Anyone else a little freaked about the Nevada nukyular test?

[Atman]

As BushCo continues hurling America backward to the fifties, I'm more than a little concerned with the varied ramifications of the upcoming test of a 700 ton moab in the Nevada desert. We've been doing computer models for years, and supposedly they're so accurate that we haven't needed to do above-ground testing like this. So who is the little (big!) show for?

Is it to remind Iran what we plan to do them? Or is it to remind Americans what Bush is claiming Iran will do to us if we don't support Mr. Bush's warmongering? All you young kiddies on DU who've only seen black & white fuzzy filmed footage of space-high mushrooms clouds, get ready for true shock and awe. This fucker Bush is about to explode is predicted to set off a 3-4 earthquake to boot.

Our nation is going backward at an ever-alarming rate, and Bush seems to determined to find us a shortcut to the past.

I'm telling you, I've got a bad feeling about this.

[AndyA]

1. I definitely think we're sending a message to the world

To not mess with us. The fact that our President seems to be mentally unstable should also concern them. They don't know what might set him off, and cause him to push that button.

The world is not heading in the right direction, and I believe George Bush's aggression is largely to blame. There is just no excuse for what is going on in Iraq. Saddam was a despicable, disgusting man, but the cost to remove him from power has far exceeded any benefit the world might receive from that effort.

[KAT119]

26. Easter nuke in Texas,City, Texas say 'reverse-speech' experts

who recently analyzed the WH speeches !! The sub-conscious of speaker comes through w/ this important method of listening to audio play -back of their words. Frightening article at: www.ken-welch.com

They want to get the word out!

[Richard Steele]

45. mn .eno taht revo htaerb ym gnidloh TON yllaer m'I...llew, haeY

[Atman]

47. Okay, I think this Ken Welch guy as too much time on his hands!

A too many rolls of tin foil in his drawer.


But I may be WRONG, and that is what scares the shit out of me!

[Marie26]

66. Ageed

LOL, it's true. My first thought was - this guy is absolutely crazy. My second thought was - but is he right? Ack! Maybe I need to start wrapping some tin-foil around my head to protect myself from all these crazy theories. We're so mistrustful of the Administration & the media that it's easier, I think, to be persuaded of some pretty paranoid theories.

[Marie26]

67. And the donations in!

Just sayin'.

[jeanarrett]

86. I don't know--but I definitely found that an interesting read!

And passed it on.

[shenmue]

2. Just when you thought it couldn't get worse...

it gets worse.

:scared:

:grr:

[guinivere]

3. It does freak me out.

And I think you pretty much nailed the reasons for this.

I don't understand why we can tell others no nukes, but at the same time do stuff like this.

[Ufomammut]

4. Very disturbing sign. Also, I posted/linked about this the other day and

The info received zero responses.

[Stephanie]

5. when is THAT happening?

good god just when you think it he can't do anything stupider

[Ufomammut]

8. Stupid? Maybe. EVIL? YES!

[madokie]

6. 1,400,000 pounds

I mentioned yesterday that the 700 ton was refering to the explosive power of 700 tons of tnt and was chastised for that statement. jeeeze

[Joe Fields]

7. I know we all think that Bush is capable of anything.

But even he isn't so far gone that we would use a nuclear bomb on Iran. It's just Bush being his usual bully self.

That said, I deplore the continued "testing" of nuclear weapons. It is completely unnecessary. As a former Nevada resident, I can tell you that this issue is huge in that region. Both the testing, and also the proposed storage of nuclear waste material approximately 30 miles from where I used to live.

[Ufomammut]

11. I disagree that Bush "decides" anything, especially..

Of such large magnitude. Bush likely has zero say-so in PNAC warring strategies, and yes, Cheney has ordered plans to pre-emptively use nukes.

[Joe Fields]

14. It will never happen.

[Ufomammut]

22. You know, I was a kid in the 80s...

And it was with Raygun, and especially the elder Bush that I began to become politically aware by degrees, and not long after, began taking note of the various "illuminati" theories and such. I never completely dismissed it out of hand, for there are many things that we simply can't prove beyond a shadow of the doubt ...however, I never took it very seriously, and chalked up the corruption as typical of how power operates.

