Hiroshima peace group on anti-nuclear drive

[bananas]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/18/BA3TVLDHK.DTL

Hiroshima peace group on anti-nuclear drive

Charles Burress, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 18, 2008

One of history's ironies is that a native of America, the nation that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, has been put in charge of that city's famous A-bomb museum and its continuing campaign for peace.

Illinois-born Steven Leeper, in his 11th month as the first non-Japanese chairman of the Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation, is now back in the United States spearheading a campaign - not to elicit sympathy for the victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - but to pull the world back from what he and the peace foundation see as a new nuclear precipice.

"We are extremely worried that the war on terror is going to become a nuclear war," said Leeper, 60, who will speak Wednesday at UC Berkeley, along with atomic-bomb survivor Koji Hosokawa, who was 17 and less than a mile from ground zero on Aug. 6, 1945, the day the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima.

<snip>

He accused the United States of "stonewalling" international efforts to achieve nuclear disarmament at a time when other nations are becoming less tolerant of a two-tier system of a few nuclear haves and many have-nots. Experts believe an additional 40 or so nations have the ability to develop nuclear weapons if they choose, he said.

"We think in the next two to three years, the international community will decide whether to eliminate nuclear weapons or whether to let everyone have one," he said. "Right now we are moving toward letting everyone have one. If we let everyone have one, it is just a matter of time before one gets used."

<snip>

[Dogmudgeon]

1. This is about weapons, not power generation.

Nice try, though.

And it will probably work. Never underestimate, etc.

--p!

[losthills]

2. You don't know what it's about.

And you have made that clear.

[Systematic Chaos]

3. You're right. It's just sooooooooo ambiguous!

"We think in the next two to three years, the international community will decide whether to eliminate nuclear weapons or whether to let everyone have one..."

:rofl:

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bananas]

5. What a screwball interpretation.

Sorry, P., but nuclear weapon proliferation concerns are intimately tied to nuclear energy programs.
For example: North Korea's nuclear energy program, India's "nukes-for-mangoes" program, etc.

[Dogmudgeon]

8. Does that include medicine?

A large number of medical tests and treatments are based on the use of tagging with radioisotopes that are produced in nuclear reactors. An entire branch of cancer therapy is organized around treatment with radioactivity. Even thyroid treatment uses radioactive medicines. In fact, many such medical nuclear materials are produced in the types of reactors that are BEST suited to the enrichment of fissile material. They are small reactors, generally unsuited for energy production, but they can be used to make cesium, americium, radioiodine, and weapon-grade plutonium. And they exist all around the world. (Cyclotrons, which produce strong bursts of radiation, are also used.)

Civil nuclear power generation uses low-enrichment, low-purity material as fuel. Most of the high-purity material is created and immediately destroyed in energy-releasing decay cycles.

Nuclear power-generating reactors can, and usually are designed to, consume as much of the radioactive substance as they can create -- and that usually isn't much. Nearly all reactors simply take nuclear material and "burn" it. This is the main method used to get rid of plutonium. In order to produce usable fissile material, a lot of planning and work is required. It is much easier to mine uranium or even buy it on the black market. Separation and refinement technology are not classified data except in a few details; epoxy and gel radionucleide extraction methods have all been published.

Smoke detectors use small pieces of radioactive material. Any terrorist with a front corporation and know-how and access to a small reactor could buy several million smoke detectors and build a fission bomb. But in theory, they could build a battleship out of empty beer cans, too.

Bombs are not medicines are not smoke detectors are not power plants. Your OP has one purpose and one purpose alone: deception.

--p!

[bananas]

10. Yes, it includes medicine. nt

[bananas]

6. I resent your statement that I was being deceptive.

You are hiding your head in the sand if you don't think nuclear weapons proliferation is a serious concern.

[Dogmudgeon]

7. You resent nearly everything anyone says that you disagree with.

You are on a crusade. Fair enough. But you're also being deceptive. a large chunk of the anti-nuclear stuff you have been posting has been weaponry topics. And considering that most of your initial responses to any criticism is ridicule, your resentment carries no weight. If you want respect, you have to be prepared to grant it.

I've pointed out proliferation as one of the few relevant concerns about nuclear programs for, oh, about three years now. And also that these concerns are becoming quickly outmoded because it has become progressively easier to extract and refine fissile materials. The problem has moved outside of the reactor core -- it did some years ago. My threads about these issues have gotten an average of zero responses. Anti-nuclearists have shown that they are only concerned about proliferation (and terrorism, and economic stability, and pollution, etc.) if it can be used for propaganda.

Conflating nuclear energy generation with nuclear weapons in order to enhance one's political position is deceit.

--p!

[bananas]

9. Wrong - here is an example

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x107257

[Terry in Austin]

11. It's those anti-nuke fundies again

They're just indulging in more yuppie "TNT bombs will save the world" fantasies, when anybody with more than a room-temperature IQ knows that nuclear is the only way to blow stuff up in an enviromentally responsible way. But no, these geniuses don't have a clue about how much greenhouse gas the average 20,000 pound daisy-cutter gives off when it goes boom.

Christ on crutch -- crack a book once in a while, you pathetic wishful-thinking spoiled windmill-hugging yuppie brats. Sheesh.