Search Details

Word: nuclearism (lookup in dictionary) (lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first (reverse)


Usage:

...sure, there are serious arguments both for and against developing such a system. Part of the justification is that the U.S. military already has such a capability. Unfortunately, it's nuclear, which renders it worthless for anything but Armageddon. But for about $1 billion, over the next three years, the nation could convert some Trident missiles - now limited to carrying nuclear warheads in their submarine launchers - to non-nuclear weapons. The plan favored by the NRC panel would replace two of the 24 nuclear missiles on each of the Navy's 12 Trident subs with conventional-armed missiles...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Will the US Develop a Death Ray? | 8/21/2008 | See Source »

...past two years, Congress has blocked Bush Administration plans to develop such a weapon. Lawmakers are concerned that Russia, and soon China, might mistake the launch of a conventionally-armed Trident with the start of a nuclear war against them - and respond in kind before realizing they were mistaken. The NRC panel dismissed this concern, saying various steps - including informing Moscow and Beijing of conventional launches - could be taken to minimize such an error...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Will the US Develop a Death Ray? | 8/21/2008 | See Source »

...predicted." That's eight caveats right there. Such a weapon would be worthless against moving or heavily-defended targets (developing such a capability would take at least a decade and cost as much as $25 billion) and represents only a "niche capability" designed to attack stationary terrorists or nuclear weapons or supplies...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Will the US Develop a Death Ray? | 8/21/2008 | See Source »

Beyond picking off terrorists and nuclear warheads stuck at border crossings, the report cites a couple of potentially cataclysmic events where a conventional strike from out of the blue could save the day. The system would be perfect for destroying an enemy missile carrying a nuclear warhead on its launch pad (apparently, the NRC has some doubts about the effectiveness of the nation's "Star Wars" missile shield and the utility of hundreds of warplanes). It would also be ideal for taking out an unexplained super-weapon (perhaps an electro-magnetic pulse nuclear bomb) that could lead to the "loss...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Will the US Develop a Death Ray? | 8/21/2008 | See Source »

...report does point out one area of potential trouble in its own proposal. Deploying two kinds of missiles together in the same submarine "raises at least the possibility of an accidental launch of a nuclear weapon instead of the intended launch of a conventional weapon because... prompt global strikes may often allow little time for second checks." Command and control becomes a dicey issue. Among other safeguards, the Navy has proposed separate "firing keys" for each kind of missile, each kept in its own safe, and each under the control of a different senior officer on the submarine. Now, that...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Will the US Develop a Death Ray? | 8/21/2008 | See Source »

Previous | 268 | 269 | 270 | 271 | 272 | 273 | 274 | 275 | 276 | 277 | 278 | 279 | 280 | 281 | 282 | 283 | 284 | 285 | 286 | 287 | 288 | Next