Having said that, I'm now willing to consider some of the more "far reaching" theories nowadays, given all that's happened, and how unprecedents become a given virtually overnight in Amerika now.

Yes, it's obvious it's about geopolitical power, and war profiteering, and oil ..however, I do honestly fear that a deadly serious component to what's happening is based around a wished-for "holy war" as part of establishing theocracy. Which is to say, I think that there are some seriously out-to-fuckin-lunch people in charge, and with the weapons and technologies they have at their disposal, hold the fate of our species in their demented whims and strategies.

So while my business-as-usual approach agrees with you, my more contemplative side doesn't put anything past these sociopaths.

[Joe Fields]

27. Americans would never stand for an unjustified nuclear strike.

Not to mention the rest of the world. Bush and Cheney are capable of most anything, but THAT is just plain out of the question.

Truman did it, and at the time it was justified. But, I would dare say that if the Truman administration knew then what we know now about the long reaching affects of lingering radiation, he may have changed his mind.

I don't believe,(and no,I am anything but naiive) that ANY American president, not even Bush, would launch a nuclear strike, unless a nuclear weapon was used on us first.

[Ufomammut]

32. As stated, normally I would agree...

However, too many unstable variables.

In your estimation, just how do you think the US populace would react to such a scenario: a nuke is detonated here, taking out a city, the "official" explanation is that "terrorists" from Iran carried it out, and so, off we go.

Okay, now I'd have to hope that such a scenario is extremely remote, even though our gov did stage 9/11. The larger point is, you're claiming that the US populace "wouldn't stand for it," and I'm suggesting that the American populace is already bent over with Big Brother standing behind and "servicing" to an appalling degree, with precious few out of almost three-hundred million voicing substantive opposition.

[Joe Fields]

37. The neocons fooled us once with 9/11.

We weren't on to them back then. Now that the truth about 9/11 is out, the "cons" are shitting their pants, hoping they won't become indicted and go to jail. It is my opinion that even they aren't stupid or arrogant enough to try such an "event" again.

As I said earlier, the American people won't stand for it, unless we are attacked by a nuclear device first.

The whole world is watching them now.

[Ufomammut]

40. And that they ARE under the gun is precisely what scares me

Obviously we have no sure way of knowing just how much military support they have to stage something like that, but what is clear is that even if Bushco were to be raptured away into the heavenly stratosphere, whichever admin steps in after will diligently maintain the bogus "war on terror:" that, along with the widespread cover-ups, offer some insight into support for the empire effort. The theocratic effort? Who knows...

[Atman]

33. Americans would never stand for invading a sovereign nation

nor for allowing the adminstration to spy on its citizens, or arrest them without warrants or rights to attorney, Americans would never stand for a $9,000,000,000,000 dollar debt.

But over and over again, Americans do indeed stand for it. In fact, we sit for it, and order up another pizza.

[Ufomammut]

34. Thank you. Exactly

[Joe Fields]

38. Tell you what. If it happens, I will tell you that...

you were right and I was wrong, if it will make you feel any better.

[Ufomammut]

43. That's besides the point and I pray such speculation is wrong

All I'm saying is that I think we're long past the point of basing our views and concerns around what many would've considered normal, or par for the course, say, several yrs ago. I put nothing past those in power, and their record reveals that fear to be well deserved. I'm not suggesting that we "give into" estab fear-based propaganda, but it's only human to be concerned - without that, without that fear, which is merely a survival instinct, we wouldn't know how to react ...and that's what is so terribly frightening and disheartening about the current dilemma: it would appear that most have been effectively brainwashed into passive indifference regarding what's already happened, as well as potential outcomes ...because...?...well, that's the biggie question, huh? Propaganda and chauvinism are effective, yes, but how to explain this mass subversion of what one would think is basic survival instincts that come hard-wired in the human system? The mind boggles...

