Yes Nell, subsequent posts have have convinced me also that the weight remains the same (dummies are of the same weight as the nuclear warhead they substitute for) and that perhaps the look of the dummy missles are identical (true?) to the look of the potentially active (were they active?) nuclear payload missles, the "only" difference being a small window on the side which said, in effect, "death to many" or "a-ok".

You seem to be on this post to squelch any notion that there's monkey-business afoot in our military, or higher. Do you have an agenda? My agenda? Make sure the Nells of the world don't patronize us into complacence while the liars who hold the reins destroy all we have worked for and believe. Accepting nuetral "facts" at face value is what got you into the Iraq War.

I have no trouble with facts supposedly "inconvenient" to my view. What you have presented to this blog has done nothing to assuage my fear that the suspicious handling of nuclear weapons by an administration of demostrated criminals is something to always be vigilant about and never submit to the "daddy knows best" opiate.

Nell, get your investigative hat on and be skeptical, it will help you in the end, and you will be correct more often in the near term.

Here's some questions that I would like you to answer:

1)What do the warheads look like in storage?

2) What is the process for moving, checking out or sending airborne a nuclear missle? Steps, personnel etc.

3)What are the minimum number of failures needed for this to occur the way its been reported so far and at what critical points did one or more military personnel have to make an obvious and vital error?

4)What were the direct roles of the airmen from Minot who have died in the last three months in operations relevant to this incident? Roles regarding storage, movement or loading of nuclear warheads and/or missles. Were they part of this incident?

5)Why did they start storing dummies and nukes in the same place or were they? If so, when did it begin and who ordered it? Rumsfeld?

The answers to these questions may or may not help me believe that our daddy has it all under control.

Posted at September 25, 2007 1:25 PM in response to Simple Error My Ass

There are far too many "convenient" mistakes. Responsible officer "makes a mistake" and signs out 5 or 6 nukes then everyone down the line becomes blind to the different color and weight of these nuclear weapons. Weight is a huge consideration for pilots. Barksdale? Why the staging area for Iraq to "decommision" nukes?

No, it looks far more sinister to me. Reinforced Tin Hat solution:

Rumsfeld-Cheney started by relaxing storage requirements which at a minimum, separated nukes from conventional explosives. Then Barksdale becomes the nuke cruise-missle "decommisioning" area by decree. A couple of authoritarian airmen sign on to the "sign-off".

Military Times said authorities first reported there to be "just" 5 nukes in 36 hour limbo. Then, somebody in the know leaks to the MT reporter that actually there were 6 nukes. Which is it? Are all the nukes accounted for right now? Wasn't there a Raw Story account of one of the airmen dying (or killed) on a recent leave? What?

Let's take it a step farther, what would be the best way to be able to nuke Iran and have most of America behind you. Why, a "homeland" nuke attack by Iran of course! An eye for an eye. We could afford to lose a liberal city to a nuke for the big authoritarian dreams. Just ask Bill O'Reilly who had no problem with a nuke in San Francisco.

So they steal a nuke, detonate it in a liberal city, make "solid" connection to Iran and let'er rip Dr. Strangeglove.

Too whacked you say? I would have said an aggressive war against a non-threatening country by an Administration composed of Constitutional vandals as whacked, and look where we are now.

Posted at September 24, 2007 9:36 AM in response to Simple Error My Ass