Switch Theme:

America has 5113 Nukes  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Eternal Plague

So we now know how many nukes we have. I guess we don't count the ones we gave to Israel or any of our prior Cold War allies or possibly ones pointed at Russia?

(P.S. I'm being snide that Israel got nukes from us. We all know about the French connection.)

In short our announcement also coincided with the Iranian President defending his country and their peaceful nuclear program, which had some skeptics.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704342604575222121497753864.html?mod=wsj_india_main

UNITED NATIONS — The Obama administration for the first time made public the extent of the U.S.'s atomic weapons arsenal, as the U.S. and Iran dueled for the international backing of their strategic agendas.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad both addressed a special U.N. conference on the global nuclear nonproliferation regime Monday as Washington pushes for a new round of sanctions against Iran for its nuclear work.

Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Ahmadinejad sought to define the other nation's nuclear capability as the principal threat to international stability. The Iranian president charged Washington with leading a skewed international system that seeks to deny peaceful nuclear power to developing nations while allowing allies such as Israel to stockpile atomic arms.


Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad slams U.S. nuclear policy and denies his nation is seeking atomic weapons. Plus, the market rallies on news of a major airline merger and BP begins drilling a relief well in the hopes of stopping the oil from continuing to spill into the Gulf of Mexico.
"The first atomic weapons were produced and used by the United States," Mr. Ahmadinejad said in a 35-minute morning speech laced with religious imagery and idioms. "This seemed … to provide the United States and its allies with the upper hand. However, it became the main source of the development and spread of nuclear weapons."

Mrs. Clinton followed in the afternoon by declaring, to the surprise of some delegates, that the U.S. was announcing the size of its nuclear arsenal, as well as the number of atomic weapons it has destroyed from its arsenal; the Pentagon announced the figures in a news conference on Monday.

Opponents to Ahmadinejad's regime protested outside the U.N.
U.S. officials have been working for almost a year to undercut Tehran's charges about Washington's nuclear threat by bringing both transparency to the U.S. program as well as by reducing its numbers. In April, the U.S. and Russia signed a Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty that lowers the numbers of deployed American and Russian nuclear weapons to their lowest levels since the 1950s. The U.S. also hosted a nuclear security conference in Washington last month.

"So for those who doubt that the U.S. will do its part on disarmament: This is our record—these are our commitments—and they send a clear signal." Mrs. Clinton told the conference.

The Pentagon said the U.S. had a total of 5,113 nuclear warheads in its stockpile as of Sept. 30, plus a few thousand more that had been retired but still needed to be dismantled. Between fiscal years 1994 and 2009, the U.S. dismanted 8,748 nuclear warheads. At its peak at the end of fiscal year 1967, the U.S. had 31,255 warheads, the Pentagon said.

It was the first time the U.S. has disclosed those figures, which had been previously regarded as highly classified. A senior defense official said at a Pentagon briefing that the stockpile had been reduced by 75% since 1989 and roughly 84% since 1967.

Also on Monday, Mrs. Clinton said Washington will continue to increase funding and technical support for countries pursuing civilian nuclear power while adhering to safeguards that prevent the development of military applications.

After Mr. Ahmadinejad had charged the U.S. with double standards by tacitly supporting Israel's assumed nuclear program, Mrs. Clinton said the Obama administration supported a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Mideast once progress is made in pushing forward the Arab-Israeli peace process. She added that the administration would support such zones in Africa and the South Pacific.

The Obama administration is in the final stages of a global push to enact new sanctions on Iran for its nuclear work. Mrs. Clinton on Monday met nations seen as still on the fence on the sanctions issue, such as Brazil. And President Barack Obama released a statement claiming the course of Iran's nuclear work could define whether the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the subject of the monthlong U.N. conference, survives into the 21st century. The NPT holds existing weapons states to reduce their arms and other countries not to pursue them.

British, American and French diplomats walked out of his speech in quick succession about 10 minutes into its delivery.

The U.S. release of nuclear data reverses decades of Cold War doctrine that concluded that the U.S.'s national security could be threatened if Washington's adversaries knew the size and status of its nuclear arsenal. China and Russia have made similar arguments in denying U.S. calls for them to provide greater transparency.

