“Stop Divine Strake” International Day of Action (Sunday 28 May 2006)

[struggle4progress]

International Indian Treaty Council
Western Shoshone Defense Project
Indigenous Environmental Network
Shundahai Network
Nevada Desert Experience
Citizen Alert ...

.. “Stop Divine Strake Coalition” Calls for an International Day of Action

The U.S. Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) plans to detonate a 700-ton ammonium nitrate and fuel oil explosive on June 2, 2006 at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), a federal facility 65 miles north of Las Vegas. They are calling this test “Divine Strake" ...

.. the presence of the United States military on Western Shoshone land is uninvited ... Western Shoshone have been fighting for sovereignty over their ancestral and treaty-recognized lands, and to shut down the NTS for years. Most recently, their efforts brought them to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) which found the United States in violation of recognized fundamental human rights standards and international law, and ordered the United States to “freeze”, “desist” and “stop” their activities on Western Shoshone land ...

.. our focus will be an International Day of Action on Sunday May 28, 2006 (Memorial Day Weekend) at the Nevada Test Site Peace Camp, located across Highway 95 from the Test Site. We are looking for allied organizations to join our coalition, and either join us at the Nevada Test Site on the 28th, or stage actions in their own communities throughout the following week ...

Western Shoshone Defense Project

[Zachstar]

1. Sickening

What on earth are we doing blowing up that much explosive for!?!?!?!

I'm tired of my country deifying the UN and its own standards for the military. This is disgusting how we throw tax dollars into big bombs like this.

Bush stop the madness!!

[struggle4progress]

2. They're trying to simulate a nuclear explosion as part of the testing ..

.. for their next-generation atomic weapons.

And welcome to DU!

[Solo_in_MD]

3. Actually they are trying to see if they can do without nuclear

weapons for deeply buried bunkers. If you are going have to blow them up, conventional is better than than nuclear.

[struggle4progress]

4. Test blast linked to nuke weapons

By LAUNCE RAKE
Las Vegas Sun
28-APR-06

LAS VEGAS -- Contrary to the Pentagon's earlier denials, a government official overseeing a test explosion at the Nevada Test Site in June says the blast could help with the development of nuclear weapons.

The detonation could simulate "a number of weapon concepts," said Doug Bruder, director of the counter-weapons of mass destruction program for the Defense Department's Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

"It could be nuclear or advanced conventional," he said. "A charge of this size would be more related to a nuclear weapon." <snip>

http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=TESTNUKE-04-28-06

[Solo_in_MD]

5. What they are doing is seeing how much explosive force

is really needed to damage and destroy deeply buried hardened structures. The article is correct in the summary of the recent remarks, but it is still non-nuke. It appears to be a true experiment to see how much explosive force it takes. I am assuming there are a variety of underground targets located varying distances from ground zero for the rest. The results should provide results that help optimize the destruction of underground facilities. It can not by its nature be nuclear weapons research (how to build a better bomb). However, the results may indeed be that the only practical way to get the detonation required is with nuclear weapons.

[struggle4progress]

6. Look at the quantity of explosive. It's about as much as was dropped ..

.. on Dresden in the famous bombing that destroyed the city. There is simply no way to deliver a conventional weapon of this size. This is research intended to guide nuclear weapons design.

And, to put it quite bluntly, the Bush administration, contrary to international law, is testing a weapon on mass destruction on the territory of an unconsenting sovereign nation ...

[Solo_in_MD]

7. How does it guide nuclear weapons design?

Nuclear weapons design research is done on triggers, focused detonator enhancements, etc. This is research into blast effects on underground structures. A non-subtle distinction to those who understand the physics.

It could be used to justify the use of nuclear weapons if conventional munitions are shown to be inadequate.

[struggle4progress]

9. "Divine Strake was approved in 2002 as part of the ..

congressionally authorized DOD FY2002 Tunnel Target Defeat Advanced Concept and Technology Demonstration (ACTD). Since then, DTRA has prepared for the event under its Counterforce program. DTRA confirmed today that Divine Strake is the event described in the budget documents. The DTRA counterforce RDT&E (Research, Development, Testing and Engineering) budget for FY2006 described the experiment this way: 'Conduct the Tunnel Target Defeat Advanced Concept and Technology Demonstration(s) (ACTD) Full-Scale tunnel defeat demonstration using high explosives to simulate a low yield nuclear weapon ground shock environment at Department of Energy's Nevada Test Site.'

