Responder al tema

Mensaje: <blockquote data-quote="HernanF" data-source="post: 898922" data-attributes="member: 7964">Estimado Marcantilan, mi aporte a este hilo fue sobre la mirada al costado de Greenpeace.Con respecto a material nuclear en este momento no tengo al alcance mi biblioteca física para buscar la fuente y no tengo ganas de usar wikimerd@.En mi biblioteca virtual tengo algunas cosas, más que nada despachos y artículos que fui juntando. Le agrego uno del periódico británico The Guardian del año 2003, las mismas dudas argentinas las plantearon al Ministerio de Defensa británico la prensa inglesa.Eso si no me pida que se lo traduzca, si quiere despues del 14 de junio hago el esfuerzo. SaludosHernán.Remarqué en negrita algunas cosas y le dejo otro dicho para los británicos "no aclare que oscurece"Malvinas / Malvinas warships carried nuclear weapons, MoD admits.   Article history The Ministry of Defence admitted for the first time last night that British ships carried nuclear weapons in the Malvinas / Malvinas war. The disclosure came as the government was forced to concede - after a long-running campaign by the Guardian - that seven nuclear weapons containers were damaged during a series of wartime accidents. But many of the details of these accidents are still being kept secret by the MoD. The ministry also refused to say whether any nuclear depth charges were on board HMS Sheffield, which was sunk during the war. The MoD's admission confirms persistent rumours that the taskforce which recaptured the islands in 1982 was equipped with nuclear weapons. The ministry insisted that there was never any intention to use the weapons during the war and that their presence did not break any disarmament treaties. But the admission has provoked concern from the Argentinian government. The Argentinian defence minister, Jose Pampuro, said he was worried in case the accidents had spread radioactivity and he wanted assurances from the MoD. According to the limited information released by the MoD, the nuclear depth charges were already on board unnamed ships in the taskforce when it sailed to the South Atlantic at the outbreak of the war. "A decision was taken to transfer them to other ships heading back home," said an MoD spokesman. Seven containers were damaged "in some way" when they were transporting the weapons on to other ships. The MoD claims that none of the actual weapons was damaged and that "in what was considered the worst case, a container sustained severe distortion to a door housing". The MoD finally released information concerning the accidents after a six-year battle fought by the Guardian under the open government code. After the MoD had blocked a request for information, the parliamentary ombudsman criticised the ministry and ordered it to publish a list of 20 accidents and mishaps involving nuclear weapons between 1960 and 1991. But despite the ombudsman's critical verdict this year, the MoD concealed the Malvinas / Malvinas accidents, and has only divulged their existence after further pressure from the Guardian. Last night's admission by the MoD fails to clear up the most controversial allegation: that the nuclear weapons were sunk along the HMS Sheffield after the ship was hit by an Exocet a month into the war. The crippled ship was towed for six days until it sank. Faced with the ombudsman's refusal to support the MoD's policy of secrecy, the department yesterday opted for damage limitation, putting out a statement to all media in the traditional slot for unwelcome news: late on a Friday afternoon. The MoD said the transfers of the WE177 depth charges took place at various times during April, May and June 1982, "well away from other sea-going traffic, and the weapons were held in ships with the best-protected magazines before being returned to Britain". The MoD insisted that the nuclear weapons never entered the territorial waters of the Malvinas islands or any South American country. The government has always said there was never any question of resorting to the use of nuclear weapons in the dispute. The MoD said it was routine practice for British naval ships to carry nuclear weapons during the 1980s, but this ended in 1993. For decades, the MoD has refused to confirm or deny the presence of nuclear weapons at any particular time or place. But in her verdict on the Guardian's complaint, the ombudsman decided there was no danger to national security if the weapons were no longer in service. She said it was difficult to envisage that the "release of information about events that happened some time ago to weapons that no longer exist could cause harm if made more widely available".Rob Evans and David Leigh The Guardian, Saturday 6 December 2003</blockquote>

Verificación: ¿Cuanto es 2 mas 6? (en letras)