Fears Grow of Wider Spread of Nuclear Weapons

[Rose Siding]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Reports of nuclear experiments in South Korean and an unexplained blast in North Korea are stoking fears that other countries may increasingly feel compelled to move toward a "nuclear tipping point."

Few officials and experts predict non-nuclear states will make a mad dash to acquire outright the capability now possessed by the five declared nuclear powers -- the United States, France, Britain, China and Russia -- and three undeclared powers -- Israel, India and Pakistan.

But they are concerned that some governments -- warily watching nuclear activity in the two Koreas and Iran -- may begin to reconsider their own status and start amassing the materials and technologies needed to leap quickly to the nuclear club in the future.

"If the assumption becomes widespread that everybody's doing it, that everyone is experimenting in these areas, then this will tend to erode a taboo against illicit nuclear activities," Robert Einhorn, the top non-proliferation official under former President Bill Clinton, told Reuters.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=6212150&src=rss/ElectionCoverage§ion=news

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

1. Did I just hear Condi-sleeza say on Wolf Blitzer's show that the

explosion could have been a 'forest fire'? WTF? Give me a break??! Yeah, and a monkey just flew out of my arse!

[oneighty]

2. Illicit nuclear activities

Why is it illicit for an independent government to build nuclear weapons? Nobody complained when Israel, India and Pakistan joined the nuclear club. (Or did they? Plausible denial?)

I wonder who tested Israel's early nuclear weapons?

180

[Ediacara]

4. IIRC there was a huge outcry when India and Pakistan tested their bombs

Not only from peace-loving citizens of the world, but from Republicans hell-bent on blaming everything that every happened on the Clenis.....

I am not sure if Israel has ever tested any weapons, but I suspect we made most of them...

[oneighty]

5. Yes

I think we made Israel's and Great Britain's nuclear weapons. And we scream the loudest when others do similar actions such as China? India? Russia? France? Pakistan?

180

[Radius]

7. Israel

made their own. GB did as well. We did transfer trident technology to them during the cold war. They had nukes before we gave them the ability to independently destroy the USSR.

France has SLBM capability as well. They also developed it on their own.

[oneighty]

13. I really doubt

they developed Nuclear weapons on their own. Same for Britain. Until I see proof I will never accept that. Of course Israel denies having Nuclear Weapons. Perhaps they are not lying? Trident technology? They have land based Trident Missiles with W-88 warheads?

180

[airstrip1]

15. Sorry but your quite wrong on this point

British scientists played an important role in the original Manhatten project.

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_701610456/Manhattan_Project.html
http://www.eas.asu.edu/~holbert/eee460/anv/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0312061676/103-3759712-6697439?v=glance

After the war the UK found itself excluded from the technology that it had played a major role in developing. It therefore decided to build its own bomb which was first tested in Australia in 1952. This device was developed without assistance from the USA and against the wishes of the then American government. The UK also separately built their own series of supersonic V bombers to deliver the warheads. It was not until the advent of Polaris that Britain became dependent on a US delivery system. Even now the warheads of Britain's trident missiles are manufactured in the UK at Aldermaston

http://www.nato.int/acad/fellow/94-96/sutyagin/01-03.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/696046.stm

[oneighty]

16. So Britain is

manufacturing W-88 or better which they developed on their own? Same as they had the United States Betty Nuclear depth charge in the fifties which they developed on their own. Gimme a break. I do not believe it.

Never once have I read of Britain being seriously involved in the Manhattan project.

But tell me about Israel. Do they have a need for the inter-continental Trident Missile with multiple warheads to defend against their Mid East neighbors? I think not.

180

[airstrip1]

17. Well I just guess all those books, articles in Encarta etc

are just so many lies.

Who would believe that people would go to so much trouble.

I am afraid that what makes nuclear weapons so dangerous is that there are many nations around who are quite capable of building them if they put their minds to it. Up to now most countries have not felt the need because they believed that the super powers would at least make some token attempts to maintain international law. Now the pre-emptive war appears to be all the rage you can be sure that the possible targets are working furiously to acquire their own nuclear deterrents. The world is going to become a very dangerous place.

[Radius]

18. Israel

Does not have trident technology, or SLBM capability. Who knows if they have MIRVed weapons. They may have cruise missile technology but that is of course not verifiable. Trident is sub-launched, MX is ICBM.

Britain and France have nuclear weapons programs developed with minimal support from us.

Britain does have trident systems we gave them but they had their own bomb program before that.

If Pakistan and India are capable why not Britain and France?

[bemildred]

19. They have harpoons, about 200Km range, at least for public consumption. nt

[Radius]

23. Harpoon

Is an anti-ship missile. Similar to the exocet system. I don;t know if one can be converted to nuclear but it has a 500lb warhead. I'm not positive but think the w-88 is larger and even if they could make this weapon, which they cant, it would not fit on that system.

