Current Nuclear Weapons Development

80 pits a year a “reckless expansion” :rolleyes: We produced 3000 W-76s in five years as only one of five warhead types in production at the time IIRC.

thehill.com

Expanding nuclear weapon production is reckless

Clearly, the Senate NDAA is not meant to maintain the safety and reliability of the existing nuclear weapons stockpile.
thehill.com thehill.com
 
www.llnl.gov

Nuclear impulse could deflect massive asteroid

An interagency team of researchers led by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) has completed the first ever in-depth investigation into how an asteroid would respond to a nuclear deflection attempt. The research was published online in Acta Astronautica and will appear in print in early...
www.llnl.gov www.llnl.gov
 
nationalinterest.org

Why Are We Rebuilding the ‘Nuclear Sponge’?

Welcome to the “nuclear sponge.” A bizarre idea that has outlived its questionable Cold War-era usefulness, the nuclear sponge is the United States’ collection of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles intended to “soak up” a nuclear attack.
nationalinterest.org nationalinterest.org

:rolleyes: These are serious people??
 
I can't even stand those guys anymore. They banned me from commenting because they didn't like my opinions of some of their "ideas". ;) They're about as far left as the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists and POGO. I question whether there's a functioning brain amongst them. Land Based ICBMs are such a terrible idea that both China and Russia have TWO of them in production.
 
sferrin said:
I can't even stand those guys anymore. They banned me from commenting because they didn't like my opinions of some of their "ideas". ;) They're about as far left as the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists and POGO. I question whether there's a functioning brain amongst them. Land Based ICBMs are such a terrible idea that both China and Russia have TWO of them in production.
Click to expand...
Only our weapons are dangerous haven’t you been paying attention the last 40 years!! :rolleyes:
 
No we need a new “Neptune E6” SLBM

news.usni.org

Navy Beginning Tech Study to Extend Trident Nuclear Missile Into the 2080s - USNI News

ARLINGTON, Va. – The Navy’s Strategic Systems Program this fiscal year will begin looking at what new technologies it will need to develop to sustain and modernize its nuclear weapons so they can operate on the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines through the 2080s. After the Trident D5...
news.usni.org news.usni.org
 
The legislation mentioned in this article has caused so much delay in important national security programs. Should be repealed immediately.

Of course they will judge shop and get our weapon’s modernization programs delayed. What a joke.

apnews.com

US plutonium production plan likely to spur legal challenge

The agency that oversees the United States’ nuclear arsenal says it doesn’t need to do a broad environmental review of a proposal that calls for ramping up production of plutonium triggers at federal installations in New Mexico and South Carolina.
apnews.com apnews.com

Nuclear watchdogs, government accountability advocates and other critics argue that the decision to ramp up production of plutonium skirts requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act and a decades-old court order that included a mandate for an environmental review when the federal government embarked on plans to boost production to more than 80 of the nuclear cores a year.
 
Reciprocity does not need a treaty. If Russia dismantled its' nuclear production capacity to match what the US has already done (Hanford, Savannah, Amarillo, etc) that would do a lot more than invoking catechism to make the case for more treaties. Having an internal anti nuclear movement (genuine) as well supported and vociferous as in the West would also make the idea more palatable.
 
Treaties can be an effective form of asymmetric warfare when one side can cheat knowing it can rely on "the usual" pressure groups who are not merely indifferent to the cheating but even hostile to raising the issue.
 
fredymac said:
Treaties can be an effective form of asymmetric warfare when one side can cheat knowing it can rely on "the usual" pressure groups who are not merely indifferent to the cheating but even hostile to raising the issue.
Click to expand...

The current US leadership are themselves are not in a particular place of credibility when it comes to maintaining treaties and other international commitments.
Treaties also help frame, and provided mechanisms for detecting and limiting, cheating.
Which is particularly important if, like any democratic country, you need to build consensus for moving in any particular policy direction (especially for those that demand so much resources and the opportunity costs that come with that).
And trying to imply that “pressure groups” that happen not to share your views are somehow traitorous is often seen on this forum but no less dishonest and despicable for it.
And completely counterproductive to what you should be trying to do which is to try to convince other people, instead of alienating them.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom