Letter: Tactical nuclear bombs unneeded

Saturday, June 19, 2004 | 12:34 p.m.

WEEKEND EDITION

June 19 - 20, 2004

I noted with interest the recent article on the Senate keeping alive the development study funding of low-yield, bunker-busting nuclear weapons. As a nuclear weapons officer some 50 years ago, I had knowledge of the fact that at that time there were tactical nuclear weapons in the inventory. These weapons and others are on display at the Nuclear Weapons Museum in Albuquerque.

Why are we spending taxpayers' funds to develop a bunker-busting tactical weapon? Secondly, why would we ever expose our troops and the indigenous population to the residual contaminants of any tactical nuclear weapon, bunker busting or otherwise. I wouldn't want to be assigned the duty to inspect a bunker recently devastated by any nuclear weapon. And why would we create as our responsibility the problems associated with collateral damage (both immediate and long-range), contaminated soil and water supply, if indeed they can be managed and cleaned up.

With these thoughts in mind, as well as perhaps a dozen others, why in the world would the Senate ever consider spending half a billion dollars to study and duplicate existent weapons in the current inventory?

If I, as an old, retired person, can think of these factors, why can't our younger representatives do likewise?

GIL EISNER

archive