Why are physicists silent? The Dangers of New

Why are physicists silent? The Dangers of New

Why are physicists silent? The Dangers of New US Nuclear Weapons Policies *Nuclear Posture Review: delivered to Congress December 2001 Represents a radical departure from the past and the most fundamental rethinking of the roles and purposes of nuclear weapons in almost a quarter-century. Instead of treating nuclear weapons in isolation, it considered them as an integrated component of American military power. (Linton Brooks, National Nuclear Security Administration Director, addressing Senate Armed Services Committee, 2004)

*Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations: Pentagon draft document, September 2003, March 2005 Military guidelines for implementation of new Nuclear Posture *Washington Post article, September 2005 NY Times March 2002 Why should physicists worry about this? * Physicists discovered E=mc2 * Physicists discovered fission and fusion * Physicists created the atomic bomb and the hydrogen bomb

* Physicists benefit from defense department funding * Physicists educate other physicists that will work in the defense industry building and managing bombs using their physics knowledge * Physicists understand better than most non-physicists why nuclear weapons are very dangerous If nuclear bombs end up killing a lot of people, it's (at least partly) our fault! egrating conventional and nuclear attacks will ensure the most efficient use of fo provide US leaders with a broader range of strike options to address immediate

ingencies. Integration of conventional and nuclear forces is therefore crucial to t cess of any comprehensive strategy. This integration will ensure optimal targetin mal collateral damage, and reduce the probability of escalation. mbatant commanders may consider the following target selection factors to deter to defeat individual targets.... 1. Time sensitivity. 2. Hardness (ability to withsta ventional strikes). 3. Size of target. 4. Surrounding geology and depth (for erground targets). 5. Required level of damage... e than 70 countries now use underground Facilities (UGFs) for military purposes...

ear weapons could be employed against targets able to withstand non-nuclear attack, example, deep underground bunkers or bio-weapon facilities)." . red capabilities for nuclear weapons systems in flexible, adaptable strike plans de options for variable and reduced yields, high accuracy, and timely employment. e capabilities would help deter enemy use of WMD or limit collateral damage, ld the United States have to defeat enemy WMD capabilities. egrating conventional and nuclear attacks will ensure the most efficient use of fo provide US leaders with a broader range of strike options to address immediate ingencies. Integration of conventional and nuclear forces is therefore crucial to t

cess of any comprehensive strategy. This integration will ensure optimal targetin mal collateral damage, and reduce the probability of escalation. mbatant commanders may consider the following target selection factors to deter to defeat individual targets.... 1. Time sensitivity. 2. Hardness (ability to withsta ventional strikes). 3. Size of target. 4. Surrounding geology and depth (for erground targets). 5. Required level of damage... e than 70 countries now use underground Facilities (UGFs) for military purposes... ear weapons could be employed against targets able to withstand non-nuclear attack,

example, deep underground bunkers or bio-weapon facilities)." . red capabilities for nuclear weapons systems in flexible, adaptable strike plans de options for variable and reduced yields, high accuracy, and timely employment. e capabilities would help deter enemy use of WMD or limit collateral damage, ld the United States have to defeat enemy WMD capabilities. WMD fallacy: Chemical Weapons Convention Treaty ach State Party to this Convention undertakes never under any

rcumstances: o develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile or retain hemical weapons, or transfer, directly or indirectly, chemical weapons to anyone; onvention on the Prohibition of the Development, oduction and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biologica nd Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction Are nuclear weapons not WMD? The US reserves the right to develop, produce, stockpile AND threaten to use WMD (nuclear) against non-nuclear states suspected of

having other kinds of "WMD's" solution? nuclear proliferation! The United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 February 21, 2003 The Honorable George W. Bush President of the United States 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you to convey our grave concern about recent public revelations that suggest that your administration considers nuclear weapons as a mere extension of the continuum of conventional weapons open to the United States, and that your administration may use nuclear weapons in the looming military conflict against Iraq. We note with grave concern the Los Angeles Times report of Jan. 25 and 26 that your administration is actively considering the use of U.S. nuclear weapons in the event that Iraq attacks with chemical or biological weapons, or to preemptively strike sites believed to store or manufacture chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. What is more, according to a Jan. 31 Washington Times article, you approved a national security directive that specifically allows for the use of nuclear weapons in response to biological or chemical attacks, apparently changing decades-old U.S. policy

of deliberate ambiguity. According to the article, National Security Presidential Directive 17 states, The United States will continue to make clear that it reserves the right to respond with overwhelming force - including potentially nuclear weapons to the use of [weapons of mass destruction] against the United States, our forces abroad, and friends and allies. Such language suggests that the administration is prepared to use nuclear weapons first to respond to non-nuclear WMD threats, thereby increasing reliance on nuclear weapons. Why all this is not just 'theory' Basis for 'Nuclear Posture Review'

(2001) Director, National Nuclear Security Administration Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence National Security Advisor Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs

Chairman, Pentagon's Defense Science Board NBC News 12/12/05 Why all this is not just 'theory' Basis for 'Nuclear Posture Review' (2001) Director, National Nuclear Security

Administration Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence National Security Advisor Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs Chairman, Pentagon's Defense Science Board

