Slashdot Mirror
Nuclear Arms Cuts, Supported By 56% of Americans, Would Make the World Safer
Lasrick writes "Kingston Reif of the Nukes of Hazard blog writes about nuclear arms reductions are back in the news, thanks to President Obama's State of the Union address and now also a Gallup poll that shows 56% of Americans support U.S.-Russian reductions. From the Article: 'A recent report by the Center for Public Integrity revealed that senior Obama administration officials believe the United States can reduce its arsenal of deployed strategic warheads to between 1,000 and 1,100 without harming national security. Those numbers would put the total below levels called for by New START...' Congressional Republicans of course are against those cuts; Reif lays out why the cuts would make the U.S. and the world safer."
Do we even need a thousand nuclear warheads?
Why are talks between us and Russia while China is rapidly increasing their nuclear stockpile?
Do we even need a thousand nuclear warheads?
If we ever want to travel to Alpha Centauri we do. How about putting those nukes toward the construction of an interstellar pulsed nuclear space drive?
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
where do you get the absurd idea that nuclear weapons could even kill all the population once? Hollywood?
"In space" doesn't mean "hard vacuum." The low mass (so they can carry enough of them) combined with the large surface area (to mimic a large object) will make them decelerate rapidly enough that they won't confuse anyone for very long. Then remember that the real ICBM has been tracked from very close to the surface, so if one missile suddenly turns into 99 missiles slowing down very quickly and 1 that keeps the same trajectory, you can be pretty confident you know which one is real and which is chaff. Then you'll see one missile descending into the atmosphere and 99 that aren't, the jig will be up.
Not even close to true. China claims 240. However, that is impossible. Their claimed boomers alone would have about 500 warheads. And with what is thought to exist on boomers, would mean over 750 warheads just for subs. That does not include their air force, their land based mobile launchers, and their recently acknowledge 3000 mile + tunnels underground that China now says does indeed have a whole other set of mobile launchers/missiles.
Even now, they just launched a new solid missile, the DF-41, that is a MIRV with 10 warheads. The DF-31s which had 3 warheads was fairly short range and would target Russia, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Phillipines, and India. They are known to have over 1000 of these. Now, with the new DF-41's, they can go all the way around the globe. These are designed for Europe and America. And apparently, they have started active production of these. It is unknown what the quantities will be. BUT, I doubt it will 10 missiles.
Regardless, China obviously has a LOT LOT LOT more than 240 warheads. And the nuke site that was discovered during the earthquake (along with their military tunnels), would hint that they are in active production on these.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
First off, China is a RICH nation. Make no mistake. They have trillion+ of dollars that they are sitting on. They are NOT a poor nation.
In addition, they are NOT a democratic gov. or even a capitalist economy. The fact is, that the economy is split into 2 with those companies that export being capitalists, while those that are tied to the gov, esp. the PLA, being a pure command situation.
With China's earthquake loads was discovered about them. That 3000 miles of underground railway was a shocker. And the fact that they had an underground hidden nuke operation by the reservoir was also a shock. That alone should be a sign that it is very possible for China to have a reactor down there, being cooled by the reservoir and would NEVER be seen by space.
Now, as to MAD, let me explain how this works. Basically, both sides have to have systems that are either 100% first strike, with limited retailiation, OR nearly 100% defense, with limited first strike. Most importantly, neither side can have a true missile defense system. Now, W killed that and the neo-cons are pushing for us to put up a BMD system. However, it should be obvious to all, that we have gone nowhere with it. As such, we are still playing by the MAD logic that America and USSR had. Now, along comes China who does not tell what they have. However, we are finding out all the time that they are far more advanced than they let on to. In particular, they DO appear to have loads more BMD than is acknowledged. For starters, they took out a sat that was quite high (500 miles+). But it continues to get better. For starters, they have multiple ground based lasers designed to shoot into space. They have already taken out multiples of our sats. In addition, their space station is a military base. It is NOT a civilian program. They have stated that no civilians or non-chinese will be on-board. All in all, it is obvious that China is working against MAD, and is looking for a number of leg ups. That implies first strike and their entertaining the idea of winning a nuke war. And I am not wild about ANY military officer thinking that. EVER. That is why the worst thing that could happen is to cut down warheads.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
We've surrounded Iran with dozens of military bases, crashed their economy and currency with sanctions, illegally threatened them with military force, and committed multiple acts of war on a country over the....nuclear weapons program both the CIA and Israelis admit they don't have.
So when does Iran get to threaten the United States for being in "material breach" of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which requires disarmament for countries already in possession of nuclear weapons?
The world would also have been safer if the USSR had won the cold war and we'd all be living under a communist dictatorship. Safety isn't all that matters.
This is dead on correct. Balloons on trajectory traveling just around mach 25 won't hit atmo with sufficient density to slow them down until about 5 minutes before the real warheads impact. There is no way to effectively respond in that time window. This is a completely effective strategy.
The problem with the MAD doctrine is the same as the problem with the second amendment, they both assume humans will act rationally when given the power of life or death over others.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.