[Joe Fields]

53. No, the point is that you are afraid it will happen,

and I am not. Surely one of us will be right.

We are both entitled to our opinions.

[Ufomammut]

54. Yeah, I'm quite concerned they will stage something

Because there's way too much riding on their bogus "war on terror" for no further justifications to "allow" further military action.

A question though: why do so many people insist on making everything about this view is only right, while that other view need be wrong? It's as if concern and contemplation is besides the point, while the true aim is one-upsmanship. I happen to find that rather sad. However, I suppose you're right - and that's obviously quite important to you - surely our gov will or will not stage another false flag.

[Joe Fields]

55. As I stated, it is my opinion. Not a fact, but opinion.

But, if you want the last word, you can have it.

[KurtNYC]

44. Truman did

I don't believe,(and no,I am anything but naive) that ANY American president, not even Bush, would launch a nuclear strike, unless a nuclear weapon was used on us first.

[Virginia Dare]

51. There are some people out there who would argue with you..

about Truman being justified, but that's a different story, and I'm being totally strawman with you there. I don't think you're being naive either, but I've heard speculation that there will be a false flag attack using a "dirty bomb" in this country, and that the Bush Administration will use this as justification to go nuclear. It's certainly in the realm of possibilities if you think about it.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

84. The words "Americans would never stand for" have...

...been on the front end of many a declarative statement (some I've seen on DU) in the past four years, not the least of which are:

Americans would never stand for illegal US government sponsored torture.

Americans would never stand for another stolen presidential election.

Americans would never stand for being purposefully misled into an illegal war.

Americans would never stand for our military's illegal use of chemical weapons on Iraqi citizens.

Americans would never stand for illegal US government sponsored domestic spying.

Americans would never stand for the bankrupting of our treasury through unbridled spending on war.


All have come to pass, all seemingly tolerated. That said, I can only hope you're right. Maybe all this is cumulative and there is a tipping point. If there is, we'd better reach it soon or there's not going to be much left of our country.

[Virginia Dare]

39. I had a similar epiphany...

A co-worker gave me a book about the Tri-lateral Commission, CFR, the Masons and other organizations centered in conspiracy theories . He was a real conspiracy nut, and I frankly thought he was crazy, but just on a lark, I read the book. I kind of treated it as a joke (I was working in D.C., and he warned me not to let anybody in public see me read it).

Well, 15 years or so later, I am a true believer. Much of what was predicted in that book has come true. It just all kind of falls into place if you take the blinders off and look at the big picture.

:scared:

[Ufomammut]

41. "Rule By Secrecy," by Jim Marrs is good

I know exactly what you mean ...it's a very uneasy feeling. One of the creepiest docs I've seen is - I'm unsure if it's even titled - but it's a six hour long film on the "alphabet" orgs, the report from Iron Mountain, and so on, tying it all into biblical prophecy.

[jeanarrett]

88. That's why I found the "matrix" reference interesting in the

Ken Welch article.

[paul_fromatlanta]

9. What's the source on this causing a magnitude 3-4 earthquake? Have not se

I have not seen that anywhere.

[paul_fromatlanta]

10. here is a somewhat larger conventional explosion that did register

Here is a somewhat larger conventional explosion that did register as a small earthquake

http://www.1976design.com/blog/archive/2004/04/18/largest-unexploded-bomb/

More than 1,000,000lbs of high explosive were packed into underground chambers along a seven-mile front. On June 7, 19 of the mines detonated in the space of 30 seconds in the biggest series of controlled explosions yet seen. Buildings within a 30-mile radius rocked on their foundations, and the bang was heard in Downing Street. In Switzerland, seismographs registered a small earthquake.

[Atman]

13. Only the news report I saw on Cabal News today

I don't have a link, although I am sure someone will locate one.