The U.S.'s nuclear program has been regularly tracked by specialty websites. Some voiced little surprise with the released numbers.

The release of the nuclear data was vigorously debated inside the White House and Pentagon, according to U.S. officials. Mrs. Clinton stressed Monday that the conclusion was that it served the U.S.'s national security interests by placing the issue of transparency back on the shoulders of nations such as Iran and North Korea.

   
Made in za
Maniacal Gibbering Madboy






How much does it cost to build 5113 nukes? Enough to keep the levees repaired?
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Eternal Plague

Orky-Kowboy wrote:How much does it cost to build 5113 nukes? Enough to keep the levees repaired?



Cost for levees:

http://www.stronglevees.com/cost/

Cost for nukes:

http://www.brookings.edu/projects/archive/nucweapons/50.aspx

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I have one in my back yard.

--The whole concept of government granted and government regulated 'permits' and the accompanying government mandate for government approved firearms 'training' prior to being blessed by government with the privilege to carry arms in a government approved and regulated manner, flies directly in the face of the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.

“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.”


 
   
Made in za
Maniacal Gibbering Madboy






"Estimated 1998 spending on all U.S. nuclear weapons and weapons-related programs: $35,100,000,000" (?!)

Sho' nuff, they ain't shy!
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Well, Freedom isn't free.

--The whole concept of government granted and government regulated 'permits' and the accompanying government mandate for government approved firearms 'training' prior to being blessed by government with the privilege to carry arms in a government approved and regulated manner, flies directly in the face of the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.

“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.”


 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka




Manchester UK

Fateweaver wrote:Well, Freedom isn't free.


Sure, keep bleating about 'freedom' - say it enough times and people are bound to believe it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/05/04 10:53:42


 Cheesecat wrote:
 purplefood wrote:
I find myself agreeing with Albatross far too often these days...

I almost always agree with Albatross, I can't see why anyone wouldn't.


 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:

Okay, so the male version of "Cougar" is now officially "Albatross".
 
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

Does it include tactical weapons?

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Mutilatin' Mad Dok




SE Michigan

With this are they counting MIRVs as single weapons?

www.mi40k.com for pickup games and tournaments
3000+


 
   
Made in gb
Bryan Ansell





Birmingham, UK

Huffy wrote:With this are they counting MIRVs as single weapons?


The count should include each MIRV warhead separately. No reason why they shouldn't.
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

I think they're missing some. I thought the MIRV count was actually much higher. I am sad.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Warplord Titan Princeps of Tzeentch





Pat that askala, O-H-I hate this stupid state

Did they count the one that is stuck in mud about 20 miles offshore from Georgia?

Then it comes to be that the soothing light at the end of your tunnel, its just a freight train coming your way!
Thousand Sons 10000
Grey knights 3000
Sisters of battle 3000
I have 29 sucessful trades where others recommend me.
Be sure to use the Reputable traders list when successfully completing a trade found here:
Dakka's Reputable Traders List 
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

The Pentagon said the U.S. had a total of 5,113 nuclear warheads in its stockpile as of Sept. 30, plus a few thousand more that had been retired but still needed to be dismantled. Between fiscal years 1994 and 2009, the U.S. dismanted 8,748 nuclear warheads. At its peak at the end of fiscal year 1967, the U.S. had 31,255 warheads, the Pentagon said.


The use of the word 'warheads', as opposed to 'weapons', seems to indicate that it would include each warhead within a MIRV, rather than the MIRV as a whole. Of course, its possible that the author of the WSJ piece used the wrong word, or that the Pentagon is being deliberately vague; both of which happen all the time.

Then again, a warhead is just the destructive payload delivered by a missile, and a MIRV can be thought of as a single destructive payload. There's certainly an incentive for the US to minimize its capabilities in this instance, so it wouldn't surprise me if that happened to be the line of reasoning used here.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/05/05 02:11:28


Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
Ambitious Marauder





Mound City, U.S.A.

WarOne wrote:
Orky-Kowboy wrote:How much does it cost to build 5113 nukes? Enough to keep the levees repaired?