NBC News 12/12/05 What has the APS said about all this? Why is it important that it says something? *Scientists are listened to,physicists know most about nuclear weapons *Help senators oppose these policies * Raise public awareness Real life example: Iran Suppose a military confrontation starts:

Iran is accused by US State Department of having chemical and biological weapons Iran has missiles that can reach Iraq and Israel Missiles could potentially have chemical warheads Iran has very large (>106) conventional forces U.S. has 1.5x105 conventional forces in Iraq FAS January/February 2001

By Greg Mello May/June 1997 pp. 28-32 (vol. 53, no. 03) 1997 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists The B61 "mod-11" gravity bomb is the first new nuclear capability added to the U.S. arsenal since 1989. It was developed and deployed secretly, without public or congressional debate, and in apparent contradiction to official domestic and international assurances that no new nuclear weapons were being developed in the United States. The B61-11's unique earth-penetrating characteristics and wide range of yields allow it to threaten otherwise indestructible targets from the air--or, in Pentagonese, to hold such targets "at risk." That makes the B61-11 a uniquely useful warfighting tool. Why these policies are wrong * Nuclear weapons are a million times more powerful than any other

weapon * An escalating nuclear war can destroy all of humanity * The new US nuclear weapons policy encourages nuclear proliferation * The 'nuclear taboo' has served humanity well for 60 years * The nuclear threshold should not be crossed in the scenarios envisioned in the new policy * Planning according to these policies forecloses alternative planning * Nuclear 'deterrence' is a fallacy. There is no deterrence unless one is prepared to do it

http://physics.ucsd.edu/petition/ ... (600 US physicists) What can be done? * Get APS to issue a strong statement against these policies Is it within APS' purview? Imagine german biologists had developed a new deadly virus in 1940, that spreads rapidly and kills millions, and Hitler was about to deploy it.

Would it have been right for the German Biological Society to issue a statement of opposition? * Raise public awareness (letters to newspapers, lectures, statements ...) * Lobby Congress to have public hearings on this matter, oppose these policies * Get these policies reversed before they are implemented What can be done?

* Get APS to issue a strong statement against these policies Is it within APS' purview? Imagine german biologists had developed a new deadly virus in 1940, that spreads rapidly and kills millions, and Hitler was about to deploy it. Would it have been right for the German Biological Society to issue a statement of opposition? * Raise public awareness (letters to newspapers, lectures, statements ...) * Lobby Congress to have public hearings on this matter, oppose these policies

* Get these policies reversed before they are implemented

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Canada Residential Products - ACN Compass Canada

    Canada Residential Products - ACN Compass Canada

    Acquire5 ACN Digital Phone Service Customers, 5 ACN Digital Phone Service Bundled with High Speed Internet Customers or a combination of both and your Digital Phone Service can be FREE! Simply acquire 5 customers of the same qualifying service, in...
  • MockData: load generation based on read replay with

    MockData: load generation based on read replay with

    1527793250 DAOD_HIGG2D1.14249006._000125.pool.root.1 4787931809 Starts the first transfer, then 30 seconds later starts the second, or with a factor of 2.0 would start it 15 seconds later.. The test finishes when the file-list is finished
  • Mid-rapidity Emission in Reactions of Sn Isotopes at 26A MeV

    Mid-rapidity Emission in Reactions of Sn Isotopes at 26A MeV

    Most of those fragments are α particles. A high yield of tritons relative to protons is . observed and the heavy fragment yields are . ... This behavior should not be restricted to fission necks and is more likely to...
  • Prmios Awards Science Service Award 2018: Helena B.

    Prmios Awards Science Service Award 2018: Helena B.

    FORAGING BEHAVIOR OF BENTHIC AND NEKTONIC TADPOLES IN DIURNAL AND NOCTURNAL PERIODS. Marques, Y. Y. 1, Annibale, F. S. 2, Rossa-Feres, D. de C. 1. 1Unesp/Ibilce - UniversidadeEstadualPaulista, 2UFG/ICB - Universidade Federal de Goiás
  • Overview of Session - CPA Australia

    Overview of Session - CPA Australia

    Professional development, including Congress, moving away from technical content, the reduction in quality, and high costs. The discussion also covered: The quality of the CPA program, and ensuring the offering remains contemporary.
  • Module 2: The Role of the Leo Club

    Module 2: The Role of the Leo Club

    How the advisor will actively engage his/her Leos to eventually reach the top rung of Hart's Ladder of Participation with his/her Leo club. How the advisor personally defines each of the following and plans to put these characteristics into action...
  • Blank Jeopardy - Commack Schools

    Blank Jeopardy - Commack Schools

    Scientific inquiry Life Functions Cells 1 Cells 2 Microscope 10 10 10 10 10 20 20 20 20 20 30 30 30 30 30 40 40 40 40 40 50 50 50 50 50 D20-Q What are 2 cell parts...
  • Ancient Egypt - Edl

    Ancient Egypt - Edl

    Ancient Egypt The Gift of the Nile Ancient Egyptian Time An Explanation BC - Means "Before Christ" AD - Means "Anno Domini" (The Year of Our Lord) Both of these terms were adopted during the early formation of the Roman/Christian...