Comments on: Gordon Prather http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/08/05/gordon-prather-12/ Interviews of foreign policy experts, writers and activists. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:43:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: dndn http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/08/05/gordon-prather-12/comment-page-1/#comment-5886 dndn Sat, 08 Aug 2009 17:40:38 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3737#comment-5886 Very good interview. Very good interview.

]]> By: ConT http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/08/05/gordon-prather-12/comment-page-1/#comment-5877 ConT Thu, 06 Aug 2009 23:00:35 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3737#comment-5877 I believe that the EMP "kill" mechanism was conjectured to be the generation of a DC pulse that would saturate the cores in transformers all over the country, causing them to overheat and explode. What a crock! I believe that the EMP "kill" mechanism was conjectured to be the generation of a DC pulse that would saturate the cores in transformers all over the country, causing them to overheat and explode.
What a crock!

]]> By: Timbot2000 http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/08/05/gordon-prather-12/comment-page-1/#comment-5874 Timbot2000 Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:12:46 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3737#comment-5874 I might also add that only implosion-type devices can be used as primaries for hydrogen and neutron bombs. Same for the N.Koreans. N. Korea imports 90% of its electricity from China. Needless to say, running a gaseous diffusion plant would be a dead giveaway. That why N. Korea tried to use plutonium to build the Pakistani Uranium design (it failed of course, the neutronics of uranium and plutonium are completely different.) I might also add that only implosion-type devices can be used as primaries for hydrogen and neutron bombs.

Same for the N.Koreans. N. Korea imports 90% of its electricity from China. Needless to say, running a gaseous diffusion plant would be a dead giveaway. That why N. Korea tried to use plutonium to build the Pakistani Uranium design (it failed of course, the neutronics of uranium and plutonium are completely different.)

]]> By: Timbot2000 http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/08/05/gordon-prather-12/comment-page-1/#comment-5873 Timbot2000 Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:07:43 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3737#comment-5873 Great stuff Scott! Only a few technical points. Keep in mind regarding gun vs. implosion nukes: A gun-type weapon, while simple to design and build, can only be built with weapons-grade (99.9% pure) U-235. Plutonium is useless in this case. Now, the problem is that U-235 is VERY tough to manufacture. All industrial methods to produce weapons-grade uranium require vast resources (especially electricity) to produce even small amounts of metal. If the Iranians had a "secret" program to enrich Uranium, it would be impossible to hide. When the US blasted Hiroshima to kingdom come, Japanese physicists ascertained that the bomb used Uranium (it did), and that the US could not possibly have another one (we did'nt). As for implosion devices, they have several advantages, namely suitability for miniaturized missile-deliverable designs, MUCH better efficiency (gun-type nukes are usually around 10% efficient, advanced implosion designs are over 90%), and finally, you can use plutonium, which can be churned out prodigiously by a breeder reactor. Finally, though it is a small point, only two countries, the US and South Africa, initiated nuclear programs with the design of a gun-type device. The Russians, Chinese, French/Israelis, British, all started with implosion-type A-bombs. Great stuff Scott! Only a few technical points.
Keep in mind regarding gun vs. implosion nukes:
A gun-type weapon, while simple to design and build, can only be built with weapons-grade (99.9% pure) U-235. Plutonium is useless in this case. Now, the problem is that U-235 is VERY tough to manufacture. All industrial methods to produce weapons-grade uranium require vast resources (especially electricity) to produce even small amounts of metal. If the Iranians had a "secret" program to enrich Uranium, it would be impossible to hide. When the US blasted Hiroshima to kingdom come, Japanese physicists ascertained that the bomb used Uranium (it did), and that the US could not possibly have another one (we did'nt).
As for implosion devices, they have several advantages, namely suitability for miniaturized missile-deliverable designs, MUCH better efficiency (gun-type nukes are usually around 10% efficient, advanced implosion designs are over 90%), and finally, you can use plutonium, which can be churned out prodigiously by a breeder reactor. Finally, though it is a small point, only two countries, the US and South Africa, initiated nuclear programs with the design of a gun-type device. The Russians, Chinese, French/Israelis, British, all started with implosion-type A-bombs.

]]> By: Claus-Erik Hamle http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/08/05/gordon-prather-12/comment-page-1/#comment-5872 Claus-Erik Hamle Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:05:10 +0000 http://antiwar.com/radio/?p=3737#comment-5872 According to former Trident missile engineer Bob Aldridge-<a href="http://www.plrc.org-the" target="_blank">www.plrc.org-the</a> Pentagon aims to achieve a disarming and unanswerable first-strike capability. And according to Bob Aldridge the US Navy can track and destroy all enemy submarines simultaneously. Please see the article by Keir Lieber and Daryl Press, "The Rise of US Nuclear Primacy" in the 2006 March/April issue of Foreign Affairs. Minuteman-3 and Trident-2 D5 linked to NAVSTAR obtain a CEP of 30-40 metres, enough to destroy any hard target. A First-Strike Capability won´t be complete without the missiles in Poland to shoot down any surviving Russian missiles. Even if it´s only for blackmail, the Russians may have no choice but implementing Launch On Warning. According to former Trident missile engineer Bob Aldridge-http://www.plrc.org-the Pentagon aims to achieve a disarming and unanswerable first-strike capability. And according to Bob Aldridge the US Navy can track and destroy all enemy submarines simultaneously. Please see the article by Keir Lieber and Daryl Press, "The Rise of US Nuclear Primacy" in the 2006 March/April issue of Foreign Affairs. Minuteman-3 and Trident-2 D5 linked to NAVSTAR obtain a CEP of 30-40 metres, enough to destroy any hard target. A First-Strike Capability won´t be complete without the missiles in Poland to shoot down any surviving Russian missiles. Even if it´s only for blackmail, the Russians may have no choice but implementing Launch On Warning.

]]>