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.

 

US, Russia nuclear arsenal data released

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:39 AM
link   

US, Russia nuclear arsenal data released


news.yahoo.com

The United States has 30 percent more deployed long-range ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads than former Cold War foe Russia, according to new data released Wednesday by the State Department.

The United States has 882 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) and heavy bombers, compared with 521 for Russia, according to the State Department, which published the new START aggregate numbers.

The United States also has 1,800 deployed
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:39 AM
link   
Just crazy, US and Russia spending much money on maintaining such a stockpile. I am pleased with the intended reduction. However, 1550 on each side still allows both sides to destroy the world over how many time? Bringing China to the equation I wonder how many they have.

Finally, with the US having so many of these weapons, I am confused that Iraq was sold as a threat to the American people and the world.



news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Great information, friend.
Even in the wake of Fukishima which still isn't over, people are misguided about the dangers of radioactive materials and the long term consequences when they are utilized. maybe your post will help shed some light on this subject for the stalwart nuclear nonapologist crowd.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by RUSSO


Bringing China to the equation I wonder how many they have.

Finally, with the US having so many of these weapons, I am confused that Iraq was sold as a threat to the American people and the world.

China? How about the US's "great friend" Israel? It's the worlds worst kept secret, they abuse their neighbors and bomb their reactors, yet hold onto these weapons of mass destruction and refuse to let any other nation in the region have them. Don't get me wrong all nukes are bad, but they are even worse when they are kept in this manner and the international community does nothing about it.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by the owlbear
 


I understand what concern you, because this concearn me too. France, UK, India, NK, and others keep this mass destruction weapons to feel secure. This is the real irony, no one will never be peaceful as long as one of these bombs exist in the world.

My friend, I dont know if you already saw this vid below. Just crazy.



Horrorshow


Peace.


edit on 2-6-2011 by RUSSO because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by RUSSO
 


At least, our nukes are better maintained and guarded….probably. I hope so anyways.

And there are people who claim that missile defense increases the chance for nuclear war. I say BS. An anti-ballistic missile (ABM) is a missile designed to counter ballistic missiles (a missile for missile defense) is a no brainer. They have to be cheaper to make. We just have to get the science down to a tee. Kinetic kill weapons also would help as a secondary line of defense.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


Actually ABM is for first strikes.

You build the ABM system, then launch your nuclear attack, then the ABM intercepts the remaining enemy nukes in flight.

It is not to stop an attack in a defensive war. It is part of a first strike system, but we pretend that it isn't sometimes when we need to.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


But all weapon systems can be used either offensively or defensively. I would like to think,
, that the US would take the high road when it comes to nukes. But we've seen otherwise in other circumsatnces, haven't we?



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by RUSSO
 


If there were a headline for that short, it would read, CANCER RATES SKYROCKET!



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by RUSSO
 


Although it sounds a step in the right direction to reduce the numbers-Do you actually think they declare all their weapons?
Myself,I think there's a good chance all nuclear powers have the nukes that the public are allowed to know about,which they can dismantle a few of from time to time.
But I think all nuclear powers also have a "black"stockpile of nukes,which no one knows about.
These of course are the ones they never get rid of,as they each worry if other countries have similar "black" nukes.

Knowing how paranoid some countries can be I bet this is the case.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by the owlbear
reply to post by RUSSO
 


If there were a headline for that short, it would read, CANCER RATES SKYROCKET!


Well, guess what, IT WAS SKYROCKET.

edit on 2-6-2011 by RUSSO because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
reply to post by RUSSO
 


Although it sounds a step in the right direction to reduce the numbers-Do you actually think they declare all their weapons?
Myself,I think there's a good chance all nuclear powers have the nukes that the public are allowed to know about,which they can dismantle a few of from time to time.
But I think all nuclear powers also have a "black"stockpile of nukes,which no one knows about.
These of course are the ones they never get rid of,as they each worry if other countries have similar "black" nukes.

Knowing how paranoid some countries can be I bet this is the case.


Yeh, I bet this too, but its "news" you know, lets pretend we believe in MSM.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Yea... real smart, releasing this data

couldnt they just kept it between themselves
I just think it gives new Nuclear powers a number to shoot for and try to exceed in warhead production.
powers such as North Korea, Iran, Pakistan etc.
just my humble opinion of coarse
edit on 2-6-2011 by paradiselost333 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
These aren't the weapons the people of the world should fear. Between the USA and Russia this only assures mutual destruction, and a lasting stalemate... For now, that could change as one side or the other gains the technology to 100% destroy these weapons before they launch from ANY location... Does either have that capability yet?

The proliferation of nuclear weapons and nuclear power in other nations that pose the greatest risks NOW and in the future.

Not IF but When a radiological weapon is detonated in a "terrorist attack" ...




posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   
China has a couple hundred. Israel has more than China.

Anyway, The US and Russia also have plenty of weapons that are somewhat "dismantled" but could be assembled VERY quickly so the numbers are really misleading.
edit on 2-6-2011 by princeofpeace because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
China has a couple hundred. Israel has more than China.


That is most likely not true. China's stockpile is probably now closer to the range of US & Russia. It all sort of hangs on the Pu pit in the last two generation of warheads. If their designs are running more like 1.5-3 kg Pu pits then they have had enough material for over 2000 warheads for a long time now.

To be fair per capita Israel...is hands down the largest nuke power.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Well China has disclosed the amount and supposedly IAEA has verified. They have a modest stockpile given their population.


Originally posted by Imperium Americana

Originally posted by princeofpeace
China has a couple hundred. Israel has more than China.


That is most likely not true. China's stockpile is probably now closer to the range of US & Russia. It all sort of hangs on the Pu pit in the last two generation of warheads. If their designs are running more like 1.5-3 kg Pu pits then they have had enough material for over 2000 warheads for a long time now.

To be fair per capita Israel...is hands down the largest nuke power.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Well China has disclosed the amount and supposedly IAEA has verified. They have a modest stockpile given their population.


Originally posted by Imperium Americana

Originally posted by princeofpeace
China has a couple hundred. Israel has more than China.


That is most likely not true. China's stockpile is probably now closer to the range of US & Russia. It all sort of hangs on the Pu pit in the last two generation of warheads. If their designs are running more like 1.5-3 kg Pu pits then they have had enough material for over 2000 warheads for a long time now.

To be fair per capita Israel...is hands down the largest nuke power.


The same IAEA that Israel not let monitor your stockpile. Yet they blame Iran for want to make atomic bombs. The same Iran that let the IAEA supervise their nuclear program. Who are the terrorists here after all? I am not advocating in favor of this country, which is radical and cruel in several things, but something is wrong in this whole story.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
If Oppenheimer himself realised how evil the weapon he helped create was, then why have none of those who use them yet?

There is no situation that would require a Nuclear/Atomic bomb to be dropped, no matter how you may try to justify it, it will always be Unjust



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Fractured.Facade
 

Yea that reminds me , I seen on some show(," lol I know") that a so called
insider disclosed that the US has been or had been looking for guaranteed first strike capability that would stop any retaliation from the Russians. Some kind of super fast(light speed?) delivery system that they would not even see until the bright flash.Thats not the surprising part, the crazy part was if they succeeded in developing it, those crazy mothers planned on using it
if I can find the source I will post



new topics




 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join