Yesterdays OWH paper was a real work of art. A front page article was about the need to update our older nuclear weapons. There are some 400 B61 warheads that are really old and need immediate fixing. The cost for this fine work is $28 million per bomb!!! This amounts to a cost that is twice the worth of each bomb if made of SOLID GOLD
The kicker is that most of these bombs are considered tactical nuclear weapons to include bunker buster bombs. Read wiki-pedia on the B61 if you want to get a headache. The concept is that these would be used in specific targeted spots such as enemy nuclear facilities that are dug underground. As a Corps of Engineer officer we studied such weapons to be used to nuc the USSRs attack throughout Germany. It was part of the barrier plan and the weapons, in that case, were buried in the path of an attack. Needless to say, Germany and other countries were not too happy about such plans. The destructive power in some of these can be dialed up or down to as high as 300KT. Of course the bomb was also described as a Thermonuclear bomb. Generally that means an H-bomb which is much more destructive that the A-bomb in all three effects. (Heat, Light and Radition) The same article in Wiki mentioned power as low as .3 Kiloton or about 300 tons of TNT. So the article seems contradictory.
Anyway the front page article was continued on page 4a. On that page was an article headed: Nations bloated nuclear spending comes under fire You ought to read all of both of these articles.
It might be interesting to know that the Postal Service had a plan to deliver the mail after the big nuc exchange. No person I know explained to whom they intended to deliver the mail At that time we had some 32,000 nucs in the arsenal. The Russians supposedly had slightly more than 32,000. Our national plan included the possibility of us using nucs on them in Europe w/o necessarily a return strike from them. Madness. Sheer madness.
There is a great quote from our enlightened Senator Deb Fisher which partly says she is worried that our military might not have this critical tool at its disposal. Gee
But all of this is just half of the OWHs astounding Sunday coverage. Reading from the back page of the front section we run first across an article about how spending on the Great Lakes problems does not run the risk of cutbacks since even Tea Partiers want the funds spent. Also on the same page an article on excess use of force by border agents
Then on page 10A a lengthy article on the rise of CO2 in the oceans which is killing off much critical ocean ecology. Then page 9A a headline A Chilling view of tomorrows waters with multiple pictures and diagrams along with p8A too.
All of this is presented as solid fact with little, if any, punches pulled. This from a paper that seems to deny the critical nature of Climate change in most of its editorial content over the last 10 years or more. Can there be life left in the OWH or indeed on our Earth? How will we survive w/o these critical B61 weapons? Where will the money come from to fix up these aging weapons? How will we be able to use them on some poor unsuspecting country's hidden assets? What WILL we do if the F25 cannot deliver these B61 weapons?