US eyes deep cuts to nuclear arsenal

Discussion in 'Americas' started by LETHALFORCE, Feb 16, 2012.

  1. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,565
    US eyes deep cuts to nuclear arsenal: officiaql


    President Barack Obama's administration is looking at possible cuts to the US nuclear arsenal that include a drastic option to reduce the number of warheads by up to 80 percent, a US official said Wednesday.

    But no decision has been taken yet on how to reshape the nuclear force, officials said, as the White House prepares for more arms control negotiations with Russia and an international nuclear summit next month in Seoul.

    The United States now has 1,790 deployed warheads and has to scale back the number to 1,550 by 2018 under an arms control agreement with Russia.

    The policy review underway suggests a range of additional cuts that include reducing the arsenal to 1,000 to 1,100, another that proposes dropping to 700 to 800 or shrinking the force dramatically to 300 to 400 warheads, the US official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told AFP.

    "Three hundred (warheads) is the very low end of those options," the official said.

    "No proposals have been made to the president. This thinking is in its early stages."

    In keeping with longstanding US policy, any reduction in the arsenal likely would only be carried out as a result of arms negotiations with Russia.

    Slashing the arsenal down to about 300 deployed warheads would represent a dramatic break with American strategy and downsize the atomic force to a level not seen since the 1950s.

    Obama vowed to work for a world free of nuclear weapons in a speech in Prague in 2009 and has championed arms control as a hallmark of his presidency, a stance that helped him win the Nobel Peace Prize.

    The details of the administration's nuclear review comes ahead of a nuclear security summit in South Korea in March. Obama launched the forum in 2010, touting the session as a way to bolster international safeguards and prevent nuclear terrorism.

    Media reports about potential cuts to the nuclear force triggered a sharp response from Republican lawmakers in Congress on Wednesday while the US military's top officer, General Martin Dempsey, sought to play down the chances of a massive reduction.

    When asked by Representative Mac Thornberry at a House hearing, Dempsey declined to confirm or deny that the administration was looking at options that included the 300-400 warhead range.

    But he said keeping the arsenal at full strength was also a possibility.

    Reports about possible reductions amounted to a simplified "Cliff Notes version" of the policy review, said the general, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    "It's the Cliff Notes version of what is a very comprehensive set of discussions internal to the military with the national security staff on what is our next negotiating strategy, notably with Russia," Dempsey told the House Armed Services Committee.

    "The status quo by the way is always an option and one that is in play."

    Dempsey sought to reassure the Republican lawmaker, saying: "At this point sir, I'd encourage you not to become too concerned with the media reports about what is a very comprehensive process."

    But Thornberry said he remained alarmed and that such a reduction would prompt other countries to build up their arsenals.

    Slashing the force by up to 80 percent "does nothing but encourage our enemies and discourage our friends," Thornberry said.
     
  2.  
  3. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    They are in most probability upgrading the arsenal with new infrastructure.
     
  4. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,565
    When 1 MIRV'd missile with 10 warheads counts as one missile the numbers can be deceiving. Also Bombers and
    development of weapons like the global strike weapon nuclear cuts and talk sound good on paper.
     
    nrj likes this.
  5. Tolaha

    Tolaha Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,158
    Likes Received:
    1,404
    Location:
    Bengaluru
    Earlier they could destroy most nations a 100 times over. Now just about 20 times probably. Humanity is much safer now! :)
     
  6. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    They are talking about conventional warhead on Global Prompt Strike Weapon, it would most lethal conventional explosive ever imo.
     
  7. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,565
    We also need to be safe from aliens.
     
    indian_sukhoi likes this.
  8. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,553
    Likes Received:
    6,565
    The devastation can be as much as a nuclear strike. Thousand of tungsten rods raining down over an area.
     
    nrj likes this.
  9. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    I posted this story earlier. Thread should be merged...
     
  10. indian_sukhoi

    indian_sukhoi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    224
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    On the other side -They are also constructing a Nuclear Plant after 30 years!!!!
     
  11. spikey360

    spikey360 Crusader Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    2,116
    Location:
    The Republic of India
    Global nuclear disarmament is a concept which sounds great, an ideal. However, the last time the world had zero nuclear weapons, two world wars broke out. Also, what happens to those countries which do not accept disarmament? None can disarm them forcefully, else they might go crazy enough to fire their nukes in the heat of the moment. How does the rest of the world which would then be de-nuclearised handle the situation? :notsure:
    NB: The only way to completely rid the world of nuclear weapons is to go for an all out nuclear war. No other pragmatic path to absolute nuke disarmament exists.
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2012
  12. trackwhack

    trackwhack Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    3,757
    Likes Received:
    2,573

Share This Page