Cost for levees:

http://www.stronglevees.com/cost/




Pity the levee website doesn't have a formula to track rampant cronyism or chronic misuse of federal money...

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/05/05 01:58:19


"I'm gonna go build my own theme park! With blackjack and hookers! In fact, forget the park!" ~ Bender Bending Rodriguez 
   
Made in us
Combat Jumping Rasyat






We need 5,113 nuke to safeguard our freedom from oppression, oppression of the extraterrestrial kind.

I mean look at Yukio Hatoyama sitting in his mighty death fortress plotting Pearl Harbor II: Nuclear Boogaloo. (Ben Affleck will not be returning)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/05/05 03:12:45


 
   
Made in us
Hangin' with Gork & Mork






National economics don't quite work on the theory that if we build weapons we can't build levees. It isn't really a zero-sum situation. It isn't as if we never built a single nuclear weapon/warhead that there would never be a natural disaster or suffering. Dealing with all the problem is much more holistic then focusing on one thing at a time.

Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
 
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





So the US has 5,113 nukes and they won’t give me one no matter how nicely I ask. That’s just selfish.


Fateweaver wrote:Well, Freedom isn't free.


He’s right. The US only remains a sovereign state because of it’s nuclear deterrent. And US military expenditure being more than everyone else in the world combined. And the separation of the US from any opposing power by two very big oceans. And the fact that no other navy in the world could defeat a single US carrier group, and you’ve got what, six or seven groups. And the fact that highly interconnected modern economy makes open war a losing equation before you consider the cost of men and materiel. And the immense cost of occupying another country, to the point where a country the size of the US can’t afford to pacify a much smaller, weaker state such as Iraq for any sustained period of time.

But other than those things, it’s the 5,113 nukes keeping you free.


Ahtman wrote:National economics don't quite work on the theory that if we build weapons we can't build levees. It isn't really a zero-sum situation. It isn't as if we never built a single nuclear weapon/warhead that there would never be a natural disaster or suffering. Dealing with all the problem is much more holistic then focusing on one thing at a time.


True, but it can still be used to demonstrate what the political system prioritises, and lead to a discussion as to whether those are really the priorities that the country wants.

“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in us
!!Goffik Rocker!!





(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)

Why is it that I knew this number over a year ago..? Is this just a much more official number than one previously released or devised?

----------------

Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad 
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

Its the first official number. All others have been estimates, or statements about the number of weapons put our of commission; normally gleaned from declassified documents.

Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Madrak Ironhide







Xyz'r'Xaz'r'Xuz wrote:
WarOne wrote:
Orky-Kowboy wrote:How much does it cost to build 5113 nukes? Enough to keep the levees repaired?



Cost for levees:

http://www.stronglevees.com/cost/




Pity the levee website doesn't have a formula to track rampant cronyism or chronic misuse of federal money...


Do the military estimates include that?

Maybe it isn't as bad with military cost estimates. Maybe.

But if the Fed can't manage the cost of public works, I don't see how they catch
every slip of dollar that goes through massive military budgets.

DR:70+S+G-MB-I+Pwmhd05#+D++A+++/aWD100R++T(S)DM+++
Get your own Dakka Code!

"...he could never understand the sense of a contest in which the two adversaries agreed upon the rules." Gabriel Garcia Marquez, One Hundred Years of Solitude 
   
Made in us
!!Goffik Rocker!!





(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)

malfred wrote:
Xyz'r'Xaz'r'Xuz wrote:
WarOne wrote:
Orky-Kowboy wrote:How much does it cost to build 5113 nukes? Enough to keep the levees repaired?



Cost for levees:

http://www.stronglevees.com/cost/




Pity the levee website doesn't have a formula to track rampant cronyism or chronic misuse of federal money...


Do the military estimates include that?

Maybe it isn't as bad with military cost estimates. Maybe.

But if the Fed can't manage the cost of public works, I don't see how they catch
every slip of dollar that goes through massive military budgets.


You know we not only had the money for the levees, but the army corps of engineers was used for quite a bit of the work. It was mostly just gak management.

----------------

Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: