverished brownskinned Third World people half way around the world in the Middle East? This was documented in the only authoritative—albeit now outdated—report entitled “Body Count” by the Nobel Prize winning Physicians for Social Responsibility. New York Magazine recently thoroughly documented the current deceptive practices employed by the military in the grossly underestimated and not compiled numbers they release reported unquestioningly by the media.

We can hardly blame our elected officials for doing this because they have been completely successful in avoiding responsibility and accountability for throwing our desperately needed tax dollars in the trashbin of history.

The question is why is the mainstream media so complicit in keeping this Information from the public? And why have they allowed the government attack on the one media outlet with a minuscule viewership, RT, and its sanctioning by the long arm of the government for advocating for the answer to the question and for reasonable transparency?

Additionally, Facebook and Google are being demanded by Congress to implement censorship and chilling of dissent from their users and they are apparently beginning to do just that. Why will the mainstream media not defend the First Amendment and freedom of the press?

It is widely recognized throughout the world that we no longer have a functioning democracy responsive to the voters. Rather, we have one with the best Congress the oligarachs can buy. What is the Fourth Estate doing about it? Have they surrendered without so much as a whimper?

Respectfully and with concern,
Tom Slockett


#13

Yes, I was mistaken about Iran, and thanks for the heads-up. Actually I KNEW that according to most US reports, Iran does not have nuclear weapons, and Iran was saying their nuclear development actions were for their energy needs. When thinking in the past though, I did not connect the current reality to a maybe.

So again, thanks.


#14

Well, yes Hannah, but lets include Israel that has enormous influence over US foreign policy and MR/NA war decisions (like the destruction of Libya and potential coming war against Iran), politics, and elections - overt subversion (AKA treasonous subversion)…


#15

While this article is welcome, it sidesteps the fact it was under Obama’s (and sold-out Dem Party Clinton/Obama corporate/banker/wall st, war-whore wing) “leadership” the nuclear “upgrade” and over trillion $ diversion from civilian priorities to military waste took place - now the trump regime comp[letes the atrocity!

"Obama began his administration with a dramatic public commitment to build a nuclear weapons-free world, that commitment has long ago dwindled and died.

“replaced by an administration plan to build a new generation of US nuclear weapons and nuclear production facilities to last the nation well into the second half of the 21st century. This plan, which has received almost no attention by the mass media, includes redesigned nuclear warheads, as well as new nuclear bombers, submarines, land-based missiles, weapons labs and production plants”. - Hillary Clinton has been more ambiguous - Asked about the trillion dollar nuclear plan, she replied she would “look into that,” adding: “It doesn’t make sense to me.” like other issues that the former secretary of state has promised to “look into,” and were never resolved. - the Dem war-machine complicity!

“Only Bernie Sanders has adopted a position of outright rejection”

https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/USNuclearModernization - analysis data projects the total cost over the next 30 years at between $1.25 trillion and $1.46 trillion in then-year dollars, meaning it includes price increases due to inflation." - but we don’t have the money for universal health care, education, environmental protections, etc, etc, etc - subversion by the for-profit war-machine/MICC has taken-over our republic and politics - a silent and slow-mo de facto coup by another name!!


#16

" It’s an especially big investment for something you hope to never use."

How insane is this statement by Trump: " what good are nuclear weapons if we don’t use them". I fervently hope I am wrong, but these nuclear weapons are not for defensive purposes, but for offensive purposes like the nukes that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan.