Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 47

Thread: U.S. reveals size of nuclear arsenal

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Southern California, High desert
    Posts
    7,436

    Default U.S. reveals size of nuclear arsenal

    (Reuters) - The United States disclosed for the first time on Monday the current size of its nuclear arsenal, lifting the veil on once top-secret numbers in an effort to bolster non-proliferation efforts.

    BARACK OBAMA

    The Pentagon said it had a total of 5,113 warheads in its nuclear stockpile at the end of September, down 84 percent from a peak of 31,225 in 1967. The arsenal stood at 22,217 warheads when the Berlin Wall fell in 1989.

    The figure includes warheads that are operationally deployed, kept in active reserve and held in inactive storage. But it does not include "several thousand" warheads that are now retired and awaiting dismantlement, the Pentagon said.

    "The United States is showing that it is being increasingly transparent," a senior U.S. defense official told reporters at the Pentagon.

    "It's part of our commitment ... to set the stage for strength in non-proliferation and for further arms control."

    The official declined to offer the Pentagon's estimate for Russia's arsenal and renewed calls for greater transparency by China, saying there was "little visibility" when it came to Beijing's nuclear program.

    The United States is also pushing for a new round of sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program.

    By releasing the data during the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference, analysts said the United States was trying to show it is cutting its arsenal so as to help persuade other states to tighten the global non-proliferation regime.

    "It is hugely important for the United States to be able to say, 'Look we are living up to our obligations under the NPT," said Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists.

    COULD IT BACKFIRE?

    The disclosure comes less than a month after President Barack Obama unveiled a new policy restricting the U.S. use of nuclear weapons and signed a landmark arms reduction accord with Russia.

    Obama, who won a Nobel Peace Prize in part for his vision of a nuclear free world, has also renounced the development of new atomic weapons.

    Historically, the overall size of the arsenal has been kept secret to help prevent potential adversaries from using the information to more precisely neutralize U.S. nuclear forces.

    Still, analysts warned the disclosure could also negatively impact perceptions of the United States -- possibly dismaying other nations by demonstrating how many nuclear weapons it retains two decades after the Cold War ended.

    "I think the states that are most concerned about nuclear disarmament will be more focused on the number that remain rather than the number (reduced)," said George Perkovich, director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    The Pentagon said from fiscal years 1994 through 2009, the United States dismantled 8,748 nuclear warheads.

    The Pentagon also declined to disclose the exact number of warheads awaiting dismantlement. It said more analysis needed to be done to make sure it did not impact U.S. national security.

    The United States aims to dismantle those warheads by the early part of the next decade, another U.S. official said, also briefing reporters on condition of anonymity.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUST...edName=topNews


  2. #2
    Quality Control Director Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    16,724
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Only an idiot would cause such information to be disclosed. What the hell ever happened to national security?
    “Learning is not compulsory. Neither is survival.”
    W. Edwards Deming

    "Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils."
    General John Stark

  3. #3
    Quality Control Director Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    16,724
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Case View Post
    "The United States is showing that it is being increasingly transparent," a senior U.S. defense official told reporters at the Pentagon.
    Increasingly transparent? How about increasingly naive and incompetent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Case View Post
    "It's part of our commitment ... to set the stage for strength in non-proliferation and for further arms control."
    More like part of their commitment to make us a third rate nation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Case View Post
    The official declined to offer the Pentagon's estimate for Russia's arsenal and renewed calls for greater transparency by China, saying there was "little visibility" when it came to Beijing's nuclear program.
    They're living in a dream world and need adult supervision.

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Case View Post
    COULD IT BACKFIRE?
    I'm sure it will.
    “Learning is not compulsory. Neither is survival.”
    W. Edwards Deming

    "Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils."
    General John Stark

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Southern California, High desert
    Posts
    7,436

    Default

    Chances are those are not the "Real" numbers ,, ?

  5. #5
    Senior Member 2dumb2kwit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Northeastern NC
    Posts
    8,530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Case View Post
    Chances are those are not the "Real" numbers ,, ?
    Whether or not the numbers are real, is almost beside the point.

    They hide their deals for health care votes, and turn right around and release national security info. Even if the info is not correct, I can just see world leaders laughing their arses off, at our current "leaders". These people are a joke, and the world knows it.
    Writer of wrongs.
    Honey, just cuz I talk slow doesn't mean I'm stupid. (Jake- Sweet Home Alabama)
    "Stop Global Whining"

  6. #6
    Administrator Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Central Indiana
    Posts
    57,947

    Default

    And to think...you guys voted for him.

  7. #7
    Quality Control Director Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    16,724
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Yeah, they did, didn't they?
    “Learning is not compulsory. Neither is survival.”
    W. Edwards Deming

    "Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils."
    General John Stark

  8. #8
    Senior Member Old GI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Dunnellon, FL
    Posts
    1,732

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken View Post
    Only an idiot would cause such information to be disclosed. What the hell ever happened to national security?
    Brought to you be a CINC that couldn't get a security clearance.
    When Wealth is Lost, Nothing is Lost;
    When Health is Lost, Something is Lost;
    When Character is Lost, ALL IS LOST!!!!!!!

