BUSH ADMINISTRATION NUCLEAR POLICY IS VERY GOOD
BUSH POLICY REVIEW WILL CHANGE THE ROLE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Theresa Hitchens, Research Director of the British American Security Information Council January 19, 2001 Nuclear Weapons: "Expensive Relics of Dead Conflicts"http://www.clw.org/coalition/briefv5n2.htm //VT2002acsln
During the campaign, President Bush called unneeded nuclear weapons "expensive relics of dead conflicts." If he is to make good on his May 23, 2000 campaign pledge to "reduce the number of American nuclear weapons significantly further than ... START II," and to "lower the alert status" of those forces, it will be necessary for his administration to undertake a fundamental and meaningful overhaul of these outdated, Cold War-era military plans and policies.
BUSH CALLED FOR UNILATERAL REDUCTION IN NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Rockefeller Family Fund, May, 2001; One Step Forward, Two Steps Back...http://dontblowit.policy.net/ //VT2002acsln
Recently President Bush called for unilateral nuclear reductions. This is a bold first step forward towards reducing nuclear weapons.
BUSH WILL MOVE TO CUT USA NUCLEAR FORCES FROM 2500 TO 1000
JAMES RUBIN, US assistant secretary of state between 1997-2000, now lecturing at the London School of Economics, February 6, 2001, Financial Times (London) SECTION: COMMENT & ANALYSIS;Pg. 23 HEADLINE: COMMENT & ANALYSIS: A deal on missile defence: George Bush can build a consensus that protects the world against weapons of mass destruction, says James Rubin: //VT2002acsln
To date, the Pentagon has insisted that 2,500 strategic nuclear weapons is as low as the US can go. That number was the result of an extensive strategic review in the early 1990s. But a Republican presidency can go further: with the right strategic guidance from the top, many analysts believe the Pentagon can construct a nuclear deterrent at a level of 1,000 warheads or even less.
USA MONITORS AND TESTS ITS NUCLEAR STOCKPILE CAREFULLY AND HAS NO NEW NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Walter Pincus, Washington Post Staff Writer April 15, 2001, The Washington Post SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A02 HEADLINE: U.S. Studies Developing New Nuclear Bomb //VT2002acsln
A new nuclear bomb has not been developed in the United States since the 1980s, and nuclear testing was halted in 1992. Each year the Energy Department spends about $ 4.5 billion in its stockpile stewardship program that keeps warheads safe and secure. Tiny elements of nuclear materials are exploded in "sub-critical" tests, which are allowed under the testing moratorium because they do not create a nuclear chain reaction.
AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL SUPPORT DEEP CUTS IN NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Thomas W. Graham; vice president, the Second Chance Foundation January, 2001 The Public Perspective SECTION: Vol. 12, No. 1; Pg. 22 HEADLINE: National Security; Opportunities and dangers for the new administration //VT2002acsln
Americans are willing to support drastic negotiated cuts in nuclear weapons, and perhaps even fundamental changes in nuclear policy, strategy, and operations, if they believe the military leadership does not need or want today's large nuclear forces.
BUSH WANTS TO DE-ALERT USA NUCLEAR FORCES
Daryl Kimball, Council for a Livable World, April 27, 2001, Standing Down U.S. and Russian Nuclear Weapons: The Time for Meaningful Action is Nowhttp://www.clw.org/coalition/briefv5n8.htm //VT2002acsln
This anachronism of the nuclear age can and must be eliminated. George W. Bush agreed during the 2000 campaign, saying:
"... the United States should remove as many weapons as possible from high-alert, hair-trigger status - another unnecessary vestige of Cold War confrontation. Preparation for quick launch - within minutes after warning of an attack - was the rule during the era of superpower rivalry...keeping so many weapons on high alert may create unacceptable risks of accidental or unauthorized launch."