I wonder who is going to make money off of this? As the story points out, we have enough hydrogen bombs now. And they will work if we need them. What the story fails to mention is that we don't need them. We have no looming conflicts with nuclear states. The conflicts we face currently are not even against organized states. We have no good targets to nuke. Even with our conventional bombs, we keep killing civilians. Even if we had a target to hit, we have enough weaponry to bomb half ... More »

The article creates an excellent collection of facts on this most urgent problem. The technical bomb experts say the current weapons are safe and reliable for another 50 years. The reckless willlful fools at the top lie and ignore that input. They harrass the experts by re-bidding the Lawrence and Alamo management contracts and attacking their unions. The administration is making moves that will re-ignite thermonuclear arms races so the rapture will come in the form of ten thousand ... More »

This is a well-written, horrifying story. Are the nation and Congress going to sleep their way through this also? Instead of poliferation we should be concentrating on the removal of ALL nuclear weapons in EVERY country and this includes the United States. To insist on this would truly prove that we are the greatest nation.

Scaremongering - keep this in perspective - the US is spending $177M per DAY in Iraq (according to the billboard in Times Square I pass every day!) and someone is worried about $118/year for upkeep? A little maintainence on 50-year old technology isn't a bad thing - Chernobyl anyone? This article shifts halfway into an assesment of the effect of a US military action on the Iranian nuclear policy????