    Colonel Charles Hyatt circa 1880

  9. #9
    Senior Member BENESSE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Gotham
    Posts
    9,651

    Default

    Do you guys honestly think than ANYONE believes these numbers? Obviously it's a joke however you interpret it.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Southeast US
    Posts
    113

    Default

    Keep in mind that there are a lot of numbers that were not released... like the strength of these devices (kiloton or megaton) and where/how deployed, mobility, accuracy, and range. Newer warheads are many times stronger and longer range/ more mobile than the arsenal that was at its peak in 1967. The Nike bases and Titan bases and Minuteman bases were deactivated because they were obsolete. Better stuff was made by our smart guys designing these things. Even if the 5113 number is correct, it is a meaningless number unless you have some more specs. Still secure. I could have 5113 firecrackers, or 5113 suitcase nukes, 5113 air-drop H bombs, or 5113 strategic missiles with multiple megaton/ multiple warhead devices able to reach anywhere on the planet.... or a mix of all that stuff.

  11. #11
    reclinite automaton canid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Central California/West Texas
    Posts
    6,622

    Default

    why does it need to be secret?

    are we afraid out enemies will somehow disable five thousand weapons and attack us before we get a chance to react?

    are we somehow afraid that five thousand warheads is not enough to defend outselves?

    i just don't see the problem here.
    Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice - Grey's Law.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To see what's going on in my knife shop check out CanidArmory on Youtube or on Facebook.

  12. #12
    Senior Member BENESSE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Gotham
    Posts
    9,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by canid View Post
    why does it need to be secret?

    are we afraid out enemies will somehow disable five thousand weapons and attack us before we get a chance to react?

    are we somehow afraid that five thousand warheads is not enough to defend outselves?

    i just don't see the problem here.
    There's no benefit to broadcasting it either.

  13. #13
    Quality Control Director Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    16,724
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by canid View Post
    why does it need to be secret?

    are we afraid out enemies will somehow disable five thousand weapons and attack us before we get a chance to react?

    are we somehow afraid that five thousand warheads is not enough to defend outselves?

    i just don't see the problem here.
    The logic is scary, but it goes like this.............

    They target our missles and we target theirs. Better use a missle to stop one of theirs from hitting one of our cities rather than to hit one of their cities and let their missle hit ours, right?

    Okay. Now, if they have 10,000 missles and we "only" have 5,000, most of which are aimed at their missles, that gives them 5,000 extra ones to aim at our cities, right?
    “Learning is not compulsory. Neither is survival.”
    W. Edwards Deming

    "Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils."
    General John Stark

  14. #14
    Administrator Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Central Indiana
    Posts
    57,947

    Default

    Yeah, but they'd never target Indy. Who'd want to mess up the 500?

  15. #15
    Senior Member BENESSE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Gotham
    Posts
    9,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken View Post
    The logic is scary, but it goes like this.............

    They target our missles and we target theirs. Better use a missle to stop one of theirs from hitting one of our cities rather than to hit one of their cities and let their missle hit ours, right?

    Okay. Now, if they have 10,000 missles and we "only" have 5,000, most of which are aimed at their missles, that gives them 5,000 extra ones to aim at our cities, right?
    And that is why boys 'n girls, they ALL lie, and they ALL know that everyone else is lying.

  16. #16
    Super Moderator crashdive123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Florida
    Posts
    44,152

    Default

    This is why the missile defense shield is so contentious with the Russians. If we can basically neuter large numbers of their arsenal, then they need more. I guess since the current administration has capitulated to the Russians on further development and deployment of the missile defense shield, coupled with this..................

    I do not believe it is in the best interests of this country, or the rest of the world for that matter to continue on this course.
    Can't Means Won't

    My Youtube Channel

  17. #17
    Quality Control Director Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    16,724
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    I know how to spell missile. Honest. Spelling it wrong 5 TIMES in a post is what happens when Ken tries to type fast. My fingers don't listen to my brain.
    “Learning is not compulsory. Neither is survival.”
    W. Edwards Deming

    "Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils."
    General John Stark

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Southern California, High desert
    Posts
    7,436

    Default

    Remember "Reagans Star Wars" ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strateg...nse_Initiative

    I'll bet its a reality

  19. #19
    Senior Member BENESSE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Gotham
    Posts
    9,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken View Post
    I know how to spell missile. Honest. Spelling it wrong 5 TIMES in a post is what happens when Ken tries to type fast. My fingers don't listen to my brain.
    Maybe you meant measles? That's nothing to sneeze at.

  20. #20
    Super Moderator crashdive123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Florida
    Posts
    44,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Case View Post
    Remember "Reagans Star Wars" ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strateg...nse_Initiative

    I'll bet its a reality
    Where do you think you current capabilities were born?
    Can't Means Won't

    My Youtube Channel

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •