It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Luxifero
I was under the impression that the usage of nuclear weapons is strictly forbidden under numerous treaties?
Don't you know by now, the Bush regime does not stand by the treaties previous administrations have signed? A sure sign of how they view the world....with absolute disregard and an imperiousness that more than feeds the fire of anti-Americanisms, but actually helps create it. FOOLS!!!
Originally posted by Luxifero
I was under the impression that the usage of nuclear weapons is strictly forbidden under numerous treaties?
Originally posted by subz
Excluding Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the United States maintained a position where it would reply with nuclear weapons to ANY WMD attack on America. If a country used biological or chemical weapons against the United States they would of retaliated with their nuclear weapons. That was their policy.
Originally posted by 27jd
... but a city killer? No way.
Originally posted by apc
Plus, I feel I should add, noone uses "city killers" anymore anyway. The USSR were the last ones to tote anything bigger than 5MT in thier arsenal, and those got dismantled a long time ago. No, what is sitting in the silos today are in the range of 50-500KT. Most are 180KT.
George W. Bush might have kicked his alcohol and drug habits, but he still appears to have at least one serious addiction--to nuclear weapons.
Last year, Congress refused to fund the administration's ambitious proposal for new nuclear weapons, largely because both Republican and Democratic lawmakers agreed that the world would be a safer place with fewer—rather than more--nuclear explosives in existence.
But, undeterred by last year's rebuff, the Bush administration recently returned to Congress with a proposal for funding a new generation of "usable" nuclear weapons. These weapons are the so-called "bunker busters." Despite the rather benign name, the "bunker buster" is an exceptionally devastating weapon, with an explosive power of from several hundred kilotons to one megaton (i.e. a thousand kilotons). To put this in perspective, it should be recalled that the nuclear weapons that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki had explosive yields of from 14 to 21 kilotons. "These weapons will bust more than a bunker," remarked U.S. Senator Jack Reed. "The area of destruction will encompass an area the size of a city. They are really city breakers."
www.wagingpeace.org...
The U.S. has now retired all of its multimegaton weapons. Disassembly of the last type removed from service, the B53, may be completed in 2006. Russia probably maintains a small number ICBMs in high-yield single warhead versions. The People's Republic of China has one type of ICBM armed with high-yield warheads. Operational multimegaton weapons in 2005 thus include:
Russia's R-36M2 Voyevoda (SS-18 Mod 6) with a 20 mt warhead (possibly 5 deployed). (The UR-100N version (SS-19 Mod 2) with a 5 mt warhead may no longer be deployed.)
PRC's DF-5A (CSS-4) with a 5 mt warhead (about 24 deployed).
There is still considerable uncertainty on some of the issues discussed here. While much information on U.S. nuclear warhead history is available, information is still scanty on some high-yield nuclear weapons. Information now available on the former Soviet/current Russian arsenal is limited regarding its largest weapons, and considerable inconsistencies in available information remain.
U.S.
Following removal of the B53 from service, the highest yield U.S. weapon is the variable yield B83, with a maximum yield of 1.2 mt.[53]
Russia
Another follow-on, the R-36M2 Voyevoda ("commander" in English), was flight tested from March 1986 to September 1989. The MIRVed variant (SS-18 Mod 5), with ten 15F173 warheads, became operational in December 1988. A single-warhead version (SS-18 Mod 6), with the 15F175 warhead providing a 20-mt yield, was deployed in small numbers begining in August 1990.[72, 73] The single-warhead R-36M2 is the highest yield nuclear weapon currently deployed by any nation.
China
The People's Republic of China has deployed a warhead estimated at 5 megatons on the Dong Feng 5 ICBM (U.S. designation CSS-4). The DF-5 can carry a 3,000-kg warhead to a range of 12,000, while the improved Dong Feng 5A can carry 3,200 kg to a range of 13,000 km.[78] The warhead is probably a high yield version of the design(s) used in the PRC's thermonuclear tests of 1968, 1970, and 1976 (given the limited number of Chinese nuclear tests, an independent warhead design is unlikely).[76]
Estimated deployments of DF-5s are highly uncertain. The first two DF-5 missiles were deployed in silos in 1981,[78] and the force remained at 2 through at least 1984.[79] Estimated numbers deployed were 18 in June 2000, 20 in 2003,[76] and 24 in 2005, although reports vary. From about 1990 to 2000, deployed DF-5s were replaced with improved DF-5As.[75, 77] Reportedly the DF-5 force is currently organized into three missile brigades. The 803rd brigade in Hunan province was established in 1984 and converted to DF-5A missiles by the mid-1990s. The 804th brigade in western Henan province was established in the late 1980s, converted to DF-5A missiles by 2000, and may include missiles based in tunnels. The 818th brigade in Hunan province was established in 1996 and was likely initially equipped with DF-5A missiles.[77]
www.johnstonsarchive.net...
article from June 19 2005
A single-warhead version (SS-18 Mod 6), with the 15F175 warhead providing a 20-mt yield, was deployed in small numbers begining in August 1990.[72, 73] The single-warhead R-36M2 is the highest yield nuclear weapon currently deployed by any nation.
Originally posted by TheBandit795
You know what I find strange? As someone mentioned before in other words: When the U.S. government uses nukes, they're called nukes. When someone else uses them, they're called "weapons of mass distruction".
I mean... . They're all WMD's!!
Originally posted by apc
This is not a deployment I would take too seriously. It was more of a "We may have just imploded, but we've still got somethin between our legs" gesture.
Originally posted by TheBandit795
You know what I find strange? As someone mentioned before in other words: When the U.S. government uses nukes, they're called nukes. When someone else uses them, they're called "weapons of mass distruction".
I mean... . They're all WMD's!!