"The reference to low-yield nuclear weapons was omitted from the section in the FY2007 budget request, which instead describes the event like this: "Conduct the Tunnel Target Defeat ACTD large-scale tunnel defeat demonstration using high explosives to produce the desired ground shock environment at the Department of Energy's Nevada Test Site." Yet the nuclear reference is used elsewhere in the FY2007 budget: 'The Tunnel Target Defeat ACTD will develop a planning tool that will improve the warfighter’s confidence in selecting the smallest proper nuclear yield necessary to destroy underground facilities while minimizing collateral damage.'" http://www.nukestrat.com/us/stratcom/gs-divinestrake.htm

The Administration has been pushing for a new generation of nuclear weapons, using the "nuclear bunker buster"; the point of Divine Strake is to quantify how much yield would be required from such a nuclear weapon; the real object, of course, is to keep the door open for more weapons nuclear work. The hypocrisy of all this in the context of endless noise about (nonexistent) WMDs in Iraq or Iran finally became so unpalatable, that the Administration claimed it would drop the whole idea, but their reputation for dealing straight has worn a bit thin ...

[Vincardog]

8. Right you are. Our biggest airplane can cary 35 tons. How do you think

they plan on delivering 700 tons?

Put the Kool Aid down and step away from the propaganda.

[Solo_in_MD]

10. Read up on explosive tests and learn some physics

1) You set off a VERY BIG EXPLOSION.
2) You have a number of underground facilities at different distances (radius and depth).
3) You have a lot of instrumentation to monitor energy being transmitted through the ground
4) Calculate the energy levels at the distances and evaluate damage.
5) See how it compares to the predicted behavior.

Bear in mind that 700 tons of ANFO is not the same as a 700 ton bomb. ANFO explosive is very low yield compared to what is currently in use. Its also quite a bit less dense. It will not generate the same kind of energy transfer a nuclear weapon will. It will will more closely resemble a conventional munition.

It is quite possible that nuclear weapons may be the only way to achieve the damage sought, so indeed this test could be used to justify the use of nuclear weapons. However it is not a nuclear design evaluation as others here seem to think.

I understand what is being done here, even if some of the others posters here do not.

[struggle4progress]

11. The original stated intent of the test was to assess desired yield ..

.. for a new generation of nukes, as indicated by budget excerpts in my #9 supra.

Although the Administration has since changed their public story, they did so when they were choking in a public relations fight. Why anyone would believe shifting stories coming out of the Executive branch nowadays? As indicated by the story linked in my #4 supra, apparently somebody didn't get the memo about distinctions between the public and private discussions. And Utah's Rep. Matheson seems concerned the test is still for nuclear development purposes:

... A statement by Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, said the tour confirmed his concerns that the test will lead to development and potential testing of new nuclear weapons, though the blast itself uses only conventional explosives. "Officials who say they are using this Divine Strake test in planning for new nuclear weapons seem to be ignoring congressional intent about no new nuclear weapons and that concerns me," Matheson said in his statement ...
http://www.thespectrum.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060428/NEWS01/604280314/1002

Whatever you want to say about yield, it's still way beyond what can be delivered by a conventional weapon:

"For comparison, the largest conventional weapon in the U.S. inventory is the MOAB (Massive Ordnance Air Blast) bomb, which contains nearly nine tons of explosives with a yield of approximately 0.012 kt TNT" http://www.nukestrat.com/us/stratcom/gs-divinestrake.htm

Assuming that the ANFO and C4 trigger have a combined punch of about 600 tons of TNT, and that the above technology scales, it will still take about 450 tons of explosive to produce a weapon like this. That's far beyond any credible delivery method.

[Vincardog]

12. You do indeed understand what is going on here

this test will be used to justify the use of nuclear weapons
The question is not what weapon is required to take out a hardened bunker. The real question is will we allow the Idiot Bush to lie us into another unnecessary war?

[Progressive4Life]

13. Help get this abomination canceled!

Send a message to your senators, rep, Rummy, and Samuel Bodman (Sec. of Energy), telling them to cancel Divine Strake.