Current Nuclear Weapons Development

bobbymike said:
www.reuters.com

China reactors will yield weapons-grade plutonium -U.S. commander

A new generation of nuclear power facilities that China is developing could produce large amounts of plutonium that could be used to make nuclear weapons, the head of the U.S. Strategic Command warned lawmakers this week.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
Click to expand...
Grey Havoc said:
On a likely related note, from today's Times:
Row over China-bound ship with nuclear cargo

Sri Lanka A ship found to be carrying uranium hexaflouride —
which can be enriched for use in nuclear weapons or power stations
— was ordered to leave Sri Lankan waters. The BBC Naples, registered
in Antigua, had arrived at Hambantota, a port on the south coast which
is run by China on a 99-year lease, from Rotterdam. It was bound for a
destination in China. (AFP)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
www.heritage.org

U.S. Nuke Chief Stresses Need for Modernization Amid Rising Threats

In testimony before the House and Senate Armed Services Committees on Tuesday and Wednesday, Adm. Charles Richard, head of U.S.
www.heritage.org www.heritage.org
Responding to a question from Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., Richard described the situation: “Both China and Russia have significant capability in their nuclear weapons complexes. … We have no capability right now to actually make a new weapon.”
————————-
“We have NO CAPABILITY........” let that sink in!
 
bobbymike said:
Meanwhile

www.realcleardefense.com

The Number of Chinese Nuclear Warheads

Early in the Biden administration, there may have been a significant change in the assessment of the scope of the Chinese nuclear threat. In April 2021, STRATCOM Commander Admiral Charles Richard char
www.realcleardefense.com www.realcleardefense.com
Click to expand...
This shouldn't come as a shock. Rapidly growing superpower, knows it has the economy to back it, wants to assert itself and control the world, will need a sizeable deterrent to help insulate themselves from foreign aggression.
 
bobbymike said:
thebulletin.org

Deep thoughts: How moving ICBMs far underground will make the whole world safer

Keeping land-based missiles in underground tunnels—where they would be essentially invulnerable to attack and therefore need not be kept on high-alert status—is a realistic option that has not received sufficient attention. Moving to such a basing system could open dramatic possibilities for an...
thebulletin.org thebulletin.org
Click to expand...
Honestly costs too much for what is a second tier system for the US.
 
Josh_TN said:
bobbymike said:
thebulletin.org

Deep thoughts: How moving ICBMs far underground will make the whole world safer

Keeping land-based missiles in underground tunnels—where they would be essentially invulnerable to attack and therefore need not be kept on high-alert status—is a realistic option that has not received sufficient attention. Moving to such a basing system could open dramatic possibilities for an...
thebulletin.org thebulletin.org
Click to expand...
Honestly costs too much for what is a second tier system for the US.
Click to expand...
You spelled "first tier" incorrectly.
 
sferrin said:
Josh_TN said:
bobbymike said:
thebulletin.org

Deep thoughts: How moving ICBMs far underground will make the whole world safer

Keeping land-based missiles in underground tunnels—where they would be essentially invulnerable to attack and therefore need not be kept on high-alert status—is a realistic option that has not received sufficient attention. Moving to such a basing system could open dramatic possibilities for an...
thebulletin.org thebulletin.org
Click to expand...
Honestly costs too much for what is a second tier system for the US.
Click to expand...
You spelled "first tier" incorrectly.
Click to expand...
I'm all for a new ICBM, but it will always play second fiddle to US SLBMs in terms of deterrent value.
 
Josh_TN said:
sferrin said:
Josh_TN said:
bobbymike said:
thebulletin.org

Deep thoughts: How moving ICBMs far underground will make the whole world safer

Keeping land-based missiles in underground tunnels—where they would be essentially invulnerable to attack and therefore need not be kept on high-alert status—is a realistic option that has not received sufficient attention. Moving to such a basing system could open dramatic possibilities for an...
thebulletin.org thebulletin.org
Click to expand...
Honestly costs too much for what is a second tier system for the US.
Click to expand...
You spelled "first tier" incorrectly.
Click to expand...
I'm all for a new ICBM, but it will always play second fiddle to US SLBMs in terms of deterrent value.
Click to expand...
Nah. ICBMs are far more of a deterrent.
 
In_A_Dream said:
bobbymike said:
Meanwhile

www.realcleardefense.com

The Number of Chinese Nuclear Warheads

Early in the Biden administration, there may have been a significant change in the assessment of the scope of the Chinese nuclear threat. In April 2021, STRATCOM Commander Admiral Charles Richard char
www.realcleardefense.com www.realcleardefense.com
Click to expand...
This shouldn't come as a shock. Rapidly growing superpower, knows it has the economy to back it, wants to assert itself and control the world, will need a sizeable deterrent to help insulate themselves from foreign aggression.
Click to expand...
The Chinese stated nuclear deference policy used to be that they needed to pose a credible second strike capability to impose unacceptable damage on the "enemy" (similar to the French policy on the Force de Frappe). This lead to a need for a modest nuclear arsenal. When the US left the ABM treaty and declared the aim to establish a capability to stop the presumed N Korean and Iranian ICBMs the Chinese said they had to increase their nuclear deterrent size. If I remember correctly the US stated they understood this and were not concerned.
 
www.heritage.org

China’s Growing Nuclear Threat

The Issue China, the pacing threat for the United States, is rapidly growing and diversifying its nuclear arsenal, expanding in recent years from a land-based monad to near completion of a viable strategic nuclear triad. According to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI):
www.heritage.org www.heritage.org
 
armscontrolcenter.org

STRATCOM Commander Makes a Misleading Sales Pitch before Congress - Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

By Geoff Wilson and John Isaacs Admiral Charles Richard, Commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, painted a dire picture of the nuclear threats the United States faces from abroad, and claimed that they could only be met by renewing the U.S. commitment to nuclear dominance over the coming...
armscontrolcenter.org armscontrolcenter.org
Admiral Charles Richard, Commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, painted a dire picture of the nuclear threats the United States faces from abroad, and claimed that they could only be met by renewing the U.S. commitment to nuclear dominance over the coming century
—————————
“Renewing the....commitment to nuclear dominance......”

Being two decades behind your adversaries, modernizing 30 and 40 year old weapons, having not produced a new warhead since 1991, as your production capacity disappears is renewing nuclear dominance!!! There’s not a big enough eye roll emoji for that statement.
 
news.usni.org

GAO Report on U.S. Nuclear Triad - USNI News

The following is the May 6, 2021 Government Accountability Office report, Nuclear Triad: DoD and DoE Face Challenges Mitigating Risks to U.S. Deterrence Efforts. From the report What GAO Found The Department of Defense (DOD) plans to replace or modernize existing triad platforms including...
news.usni.org news.usni.org
 
www.iiss.org

Counting the cost of deterrence: France’s nuclear recapitalisation

Having formally launched the development of its third generation of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, France is embarking on a broad renewal of its nuclear forces. The aim is to ensure that its deterrent remains credible into, and beyond, the middle of this century, explain Timothy...
www.iiss.org www.iiss.org
 
Grey Havoc said:
thehill.com

China resisting nuclear talks, US ambassador says

U.S. disarmament Ambassador Robert Wood said on Tuesday that China is resisting nuclear talks.”Despite the PRC’s dramatic build-up of its nuclear arsenal, unfortunately it continues to …
thehill.com thehill.com
Click to expand...
Of course they are. Why would they talk at all? Because of all the modern nuclear weapons we are producing? Besides, they're busy working on project Peaceful Rise:

news.usni.org

Report on Chinese Nuclear and Missile Proliferation - USNI News

The following is the Congressional Research Service May 17, 2021 In Focus report, Chinese Nuclear and Missile Proliferation From the report The U.S. government has continued to express concerns about China’s record concerning the proliferation of nuclear- and missile-related technologies to...
news.usni.org news.usni.org
 
Last edited:
thehill.com

Here is the nuclear triad we actually need for deterrence

There is no need for three additional types of nuclear bombers and a new nuclear cruise missile.
thehill.com thehill.com
Our nearly $2 trillion nuclear weapons plan to replace every weapon in our Cold War arsenal is bloated and on autopilot
——————————
I sound like a broken record but when you start an article with “$2 trillion”, “Cold War arsenal” you’re telling a knowledgeable reader that you either don’t know what you’re talking about or are being intentionally deceptive (it’s usually the latter in most cases).

$1.4 trillion will be spent ($600 billion is the cost of full modernization OVER THE NEXT 30 years) if we do nothing but maintain the current arsenal. Also our nuclear arsenal has been cut by 90% since the Cold War, we haven’t produced a new warhead design in 30 years, the average age of our nuclear delivery platforms is even older. Describing this as a Cold War arsenal is extremely hyperbolic.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom