HOW CAN WE GET RID OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS?

Funkhouser and KCMO City Council Say Nuclear Holocaust Jobs Are Good

Nuclear weapons are for one thing, destroying cities and people by the millions. So want a good job? Go to Kansas City, Missouri. That is where the city council and the notorious Mayor Funkhouser could see eye to eye on something. Only one council member had the integrity to say no to the nuclear holocaust industry.

Everyone else played the ignorant, any job is a moral job, approach. They want the jobs and they don't care if the jobs are in preparation for a nuclear holocaust. KCP the so called Kansas City Plant makes most of every nuclear weapon deployed by the United States of Nuclear Terror.
Kansas City could have said no just like the people who made the cannisters for ZYKLON B could have said no. But they didn't and when and if people die from these weapons it will be the City Council and Mark
Funkhouser, among others who are responsible.

Moral degeneracy and degradation in high places, what a surprise!

It was reported that the council and mayor were respectful of peace activists who suggested the council and the mayor do the right thing. But the council and mayor were respectful of no one. They determined that any job, no matter how evil and reprehensible is a good job. They degraded themselves and showed that the nation is rotten at the municipal as well as federal level. Making weapons of mass destruction is a form of terrorism, in this case nuclear terrorism and it is always wrong.

A REMARKABLE LAWSUIT IS FILED AGAINST MOVING NUCLEAR WEAPONS FACILITY IN KANAS CITY (KCP)

For decades we called it Bendix and now what is it, Honeywell? It's KCP the imaginatively named Kansas City Plant, where most of a nuclear weapon is manufactured. The radioactive parts are not manufactured at KCP but 85% of everything else in a bomb is. Without KCP there would be no new nuclear weapons or spare parts.

It seems that the nonradioactive nature of KCP's work often takes the headlines. That and a couple thousand good jobs make manufacturing instant hell a tempting proposition.

Apparently the United States is revamping its nuclear weapons production facilities and that involves a plan to move KCP from about 95th and Troost to the Botts Road near the southern limits of KCMO. This would involve moving 2/3rds of the equipment from the old site to the new, "smaller" site. I want to examine the claims before I am sold on the idea that it is really going to be a smaller site. I see the plans for a new smaller plant but what if the old one is largely empty and inactive anyway? It could represent a significant expansion hidden behind a veil of partial information and even, perhaps, misinformation.

I was amazed and pleased to see that a remarkable lawsuit has been filed by a number of local and national organizations and individuals seeking to compel certain actions to interrupt this move of the KCP nuclear weapons factory to Bannister Mall. The complainants argue that costs are greater with the move than without it and that numerous regulations have not been followed in making the decision in the first place.

Perhaps it is a sign of the times that good things like this are happening. Certainly we could use a smaller nuclear weapons family.

While this law suit doesn't directly address the issue of abolition of nuclear weapons, or at least the law is unlikely to recognize such appeals, the question is there for all of us. How much is a nuclear weapon really worth? Who is responsible if it is used?

OUR NUCLEAR WEAPONS FAMILY

Nuclear weapons are too destructive to actually use and too expensive to develop.

The advantage gained by those with nuclear weapons is based upon the assumption that the nuclear weapon possessor will be able to intimidate others with these especially destructive devices. The threat is the annihilation of a city or perhaps a world.

United States nuclear policy has been based on the idea that nuclear weapons can somehow be monopolized by the United States or by those currently holding such weapons. This has proven to be an illusion. Nation after nation has acquired nuclear weapons. Unless a concerted effort is made to ban all nuclear weapons proliferation is likely to continue.

The so called "balance of terror" achieved by adversaries possessing nuclear weapons leaves all parties essentially where they would be if all parties were at peace.

Of course the more nations with nuclear weapons must increase the probability that one of these weapons will be actually detonated on a target.

On the other hand the "balance of terror" does seem to inhibit invasion and enhance respect in some instances. North Korea is one example where the nuclear weapons of this tiny nation has led to some benefits and economic arrangements with the "West". Of course the same results could have been negotiated many years ago and North Korea would not have nuclear weapons. That would have allowed North Korea to divert those resources to economic development, education, health care. Everyone would be better off.

But with the possibility of nuclear tipped missiles from North Korea hitting our West Coast the United States decided to finally negotiate. So the nuclear weapons got North Korea that and all subsequent negotiations.

The nuclear weapons family is growing and will continue to grow until all nations, including the most powerful agree to systematically eliminate nuclear weapons. The exact method of achieving this goal can be developed by all nations involved. [Otherwise I'll present a foolproof method in a later blog entry, ahem.]