krispos42
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-26-10 01:41 PM
Original message |
UK has 'fewer than 225 nuclear weapons' |
|
Source: CNN
London, England (CNN) -- Britain has a total nuclear arsenal of fewer than 225 weapons, with 160 currently operational, Foreign Secretary William Hague said Wednesday.
"We believe that the time is now right to be more open about the weapons we hold," Hague said in a statement to Parliament.
"We judge that this will assist in building a climate of trust between nuclear and non-nuclear weapons states and contribute, therefore, to future efforts to reduce the number of nuclear weapons worldwide."
The British disclosure follows similar recent announcements by France and the United States, the other nuclear-armed Western allies. Britain had previously disclosed that it had 160 operational warheads, which since 1998 have been based aboard a squadron of four ballistic missile submarines.
In May, the United States announced its stockpile of nuclear weapons numbers 5,113. In April, Washington decided to swear off the development of new generations of nuclear weapons and announced it would not use its existing warheads to attack non-nuclear states that are in compliance with nonproliferation agreements.
Read more: UK has 'fewer than 225 nuclear weapons'
Less than I would have thought.
|
Name removed
(0 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-26-10 01:46 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
|
Captain Hilts
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-26-10 01:48 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Less than I would have thought also. But they know we'll defend them. |
|
Hence all the secret stuff labelled "US-UK Eyes Only."
|
Uncle Joe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-26-10 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. Yes because God knows a nation can't defend itself with only a 160 operational nuclear weapons. n/t |
Oregone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-26-10 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
Honestly...Id think they were just as deadly with only a handful
|
Captain Hilts
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-26-10 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
FarLeftFist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-26-10 01:56 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Still enough to blow up the entire planet 5 times. |
Xipe Totec
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-26-10 02:33 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I guess that puts us in the same league, the "under 225 nukes" category.
|
krispos42
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-26-10 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. We have a bit over 5,000 |
|
I think we're going to go down to about 1,500 under the current agreement.
Probably shouldn't go much lower.
We have 14 ballistic-missile submarines with 24 ICBMs, for a total of 336 missiles. Each one can legally carry 4 warheads, which is 1,344 warheads right there.
I like keeping our nukes on submarines... at sea they're 100% safe from a terrorist attack, and at base they're guarded by swarms of Marines.
|
Xipe Totec
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-26-10 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
Edited on Wed May-26-10 02:46 PM by Xipe Totec
I have less than 225 nukes.
That puts us, the UK and me, in the same league.
|
Iggo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-26-10 03:20 PM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 13th 2024, 08:12 PM
Response to Original message |