As the world's strongest nuclear and conventional power, America should want to freeze weapons development and halt nuclear proliferation. Yet the Bush administration's proposed military budget moves in a different and more dangerous direction by seeking a sharp increase in the funds for research on two new kinds of nuclear bombs. The Senate should halt this reckless folly by voting next week for an amendment sponsored by Senators Edward Kennedy and Dianne Feinstein.
One of the new nuclear weapons is a reduced-yield explosive, less than half as powerful as the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Proponents call these low-yield bombs more "usable" than today's versions. That means easing the taboo that has kept nuclear weapons sheathed since 1945 on behalf of a bomb that could still expose hundreds of thousands of people to death or radiation sickness. With nine countries now believed to have nuclear weapons, including North Korea, Pakistan, India and Israel, the world does not need America's encouraging the idea of more usable bombs.
The administration also wants money to study much more powerful nuclear explosives for use against suspected underground bunkers containing biological, chemical or nuclear weapons. Just imagine launching nuclear bunker busters based on weapons intelligence as unreliable as that circulating before the Iraq war. Even if underground sites were accurately identified, the resulting nuclear explosions could spread the blast, radiation and toxins over populated areas. The proposed research money ought to be going into better weapons intelligence and improved conventional methods for putting these sites out of commission, like blocking air intakes and external energy sources.
The only research involving nuclear weapons should involve finding ways to discourage their spread. It's mind-boggling that the administration seems more interested in finding new uses for them.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/08/opinion/08TUE3.html?ex=1087272000&en=ae122415fc548da9&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE