U.S. keeps major lead over Russia in nuclear weapons

[alp227]

Source: Wash. Post

The United States has slightly reduced its numbers of strategic intercontinental missiles, bombers and nuclear warheads, but it continues to maintain a major advantage over Russia, according to figures released this week by the State Department.

In the eight months since the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia went into effect, the two countries have conducted dozens of on-site inspections of each other’s missiles, bombers, stored weapons and test sites. They have notified each other almost 1,500 times about missile movements, flight tests and other actions regulated by the treaty.

The implementation of the accord “has been going very well indeed,” said Rose Gottemoeller, assistant secretary of state for arms control, verification and compliance. But analysts cautioned that upcoming elections in the United States and Russia will make progress on arms control unlikely over the next two years.

Since February, according to State Department data released Tuesday, the United States has removed 60 nuclear-weapons delivery systems, mostly bombers, from the deployed category, leaving in place 822 land- and submarine-based intercontinental ballistic missiles and bombers.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-keeps-major-lead-over-russia-in-nuclear-weapons/2011/10/25/gIQAHUTHKM_story.html

[Matilda]

1. So if we're going to get wiped out,

it's more likly to be by the United States rather than Russia.

That makes me feel good.

:nuke:

[Zyzfyx]

6. Fuck Yeah!

:patriot:



















:sarcasm:

[caseymoz]

2. Those bombs and warheads are getting old.

And without the Cold War to keep people on their toes, military personnel is getting careless about handling them.

[formercia]

3. The weapons are rebuilt on a regular schedule

As far as handling goes, they are never taken out of their storage container unless they are being deployed or maintained. When they leave the maintenance facility, they are just as good as a brand new one. You might be surprised to learn that the maintenance facilities have an extremely low background radiation level, in fact it is about as close to zero as you can get. These facilities are so clean that you could eat off the floor. Everything is done by the book.

[caseymoz]

4. You have complete faith in the honesty of the military?

By that I mean does it have superhuman honesty? And superhuman reliability? Now, how much room for error is there in handling warheads and nuclear materials?

And how superhuman is the military's integrity? Let's say it's more honest than most people, but remember the Tillman incident? Besides known corruption, the military has pride and it has a sense of self-preservation. That's two strong motivations to lie. Now, if they would lie about Tillman, and that was, in the broad sense, only a public relations embarrassment(apparently), how easy is it going to be for them to admit that maintenance for the warheads has slipped?

Remember this story?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2007-09-05-b-52_N.htm


Then there's this follow-up:

http://gsn.nti.org/gsn/ts_20090203_8569.php

I'll quote: "The incident sparked a series of internal and external investigations that revealed widespread erosion of nuclear expertise, discipline and capability across the service." (Emphasis mine.)


Then there was this incident:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1582787/Nuclear-bomb-parts-sent-to-Taiwan-by-mistake.html


Even if the US military shows superhuman reliability, sometimes it's not their fault:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/27/cuts-threaten-nuclear-weapons-safety

That source touches on some problems with procuring funds for maintenance schedules. Will Congress always have the money to rebuild these constantly?

Now, I couldn't remember or find my source I was really looking for, but it talked about another near-mishap with nuclear warheads. It quoted military personnel saying it was extremely difficult to get good people for nuclear duties now. Why? Because the duties are strict, there's no glory to it, and the work is dull.

Without the adrenaline that comes from the threat of a nuclear enemy, I think the US' own nuclear capability will deteriorate. How fast? Nobody can say. It's just human nature, though. If the US tries to maintain all these warheads, some are going to become unreliable. Some might become a dangerous. But even if I don't point that out, you should see that we can't maintain these things forever, especially when they suck up effort and resources needed for other things.

I'm more knowledgeable about the military and nuclear matters, like cleanliness and background radiation in maintenance facilities, than you think. One thing for sure: the military will keep things sparkling clean if they can't do anything else.

[No Elephants]

5. Oh, phew. As long as we have enough to destroy the entire planet a few times over,

we can finally end the war on terror.

Oh, wait.....


Oh, well, at least stockpiliing nuclear weapons can't hurt. It's perfectly safe.'

Oh, wait.....