[paul_fromatlanta]

17. Found the link - I was searching wrong

>>Irene Smith, a spokeswoman for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, said it will register between 3.1 and 3.4 on the Richter sale but that "there will be no adverse effects to surrounding facilities either on or off the Nevada Test Site."<<

Apparently its 85 miles from Vegas so there is no way they should feel it but I bet they can see the cloud.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0603310168mar31,1,4673698.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

[leftyladyfrommo]

12. I absolutely hate this.

I was little when they did the testing in the 50's. That air sailed all the way up to Spokane. Way too many people in Spokane have MS and nobody knows why.

[DemonFighterLives]

15. Terrible, terrible

I don't know how this nation has slipped back to this stage. The nukes are no damn good for testing or use. Get real pnacers!

[Atman]

21. Correct, this is a MOAB, not a nuke. My bad. Here's a link...

(ON EDIT - This was supposed to be a response to post #16)

Bunker buster ready for test in Nevada desert

By Ann Scott Tyson in Washington
April 1, 2006

ONE of the largest explosive tests since the end of the Cold War is planned for June, when the Pentagon will detonate a gigantic, 635-tonne conventional bomb in the Nevada desert as part of its research into developing weapons that can destroy deeply buried military targets

The test, code-named Divine Strake, will occur on June 2 about 145 kilometres north-west of Las Vegas in a high desert valley bounded by mountains.

"This is the largest single explosive we could imagine doing," said James Tegnelia, director of the Pentagon's Defence Threat Reduction Agency, which is conducting the test. It will generate a huge mushroom cloud.

The test is aimed at determining how well a conventional bomb would perform against fortified underground targets, such as military headquarters, biological or chemical weapons stockpiles, and long-range missiles, that the Pentagon says are proliferating among adversary nation around the world.

Mr Tegnelia says there a many technical hurdles to overcome. He suggests big conventional bombs are unlikely to solve the overall problem of buried threats. "It's a lot easier to dig your tunnel 15 metres deeper ," he says. The bomb would be a conventional alternative to a nuclear weapon proposed by the Bush Administration, which has run into opposition on Capitol Hill.

http://smh.com.au/news/world/bunker-buster-ready-for-test-in-nevada-desert/2006/03/31/1143441331987.html

[DemonFighterLives]

31. Thanks

:dem:

[guinivere]

36. It still bothers me. nt

[donkeyotay]

82. Thank the Divine, this is a kinder, gentler bomb

"This is the largest single explosive we could imagine doing," said James Tegnelia, director of the Pentagon's Defence Threat Reduction Agency, which is conducting the test. It will generate a huge mushroom cloud...

Mr Tegnelia says there a many technical hurdles to overcome. He suggests big conventional bombs are unlikely to solve the overall problem of buried threats. "It's a lot easier to dig your tunnel 15 metres deeper ," he says. The bomb would be a conventional alternative to a nuclear weapon proposed by the Bush Administration, which has run into opposition on Capitol Hill. <end>

I have a bad feeling about this, too, but I have a bad feeling about everything they do. Everything they do is about making the world into one of those awful movies where every little bit of beauty and love and kindness is dead. Mission Accomplished. The world sucks and we're locked into your militarization escalation. Not so divine.

[DrRang]

16. Moabs are conventional explosives, right? Not nukes?

[paul_fromatlanta]

18. That is correct

[DemonFighterLives]

20. Not a nuke= I feel a little better

When dubby dropped out of the nuclear test ban treaty, I was scared out of my wits.
:nuke:

[paul_fromatlanta]

24. This is a larger version of the "Mother of all bombs" -

Technically its called a Massive Ordnance Air Blast - you may have also heard it called a Fuel Air bomb when it was developed in just a few weeks at the start of the Iraq war but this turned out not to be correct - it is more like a giant depth charge. The same technology is also used in explosive mining and torpedoes (but on a much smaller scale).

Apparently the main explosives are TNT and RDX plus powdered aluminum.

Here are some references

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-11-us-bomb-test_x.htm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/moab.htm

[DemonFighterLives]

30. That is the one thing we can count on from dubco

Shock and Awe. I'm awestruck.
:argh:

[paul_fromatlanta]

19. They could have tested it underground or on an island where nobody

would see it. So I think its a message to Iran that we can penetrate their nuclear facilities without using nukes ourselves....

Its also an admission of how useless nukes are for a non-apocalyptic war... the only reason we need something like this is that we are admitting the drawbacks of tactical nuclear weapons.

[lonestarnot]

23. Why don't they conduct the test in Wyoming?

[paul_fromatlanta]

25. Official reason: Nevada is the normal large explosive test site

My theory: So that reporters can see it from Vegas and Iran will be aware that we have a way to penetrate their nuclear weapons facilities without using nukes ourselves.

Note: This is an addendum to my theory that the Bush administration has already decided we are going to war with Iran.

[ProfessorGAC]

48. You Really Think They'll See The Cloud From This Bomb In Vegas?

85 miles is a long way! This bomb is about 4% of the Hiroshima bomb is total detonative strength. It's not going to create the total energy release of a nuke. It's tiny in comparison to most the films we have all seen on TV of nuke testing.

The might see a little bit of the cloud, but from 85 miles away, i don't think reporters will be shocked and awed. I've seen explosions from very close up in my past. (Consulted on the decon and ordinance destruction of a shuttered arsenal near where i live.) Obviously, i never saw a 1.3 million bomb go off (probably never saw anything bigger and 100kg), but i'm not sure this is for any reason other than to flex the military muscle and use some of the inventory so they can buy more.

It's all about the money. They're thieves stealing from the treasury. I think we all agree about that.

The Professor

[newspeak]

63. actually, you could

see the nuclear mushroom from Henderson NV and Beaver UT when they did the above ground testing. My friends mom and her classmates were allowed to go outside and see the mushroom cloud when it went off. Unfortunately, they were downwind and many at that school in Beaver UT developed cancer. My father-in-law worked at Timet in Henderson and they would go up to the top story of the building and watch the mushroom.

[ProfessorGAC]

Those Were Not 0.6kT Bombs Though

My point is that this is not a very big detonation, by nuke standards. This is a conventional explosive. Doesn't have the core temperature of a fission or fusion device, so the updraft is not hyperaccelerated in the first microseconds; the total energy release over unit volume of airspace is a fraction of a nuke; and the the plasma wave that is heading down toward the ground is not hitting with even 5% of the velocity, so the vertical rebound would be of far lower force.

This is a big nasty bomb, to be sure. But, the tests your mom saw were likely 100 to 5000 times more powerful than this device, and at lower velocity. (Nukes are measured in the joule equivalent of 1000 or 1 million metric tons of TNT. The higher velocity makes the bomb even more destructive than a truly equivalent amount of TNT.

I guess i'm doubting the shock and awe thing, because i don't think this bomb would be that "awesome" from 85 miles away. I wouldn't want to be standing next to it, but 0.6kT from 85 miles away is not really that tremendous an energy release to make a mushroom cloud like the huge ones your mom saw.
The Professor

[ProfessorGAC]

69. Those Were Not 0.6kT Bombs Though

My point is that this is not a very big detonation, by nuke standards. This is a conventional explosive. Doesn't have the core temperature of a fission or fusion device, so the updraft is not hyperaccelerated in the first microseconds; the total energy release over unit volume of airspace is a fraction of a nuke; and the the plasma wave that is heading down toward the ground is not hitting with even 5% of the velocity, so the vertical rebound would be of far lower force.

This is a big nasty bomb, to be sure. But, the tests your mom saw were likely 100 to 5000 times more powerful than this device, and at lower velocity. (Nukes are measured in the joule equivalent of 1000 or 1 million metric tons of TNT. The higher velocity makes the bomb even more destructive than a truly equivalent amount of TNT.

I guess i'm doubting the shock and awe thing, because i don't think this bomb would be that "awesome" from 85 miles away. I wouldn't want to be standing next to it, but 0.6kT from 85 miles away is not really that tremendous an energy release to make a mushroom cloud like the huge ones your mom saw.
The Professor

[ProfessorGAC]

70. Those Were Not 0.6kT Bombs Though

My point is that this is not a very big detonation, by nuke standards. This is a conventional explosive. Doesn't have the core temperature of a fission or fusion device, so the updraft is not hyperaccelerated in the first microseconds; the total energy release over unit volume of airspace is a fraction of a nuke; and the the plasma wave that is heading down toward the ground is not hitting with even 5% of the velocity, so the vertical rebound would be of far lower force.

This is a big nasty bomb, to be sure. But, the tests your mom saw were likely 100 to 5000 times more powerful than this device, and at lower velocity. (Nukes are measured in the joule equivalent of 1000 or 1 million metric tons of TNT. The higher velocity makes the bomb even more destructive than a truly equivalent amount of TNT.

I guess i'm doubting the shock and awe thing, because i don't think this bomb would be that "awesome" from 85 miles away. I wouldn't want to be standing next to it, but 0.6kT from 85 miles away is not really that tremendous an energy release to make a mushroom cloud like the huge ones your mom saw.
The Professor

[paul_fromatlanta]

72. No, I think I was wrong....looking at the math on this site

http://science.howstuffworks.com/question65.htm

[ProfessorGAC]

74. Well, Only Sort Of

If the cloud were to go up 10, or 15 or 20 miles, then the drawing you show wouldn't be pertinent, because the top of the cloud would rise above the horizon and come at you as a tangent to the horizon.

However, i'm only suggesting that this is not a big enough bomb to do just that.

Someone else mentioned that their mom saw a mushroom cloud during desert testing in the past, from about that distance. I believe that, but those bombs were WAAAAYYYY more powerful.
The Professor

[paul_fromatlanta]

77. Ok, it sounds like I was wrong about being wrong.

I appreciate the analysis.

[ProfessorGAC]

79. You're A Good Sport, Paul

The Professor

[ProfessorGAC]

75. Again

...

[ProfessorGAC]

76. Triple Again

...

[ProfessorGAC]

49. This Is Annoying

The Professor

[lonestarnot]

57. What are you annoyed about?

[ProfessorGAC]

59. The System Keeps Triple Posting On Me

It's been happening for 3 days and nothing i do seems to solve it. Sorry. I think a lot of people have seen the echo chamber that have been my posts, that i assumed people knew what i meant. I was wrong. Just having to go back and clean up threads by wiping out triple posts is getting annoying.
The Professor

[Atman]

62. Call your ISP

This was happening to my mom...everything she e-mailed or posted went out in triplicate. It turned out to be a problem with echo settings or somesuch at Cox communications.

[ProfessorGAC]

64. That's A Thought

I'll look into that. Thanks
The Professor

[lonestarnot]

65. Happened for 2 days for me. Email staff.

[ProfessorGAC]

71. Did It

Thanks

[ProfessorGAC]

60. The System Keeps Triple Posting On Me

It's been happening for 3 days and nothing i do seems to solve it. Sorry. I think a lot of people have seen the echo chamber that have been my posts, that i assumed people knew what i meant. I was wrong. Just having to go back and clean up threads by wiping out triple posts is getting annoying.
The Professor

[ProfessorGAC]

61. The System Keeps Triple Posting On Me

It's been happening for 3 days and nothing i do seems to solve it. Sorry. I think a lot of people have seen the echo chamber that have been my posts, that i assumed people knew what i meant. I was wrong. Just having to go back and clean up threads by wiping out triple posts is getting annoying.
The Professor

[ProfessorGAC]

50. Darn It

...

[KurtNYC]

52. "penetrate their nuclear..." - No this is a bunker buster

Iraq had a nuclear program in 1981 and Isreal took it out in a "surgical" airstrike. It did not require a large amount of explosive force. (Google "Osirak 1981")

Bombs of whatever size do not CAUSE earthquakes. They register on meters that track earthquakes but their explosion is not itself an earthquake. Every point up the richter scale is 10 times as strong so a 4 point measurement is 100 times less than a 6 point measurement. 4 points is almost nothing.

If recent history is any guide, we do not intimidate coutries out of going to war with us. Rather we try to provoke them into firing the first shot (paint planes as UN planes and fly over, etc) so we can gain more support for our pre-planned war/invasion. If Iraq is a model then there is probably nothing Iran can do to stop us from invading.

[paul_fromatlanta]

73. You're right except I believe Iran's nuclear facilities are in bunkers

And I agree it will not intimidate them. I think we are going to war with Iran.

[ronnie624]

81. "...and Iran will be aware...

that we have a way to penetrate their nuclear weapons facilities without using nukes ourselves."

With 1.4 million pounds of conventional explosives?

I think your understanding is far from complete.

[Ufomammut]

28. Received this from Mark Crispin Miller

Bush/Cheney testing nukes

... and doing it quietly!

Shouldn't we be making noise about this?

MCM

Hi,

Seems as though the Bush administration has been doing a little "quiet" nuclear testing in poor old Nevada...this email came from a member of the local native community.....media coverage anyone?

Stephenie Hendricks

Western Shoshone Defense Project
P.O. Box 211308
Crescent Valley, NV 89821
[phone]
Fax: [phone]
www.wsdp.org


-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 5:53 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Nuclear weapons test tomorrow at Nevada Test
Site

Krakatau Subcritical Experiment Scheduled

For Immediate Release February 21, 2006
National Nuclear Security Administration

http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/newsreleases/KrakatauSubcritical_02212006.
pdf

Krakatau, a joint United States/United Kingdom (US/UK)
subcritical experiment, will be conducted on February 23,
2006, at the Nevada Test Site. The experiment will be
conducted in the U1a complex. The Atomic Weapons
Establishment of the United Kingdom and Los Alamos National
Laboratory are conducting the experiment to gather
scientific data that provides crucial information to
maintain the safety and reliability of each nation's nuclear
weapons without having to conduct underground nuclear tests.

There have been 21 subcritical experiments to date since
they began in 1997. The last subcritical experiment,
Armando, was conducted on May 25, 2004. The last joint
US/UK subcritical experiment was Vito, conducted on February
14, 2002. Krakatau is a follow-on to the Vito experiment.

Subcritical experiments examine the behavior of plutonium as
it is strongly shocked by forces produced by chemical high
explosives. Subcritical experiments produce essential
scientific data and technical information used to help
maintain the safety and reliability of the nuclear weapons
stockpile. The experiments are subcritical; that is, no
critical mass is formed and no self-sustaining nuclear chain

reaction can occur; thus, there is no nuclear explosion.

The Nevada Test Site's U1a Complex is located 85 miles
northwest of Las Vegas. The U1a Complex is designed to
contain these experiments in a safe and secure environment
in an underground laboratory of horizontal tunnels with
small excavated experimental alcoves mined at the base of a
vertical shaft, approximately 960 feet beneath the surface.

NNSA/NSO Office of Public Affairs
http://www.nv.doe.gov
P.O. Box 98518
Las Vegas NV 89193-8518
News Media Contact:
Kevin Rohrer, 72-295-3521 [e-mail]
Nancy Tufano, 702-295-3521 [e-mail]
Shundahai Network
www.shundahai.org
P.O. Box 1115
Salt Lake City, UT 84110
Phone- 801.533.0128
Fax- 801.533.0129
[e-mail]

Online Fundraising Store- www.cafepress.com/shundahainet
If you are a Myspace user, you can now add us! www.Myspace.com/shundahai

Shundahai is a Newe (Western Shoshone) word meaning "Peace and Harmony
with all Creation"

[Atman]

35. Very interesting!

So this is at least in part to find out what happens to the nukes this MOAB hits when it is finally used against Iran's facilities. Thanks for the link!

[paul_fromatlanta]

42. They could have done that in secret - I think its a message to Iran

[blogslut]

83. wait a tic...

