It's no surprise that neither the Russians or Americans are making a song and dance about losing nukes. I hope they've never stopped looking for the
two beneath the Arctic ice shelf. In the wake of the Cold War and the collapse of Russia's infrastructure, military went unpaid, soldiers sold
equipment etc. There were rumors of missing warheads that have never been accounted for and it's too damaging to National pride to admit too.
I imagine the single greatest factor is plausible deniability. The human and environmental damage could be enormous and the bottom line is always the
bottom line

Who would take responsibility for loss of life and reparations for the environmental consequences?
So far I'm only thinking about the possibilities of an aging, missing warhead exploding. The political consequences of a serious terrorist action
would be terrible. If the US or a US ally had a major city nuked, it's a reasonable bet (based on previous record) that a Middle-East Country would
be decimated in response.
Link to a relevant article in de Speigel.
PS. I forgot to add that a British Navy Admiral was explaining yesterday (follwing the nuclear sub collision) that modern nuke warheads cannot
detonate without their computer system running over 180 checks. If one diagnostic is the wrong value, the nuke is effectively dead. Even using
conventional explosive semtex/C4 or whatever wouldn't work.
Again, it's these older ones that are a concern
[edit on 18-2-2009 by Kandinsky]