skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: An Aerospace Engineer in Defense Policy's Court: Nuclear Deterrence Policy and the Nuclear Weapons Council.

Abstract

Abstract not provided.

Authors:
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Sandia National Lab. (SNL-CA), Livermore, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
OSTI Identifier:
1367210
Report Number(s):
SAND2017-5178C
653343
DOE Contract Number:
AC04-94AL85000
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: Proposed for presentation at the Astronaut Scholar Technical Conference held May 20, 2017 in Cocoa Beach, FL.
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English

Citation Formats

Lafleur, Jarret Marshall. An Aerospace Engineer in Defense Policy's Court: Nuclear Deterrence Policy and the Nuclear Weapons Council.. United States: N. p., 2017. Web.
Lafleur, Jarret Marshall. An Aerospace Engineer in Defense Policy's Court: Nuclear Deterrence Policy and the Nuclear Weapons Council.. United States.
Lafleur, Jarret Marshall. 2017. "An Aerospace Engineer in Defense Policy's Court: Nuclear Deterrence Policy and the Nuclear Weapons Council.". United States. doi:. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1367210.
@article{osti_1367210,
title = {An Aerospace Engineer in Defense Policy's Court: Nuclear Deterrence Policy and the Nuclear Weapons Council.},
author = {Lafleur, Jarret Marshall},
abstractNote = {Abstract not provided.},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2017,
month = 5
}

Conference:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share:
  • Why does the nuclear arms race continue. What type forces maintain the arms race. Are the sources of the nuclear arms race external or internal to the United States. This dissertation focuses upon these issues or questions through the development of two divergent case studies of American participation in the arms race during the decade of the 1970s. The first case study analyzes America's nuclear weapons doctrine as it evolved from Mutual Assured Destruction to Counterforce. The role that external systemic forces (such as an altering military balance of power) played in the public policy statements of the Nixon, Ford,more » and Carter Administrations, acts as a theoretical referent for this case study. The second case study focuses more narrowly upon the development of the cruise missile and the role that domestic politics played in the collective decisions of the three presidencies of the 1970s to strongly favor a cruise missile with strategic capabilities. Of particular interest is the role that three groups of domestic political actors (Congress, the public, and interest groups) played in the decision to go with the cruise. The author argues that domestic political issues and actors played both a direct and indirect role in the acquisition of the cruise missile and other new weapons systems. He also argues that forces of redundant causation are typically at work; either internal or external forces are sufficient to produce racing behavior.« less
  • In this presentation, the author will discuss recent nuclear policy impacts, including the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, and the impacts they have on maintaining the nuclear deterrent. Specifically, he will highlight some of the remaining questions and challenges that remain to the nation and to the national laboratories. (auth)
  • The issue of nuclear war and its medical consequences is discussed from a historical perspective. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has proposed a multi-billion dollar program designed to relocate the population over a period of several days to help residents find protection from lethal fallout. The American Medical Association is called on to make a clear statement to the government that adequate preparation for a nuclear holocaust is impossible and that the medical problems would be awesome and without precedent. Forty-seven references are included. (JMT)
  • In September 1991 President Bush announced sweeping cuts in the US nuclear weapon stockpile as well as changes in deployment to remove significant numbers of weapons from alert status and to return to the US for storage many weapons formerly based abroad in US sites. In October 1991 President Gorbachev announced similar moves for the Soviet Union. Even though the Gorbachev announcement represented a substantial step forward in reducing tension between the US and the Soviet Union, the US continued to be concerned about the deteriorating situation in the Soviet Union and the prospects for internal stability. As a result,more » in November 1991 the Administration began talks with the Soviets in a number of areas including field disablement of nuclear weapons to prevent unauthorized use, emergency response in the event of a weapons accident, and command and control of nuclear weapons. The Nunn-Lugar legislation assured assistance to the Soviet Union in the safe, secure dismantlement (SSD) of weapons to implement the Gorbachev commitment and in the development of measures to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The Department of Energy (DOE) is supporting and collaborating with the Department of Defense (DOD) in several areas due to the DOE responsibilities for developing, assembling, and dismantling US warheads and as the custodian of the nuclear materials stockpile. Russia, as the successor state to the Soviet Union, controls the nuclear weapons of the Former Soviet Union. Thus, DOE`s nuclear weapon and nuclear materials expertise are being applied particularly to Russia. However, the DOE is also providing assistance to Belarus and is prepared to assist Ukraine and Kazakhstan as well if agreements can be reached. In this paper, the DOE SSD activities in support of DOD as the US Executive Agent will be discussed. Two areas will not be covered, namely, DOD activities and the purchase of highly enriched uranium.« less