Stephen Young Profile picture
Mar 28 5 tweets 2 min read
Top-lines from the NNSA Budget request released today. The request for Weapons Activities - where most #nuclear weapons $$ is - is up $1B to $16.5B from last year's request, or 6%, & up $500M or 3% from the amount Congress actually appropriated. #FY23Budget
Notably, we can't compare it to what the NNSA projected last year they would request this year. They are officially required to include such projections in the budget request BUT last year they didn't do it. (Don't know if they will include it this year, bet they won't.)
That is important because, for several years running, the NNSA budget for Weapons Activities grew by more than it was expected to grow. Then in FY21 it jumped MASSIVELY when Trump intervened personally to give NNSA extra billions after he was lobbied by nuclear hawks in Congress.
That increase, $3.1 B for weapons activities, was a 25% increase. Shocking. Biden's first budget increased that top-line by less than 1%. So this year's budget is a significantly sharper rise than last year's, even though last year's budget funded every weapon in Trumps request.
If you combine that increase with the expectation that the forthcoming Nuclear Posture Review will cancel the proposed new sea-launched cruise missile and retire the B83, yet the budget is still going up, it means other programs are increasing in cost.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Stephen Young

Stephen Young Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @StephenUCS

Mar 28
@russianforces talking about Putin, Ukraine & nuclear weapons, at an event organized by the @PhysCoalition. He notes meaning of the "special mode" alert is fuzzy, as much of the Russian nuclear forces are already on alert. 1200 warheads on ICBMs could be launched quickly any time
He notes there have been no obvious steps to increase that alert, or to mobilize Russian submarines or to deploy the road-mobile elements of Russia's nuclear forces.
He notes there don't seem to be any bombers or fighters on alert armed with nuclear warheads, and the shorter-range missiles that can be nuclear-armed also do not seem to have been deployed from their bases. It would likely be visible if it had been done.
Read 22 tweets
Mar 25
WSJ reports @POTUS NPR will reject "sole purpose" despite Biden's support for it. Here's the video UCS got of him on the campaign trail endorsing No First Use:
My statement in response to the news: “Right now, Putin is effectively holding the world hostage with his own threats of nuclear use. This kind of nuclear brinkmanship is unacceptable, and the U.S. should not validate his stance by replicating it.
"As President Biden himself has said, it would never make sense for the United States to use nuclear weapons first in a conflict,” Young said. “Unfortunately, a ‘fundamental purpose’ policy leaves the door open for the U.S. to take the irreversible step of starting a nuclear war.
Read 10 tweets
Feb 27
Thoughts on Russia's nuclear posture change
This is a bad sign, an intentional and unnecessary escalation on Putin's part, seemingly because the invasion of Ukraine is not going as well/quickly as he expected/hoped, as well as the harsh sections put in place by the West.
The White House shares the view that it is unnecessary and escalatory: cnn.com/2022/02/27/pol…
Read 16 tweets
Feb 16
Here's the APS slide explaining how the US anti-missile system is supposed to work. This is hard work, & it is amazing the system can work even 50% of the time, which is about what it does in testing.
Now @LauraEGrego is discussing the challenges of countermeasures to the missile defense system. As she notes, this is not a new problem the APS found. It is well known. Here is the @UCSUSA video from more than two decades ago:
As @LauraEGrego notes, the estimated cost of this system, $90B, is a major investment, particularly when one recalls it is only intended to defense against a limited attack, and it doesn't work reliably.
Read 14 tweets
Apr 9, 2019
BREAKING NEWS!! Just confirmed by Hill staff: Pentagon has terminated the contract of JASON, the independent science advisory group that Congress & the public rely on for assessment of many technical issues. This is a travesty & will lead to more ill-informed, bad government.
JASON is a group of scientists who spend their summers conducting technical studies that Congress or federal agencies have requested. They are impartial, nonpartisan & about as geeky as you can get. You can see many of their studies here: fas.org/irp/agency/dod…
You can see more today on this story in an excellent story in Science Magazine here: sciencemag.org/news/2019/04/s…
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(