Bush Budget Cuts Nerve Gas Destruction Money

[True_Blue]

The Bush administration's budget proposal released Monday includes new money for military bases, but critics say it shortchanges the Blue Grass Army Depot, where chemical weapons are stockpiled.

The proposal includes spending $167 million on barracks, training and other items at Fort Campbell, the sprawling Army facility on the Tennessee-Kentucky line, $21 million on barracks at Fort Knox and $9.7 million on training facilities the W.H. Ford Regional Training Center. But it offers only $31 million of new money for the destruction of chemical weapons stockpiles at the Blue Grass facility in Richmond, Ky., and the Pueblo Chemical Depot in Pueblo, Colo.

A military study conducted last year determined the weapons facilities each needed about $115 million in the coming fiscal year to keep the weapons destruction program on track, said Craig Williams, director of the Chemical Weapons Working Group. An international treaty calls for destruction of the country's stockpile of chemical weapons by 2012.

more....
http://www.wkyt.com/Global/story.asp?S=2914679

[Erika]

1. W, as the EVIL king of the hill,

doesn't want to give up any of his weapons. There could be horrible threats out there equal to Saddam Hussein. Condi and Rummy have told him so.

[LynnTheDem]

2. Free nations don't have WMD, said bush.

And only OOTs (outposts of tyranny) and EDs (evil-doers) have chem & bio weapons.

[burrowowl]

3. Who knows when the U$

might need it?

[Gunit_Sangh]

4. I live close to the BG army depot

These weapons are so old (WW II vintage) they can't be used. For 20 years we've been told it's too dangerous to move them and that they HAD to be destroyed onsite.

At first, they wanted to build an incinerator which they PROMISED to destroy when the weapons were destroyed. We didn't believe them and the actions of a citizens group, along with help from our congressmen, forced the army to look at neutralization techniques to destroy the weapons.

The real problem here is that it's more important for *'s wealthy campaign contributors to buy Hummers, Rolexes and Plasma TV's than it is to provide the funding for building the facilities needed to destroy the chemicals. For that reason, it's acceptable to move them. So what if a few hundred thousand peons die in a tragic accident?

[cornermouse]

5. That's right. Waste not, want not.

[Jacobin]

6. Damn. Now we're gonna have to invade ourselves!!

:silly:

[tanyev]

7. Crap.

Anyone know what the status is on all the old Soviet chemical weapons that we promised to help destroy and then I think George didn't follow through? I saw a 60 Minutes piece on that and it was scary. The location where they are being kept is not very secure, and if W is really, truly, worried about terrorists getting their hands on chemical weapons, then we need to help destroy that stuff.

[struggle4progress]

8. kick