Re: Anti-WIPP article lacks critical thinking

[Steven Pollack <themissinglink@eznetinc.com>]

Yes this posting brings up an important point.  These weapons programs are
producing dangers not limited to the controlled release of the weapons.  When
is environmental fate to be considered collateral damage as regards weapon
accuracy assessment?  It seems as if the environmental dangers are unleashed
upon the unsuspecting citizenry and then the scientists are sent out to argue
how these are unfortunate consequences of defending ourselves.

At what point do the environmental impacts outweigh the defensive benefits?  At
what point does the environmental damage become part of a mutually assured
destruction scenario?  At what point have the scientists decided that the costs
outweigh the benefits?  At what point do the dangers posed by an ever growing
nuclear waste stockpile outweigh the defensive benefits of maintaining a
nuclear weapons force?  Logic would suggest that there would be such a point.
Havent our protectors in the DOD and DOE done this type of systemwide
assessment?

Steven Pollack