"Subcritical experiments examine the behavior of plutonium as
it is strongly shocked by forces produced by chemical high
explosives. Subcritical experiments produce essential
scientific data and technical information used to help
maintain the safety and reliability of the nuclear weapons
stockpile. The experiments are subcritical; that is, no
critical mass is formed and no self-sustaining nuclear chain

reaction can occur; thus, there is no nuclear explosion..."

So, does that mean they're going to try to blow up a plutonium warhead or pit?

[hlthe2b]

29. NOT nuclear! I'm still bothered, but it is conventional, not nuclear.

[jim3775]

46. Here is full info on the "GBU-43-MOAB - Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb":

It is a conventional explosive that has been tested on American soil in the past.

Globalsecurity.com

The GBU-43/B is large, powerful and accurately delivered. high explosive.The GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb weapon is a 21,000 lbs total weight GPS-guided munition with fins and inertial gyro for pitch and roll control. MOAB is a guided bomb which delivers the 18,700 lb BLU-120/B warhead bomb with KMU-593/B GPS/INS. The MOAB is the largest-ever satellite-guided, air-delivered weapon in history. The 21,600-pound MOAB is an improved replacement for the unguided 15,000-pound BLU-82 Daisy Cutter. It is 30 feet long with a diameter of 40.5 inches. The warhead is a blast-type warhead. It was developed in only nine weeks to be available for the Iraq campaign, but it was not used.

The 21,700-pound <9,500 kilogram> bomb contains 18,700 pounds of H6, an explosive that is a mixture of RDX (Cyclotrimethylene trinitramine), TNT, and aluminum. H6 is used by the military for general purpose bombs. H6 is an Australian produced explosive composition. Composition H6 is a widely used main charge filling for underwater blast weapons such as mines, depth charges, torpedoes and mine disposal charges. HBX compositions (HBX-1, HBX-3, and H6) are aluminized (powdered aluminum) explosives used primarily as a replacement for the obsolete explosive, torpex. They are employed as bursting charges in mines, depth bombs, depth charges, and torpedoes. HBX-3 and H-6 have lower sensitivity to impact and much higher explosion test temperatures than torpex. The MOAB weapon produces a very large explosive blast, with lesser fragmentation effects due to a thin-walled aluminum casing.

...

On 11 March 2003 he Air Force tested its Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) weapon at the Eglin Air Force Base Air Armament Center's western test range, dropped from a C-130.

Eglin Air Force Base's Air Armament Center conducted the second live test of the largest conventional bomb in the US inventory at approximately 2:30 p.m. EST 21 November 2003. Designated the GBU-43/B, and popularly known as MOAB -- Massive Ordnance Air Blast -- the 21,700-pound bomb was launched from an MC-130E Combat Talon I aircraft flown by a crew assigned to Eglin's 46th Test Wing. One objective was to collect more data and provide it to the user to assist in targeting. Also, the Air Force wanted to certify MOAB on the Combat Talon I aircraft as previous launches had been made from the MC-130 Combat Talon II.

[Marie26]

56. *raises hand* nt

[newspeak]

58. yes, living outside of Vegas now

however, if they test this monster, better here than downwind. If they detonate this bomb and contanimated radioactive material is stirred up, Utah will be hit again. My friend's mother died of a rare cancer along with most of her classmates, watching the above ground testing. My other friend has a thyroid condition because of contamination and parts of her family have thyroid conditions or cancer.
This is not a good thing, especially for those who are downwind in Southern Utah.

[951-Riverside]

68. Lord Pissypants should be standing right under the fallout

[Cleita]

78. I thought above ground testing had be banned in the sixties by

law. Is this criminal breaking the law again in front of the whole nation for everyone to see?

[lonestarnot]

80. Not a nuke.

[newspeak]

85. it's not supposed to be a nuke

however, it depends where there going to test it. The Nevada test site has been used for years for nuclear testing. Is there any chance to spread radioactive material with this bomb?

[lonestarnot]

87. It just makes sense to me that is a possibility. The shit remains

active for megayears. Can't remember the half life, schooling too many years ago.

[earth mom]

89. K & R. nt