cast the first stone, buddy.
How much are American lives worth?
- Thread starter ohio
- Start date
Yeah, I busted him on that has well.
Now now. Let's not get nasty.
These types of discussions won't solve any of the issues on the table. What can happen is that people learn from each other.
These types of discussions won't solve any of the issues on the table. What can happen is that people learn from each other.
That is specifically the act I was referring to. It did not go near far enough, and the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program has been largely unsuccessful. Rather than shutting down borders and the black market, it's helped disarm weapons under the control of competent governments that have demonstrated an overwhelming willingness to disarm themselves in accordance with previous agreements. In addition the numbers above don't compare the number of still active weapons. I'm not certain on this last point, but I also believe the reason we can't account for the chemical weapons isn't the "behest of the governments,' but because the USSR wasn't required to catalog them like nuclear weapons... which makes them that much easier to smuggle.
And Burly-Surly, give me a break. I admitted I was wrong in that thread, with regards to those specific tubes... and if you'd heard the term Nunn-Lugar prior to this thread, I'm sure you thought it was a fire-arm for women of the cloth.
I double checked. Nunn-Lugar act transferred $400 million to the DOD for the purpose of disarming weapons and providing housing and jobs to Soviet scientists.
It's reasons for being inneffective WEREN'T entirely our fault, as Moscow will not allow us to assist them in inventorying the massive numbers of nuclear weapons.
Additionally the promise of aid, prompted some new republics to effectively hold us ransom with their weapons; despite having agreed prior to the act to disarm themselves.
And once again, it provided no measures to prevent employees and military personal from smuggling goods or information to the black market.
It's reasons for being inneffective WEREN'T entirely our fault, as Moscow will not allow us to assist them in inventorying the massive numbers of nuclear weapons.
Additionally the promise of aid, prompted some new republics to effectively hold us ransom with their weapons; despite having agreed prior to the act to disarm themselves.
And once again, it provided no measures to prevent employees and military personal from smuggling goods or information to the black market.
No seriously writing something on the internet does not make it true. You said and I quote
We did. We gave the Soviets and then the Russians as much help (more in most cases) then were willing to ask for. I don't see any mention of Nunn Lugar in your post.
Unsuccessful by what standard? You are right it hasn't stopped the black market and closed borders but that wasn't what it was designed to do. It was designed to shore up the security of WMD and facitliate the destruction of them. Now while the security of Russian nuclear weapons is still pathetic in comparison to US security it is better by bounds than it was in the early 90's. That improvement can be directly related to these acts and the money from them.
As for the numbers not comparing to the still active weapons. Lets see in late 2001 the levels were reported as follows: 5500 strategic warheads and 4000 not strategic warheads. So I would say 5000 is a pretty substanial number. The Russians are also in the process of deactivating weapons outside of the program under verification procedures established in the START and SALT Treaties.
As for chemical weapons. Those weapons (both in bulk and warheaded) have been cataloged but classified. Through FIA you can get the reports but the amounts have been blacked out. Even then the Russians have been much more secretive about chemical weapons. So whether the numbers are accurate is certainly more debatable than those for nuclear forces. While much of the financing for chemical weapons comes from the previously mentioned act, the Wyoming Memorandum of Understanding is also significant in regards to chemical weapons. The security at these facilities has always been much higher. I think that the Russians fear these weapons even more than the nuclear ones.
No you checked for the first time. Be honest.
That $400 million was just for 2002 and it is set to remain the same for this year. It has actually run right around $500 million a year since the first year that the Russians accepted the help. All total the its been about 3.5 billion that has gone into this program.
Yes there were problems with republics wanting aid in exchange for sending their nuclear weapons back. Even former Warsaw Pact countries did the same thing in regards to the tactical weapons they held. You should do the research and let me know exactly where the vast majority of these weapons are now.
Money that was formerly being used to pay scientists is now being extended to military personnel. I don't have the source here in my office but I believe the number was scheduled to around 15 to 20 million for those payments in 2002.
And you are right to stop such information smuggling is virtually impossible regardless of how much money you would spend on it. So you can have unrealistic expectations or reasonable ones. But again there never was an intention to for Nunn-Lugar to do this.
Ineffective - not producing an intended effect. Not sure that matches the results of Nunn-Lugar.
Is this still on topic Ohio?
This thread has gone every which way.
This thread has gone every which way.
"not in your office"????!! Wait, you're not a hippie. What exactly do you do for a living?
You're kidding me. You really want me to cite the specific name of any law or act I refer to in this forum? I'm neither a politician nor a historian, and like you said this is an internet forum. I'm assuming most people either don't care about the name, or find it annoying when others use it...
I said double check, because it was that. The last time I'd read about the CTR program was a couple of years ago, likely in Mother Jones or the Economist... since they were the only relevent magazines I've been reading regularly (though not lately, didn't renew subscriptions this year...), other than the odd Newsweek floating around.
Intended effect in my mind was "reduction of the threat to the US"... maybe an unrealistic expectation. To that end, do we have any operations in place buying weapons in the black market for purpose of disarmament? Probably wouldn't be public knowledge if we did... though I can't imagine we don't.
And yup, we're off topic, but it doesn't really matter... all the thread was supposed to do was get folks (me included) thinking more about the potential war.
Ha ha ha!
Thanks pal.
Those pesky facts. 
As for the buying weapons in the black market. The Russian Federal Security Service (used to be the KGB) actively runs sting style investigations against workers both civilian and military at WMD facilities. They have even been known to attempt to turn US participants in the program. It is relatively common knowledge that the CIA, FBI and DIA particpate in these investigations. Without all those pesky civil rights, they can go to great lengths to goad folks to attempt to commit these crimes. In the US, lawyers would call it entrapment, in Russia...... The penalities are extremely harsh. So you never know who you might be selling to.
I think that the reduction in threat to the US is very real in the destruction and control of arms under Nunn-Lugar.
As for the buying weapons in the black market. The Russian Federal Security Service (used to be the KGB) actively runs sting style investigations against workers both civilian and military at WMD facilities. They have even been known to attempt to turn US participants in the program. It is relatively common knowledge that the CIA, FBI and DIA particpate in these investigations. Without all those pesky civil rights, they can go to great lengths to goad folks to attempt to commit these crimes. In the US, lawyers would call it entrapment, in Russia...... The penalities are extremely harsh. So you never know who you might be selling to.
Yep pretty good stuff and it remains pretty civil, which keeps the debate going.
Not interested in oil? Oil is the main reason.
Yes Saddam is nuts, but a puppet government controled by the US and Britain would have access to all the oil they want. BTW we did the Bush government negotiate with the Taliban, in the past, in order to run some pipeline through Afganistan?
Yes Saddam is nuts, but a puppet government controled by the US and Britain would have access to all the oil they want. BTW we did the Bush government negotiate with the Taliban, in the past, in order to run some pipeline through Afganistan?
Yes Saddam is nuts, but a government influenced by the US and Britain would have access to the oil they need and stablize the Gulf region for the better.
I'm a professional hippie. My office is a tent in the woods.