Nuclear weapons usually have sophisticated arming fusing and firing systems.

[bemildred]

25. Here you go, make what you want of it:

The submarine has the capacity to carry anti-ship missiles, mines, decoys and STN Atlas wire-guided DM2A3 torpedoes.
The surface-to-surface missiles may include the submarine-launched Harpoon which delivers a 227 kilogram warhead to a
range of 130 kilometres at high subsonic speed. It is generally agreed that these submarines are outfitted with six
533-millimeter torpedo tubes suitable for the 21-inch torpedoes that are normally used on most submarines, including those
of the United States.

---

Some reports suggest that the submarines have a total of ten torpedo tubes -- six 533-millimeter and four 650-millimeter.
Uniquely, the Soviet navy deployed the Type 65 heavy-weight torpedo using a 650-millimeter tube. The four larger 25.5 inch
diameter torpedo tubes could be used to launch a long-range nuclear-capable submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM).
According to some reports the submarines may be capable of carrying nuclear-armed Popeye Turbo cruise missiles, with a
goal of deterring an enemy from trying to take out its nuclear weapons with a surprise attack.

---

An article published by the Los Angeles Times in mid-October 2003, indicated that Israel had successfully modified
American-supplied Harpoon cruise missiles for use with nuclear warheads on its submarines. The process would have
involved reducing the size of the warheads to fit inside the missiles as well as altering the guidance systems so as to be able
to hit land-based targets, but would enable Israel to deliver nuclear weapons from the sea virtually unimpedded. The claim was however disputed by Israeli and others
who questioned the ability of the Harpoon missile to carry a nuclear payload.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/israel/sub.htm

[oneighty]

21. But you said

the United States gave Israel Trident technology? I wondered what that could be for as I am not aware they have a suitable submarine for the Trident. Or perhaps you mean guidance systems technology. Boy that be giving away terrible secrets. I understand Israel does in fact have a newly arrived or recently developed cruise missile.

180

[Radius]

24. England

was given trident technology during the cold war. The us has never transfered nuclear technology to israel, at least not publicly.

If i said israel I meant england, type o.

[oneighty]

26. Okay.

Must agree with that!

180

[oneighty]

22. France was capable

on their own in their drive for military independence. I understand they also helped Israel early on in developing Nuclear/Electric power plants.

I expect India also developed nuclear weapons on their own as they entered the game later when weapons technology was/is readily available.

180

[leesa]

3. Well, of course countries are scrambling to get nuclear weapons

We have made it clear that they may be our next victim no matter what they do or don't do. They have no choice. We have published our intent to attack anyone who does anything we don't like or who has anything we want.

[Professor_Moriarty]

6. Although the mad scramble to acquire nuclear weapons at any cost

has been unleashed by our illegal war on Iraq under false pretexts, I think we may have to worry about a future when even more lethal weapons based on genetically engineered viruses will be introduced.The technology to produce viruses that attack a specific genotype is already here and its attraction is that it is not detectable, it is a poor man's weapon and can be carried in one's pocket.In fact, Wolfowitz and Kristol make a reference to this type of weapons as a possible "solution" to the demographic "problem" of rising Palestinian birthrates and declining Israeli birth rates.We are about to enter an era of increasing lunacy.So, enjoy your atomic dust while you can.

[Radius]

8. Ahh

The genocide in a virus myth. This has been discounted by geneticists. Arabs and Jews are both Semitic and even if a virus could use IF THEN logic it could not genetically tell a Jew from an Arab. Developing viral weapons is a rich mans weapon. Using existing ones is the poor man's route.

Link to wolfowitz quote, or retract it. Like saying GSK is developing the T-cell virus.

Bioweapons are real, smallpox is much easier to used by terrorists since there is no development. The problem is that if unleashed it would be much worse for countries who are unable to vaccinate against it.

Using tanks and guys with guns to kill Palestinians makes more sense than an "virus" that can readily mutate and do god knows what. Not supporting genocide but saying if it were to be used it would not be a virus doing the killing.

[bemildred]

20. One of the dumber ones.

You have to be a racist to believe it.
"They really are different ..."

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. AXIS OF EVIL declared teh CHIMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But we are safer now, go on citizen nothing to see here, the war with East Asia has been going on forever, ooops sorry, Eurasia....

[VladTheImpaler]

10. We could be seeing the beginning of the end.

nt

[Gregorian]

11. Simple solution- BOMB EVERYONE!

The American way.

[FlemingsGhost]

12. So the media unwittingly admits their complicity?

"Reports of nuclear experiments in South Korean and an unexplained blast in North Korea are stoking fears ..."

Yup, fear is a psychological fire ... and the media, the bellows.

[Nimrod]

14. * would be SO happy

...if he could start WWIII before he left office. I really used to think that no one was that evil, but I've developed just a few little teensy doubts in the last few years.