Reply
Swimmortal
westpark
Posts: 59,269
Registered: ‎10-26-2005
0

US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NUCLEAR_WEAPONS?SITE=AP
&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

WESTPARK THE KING OF ASMB

"westpark ran a train on this thread" - Stilgar

"Every woman needs a good slap now & again." - Sir Sean Connery
Reeve
NaBraniel
Posts: 29,736
Registered: ‎11-26-2004
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to westpark - Message ID#: 63724159

Real good stuff. Obama is trying hard to get me to leave the house in November.
Muslim brotherhood
SwimLegend
TheGreatUrameshi13
Posts: 23,513
Registered: ‎05-23-2004
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to westpark - Message ID#: 63724159

My opinion has always been, yes, nuclear weapons are bad.  But we'll get rid of ours just as soon as they get rid of theirs.

 

Besides, there have been no huge wars since the development of them, so that's a plus.

"Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred."
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

SwimHotshot
crapshot2
Posts: 9,561
Registered: ‎04-14-2011
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to TheGreatUrameshi13 - Message ID#: 63727499


TheGreatUrameshi13 wrote:

My opinion has always been, yes, nuclear weapons are bad.  But we'll get rid of ours just as soon as they get rid of theirs.

 

Besides, there have been no huge wars since the development of them, so that's a plus.



we will still be able to blow up the world several times over. we have what, 2000 nukes right now?

 

we will be fine, and this will save a ton of money

all hail the crimson king
Order of the Owl
scoobdog
Posts: 28,376
Registered: ‎09-13-2003
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to crapshot2 - Message ID#: 63727537

Yeah. I was wondering why we needed thousands of nuclear warheads. Isn't one enough to get the job done?
SwimSuperfan
Satoh
Posts: 5,024
Registered: ‎07-27-2011
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to westpark - Message ID#: 63724159

I'm gonna start calling you dpark.
Google翻訳は、実際の知識に代わるものではありません。
SwimIcon
rotanalebor
Posts: 10,022
Registered: ‎02-16-2004
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to scoobdog - Message ID#: 63727565

If our preferred response to a nuke attack is to rain down armageddon upon the culprits, to nuke every major city and military installation of the offending country, then we'll need several dozen nukes, at least, to get the job done. 300 should be plenty.

Whether this would be an ethical or even intelligent response to an attack, well, that's another question.
yes
Swimieval
EvilsergE
Posts: 74,416
Registered: ‎06-10-2004
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to westpark - Message ID#: 63724159

Instead of being big pusies, everyone should do sword fights like real men.
LIVE IN YOUR WXRLD.
PLY IN URS.
×
PSN, Steam - worldWar_me
Swimportant
Drake6-5
Posts: 9,170
Registered: ‎01-26-2005
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

[ Edited ]

Reply to westpark - Message ID#: 63724159

Eh so we'll only be able to nuke the world 12 times over as opposed to 60, bearing in mind that's not quite accurrate as a disproportionate amount of the ones we'll be keeping will be thermo nukes thousands of times more powerful than conventional nukes and its the field tactical nukes where the you'll most of the reductions while the intercontenental ballistic variety will likely remained untouched just with reduced redunant capacity because advancing technology makes it largely unnecessary.

"Once you figure out what a joke everything is being the comedian is the only thing that makes sense."
Order of the Owl
scoobdog
Posts: 28,376
Registered: ‎09-13-2003
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to rotanalebor - Message ID#: 63727761

Quite. There just isn't a practical way to deploy hundreds of nukes at a time, let alone thousands, and, once even one nuke is deployed, armagaeddon has already started and the rest of those weapons can do nothing to protect us.
SwimLegend
GiantMegaDoucheX
Posts: 23,354
Registered: ‎06-04-2004
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to westpark - Message ID#: 63724159

####...

 

 

Soon we'll only have enough nukes to destroy the world THREE times over...

SwimHotshot
Josey
Posts: 7,410
Registered: ‎08-31-2003
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to westpark - Message ID#: 63724159

So, according to the GOP, we need to keep our nukes because Iran might develop some that might travel as far as Israel?  Why even mention Syria?

 

It still remains to be seen how far these cuts go, if they go anywhere. A sizeable faction is still beating the paranoid Cold War drum.

Take my political philosophy quiz! | Candiru? No can do. | Current events discussion and other nonsense
Order of the Owl
Pinkfrog
Posts: 26,584
Registered: ‎09-03-2003
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to Josey - Message ID#: 63728895

Something i dont think you understand

 

"A sizeable faction is still beating the paranoid Cold War drum."

 

There are no mulligans or oops.. or sry that was an accident.. When one goes off things will happen that I prey never happen.

 

The thing is even if the USA reduces its nuclear arms ( you cant hug your children with nuclear arms ) it will not decrease the likely hood of a nuclear war happening will it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7QhpJ3DWDA

 

I would say most of us understand that if nukes are ever used again.. Its bad for everyone.

So even if we cut back our nukes to 1 per state.. That still doesnt change the dynamics of the political environemnt in the middle east and the new power struggle going on between new powers in the reigon.

 

The thing about nuclear war was always..

If you ever attacked us with one.. we would attack you and there could be no winner.. Ever see the movie War Games..?

TBH we only really need the Boomer subs to handle the nuke threat..

But that isnt the point when it comes to international politics..

 

I ask my self why do i bother replying to you every thread you make is the usa is the bad guy you support iran and other dictators because of what ever reason

The point is we could reduce the number of nukes the USA has down to 1 and it wouldnt change the dynamic

or the thread of nuclear war.

 

When people are not afraid of death and they have the power to bring death to millions instantly.. That should scare you just a little bit..

 

SwimHotshot
Josey
Posts: 7,410
Registered: ‎08-31-2003

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to Pinkfrog - Message ID#: 63729091

Why be afraid of countries that have no capacity to hit us with a nuclear missile?

 

We don't really have any reason to have so many nukes that we can destroy the world 10 times over, the Soviet Union is dead and Russia has not interest in going to war with us and vice versa. That fight is over, the days of mutually assured destruction are gone. China isn't going to go to war with us, India is not going to go to war with us, Pakistan's nukes exist to deter India from attacking them. We don't have to worry about nukes raining down from the sky anymore. 

 

Getting rid of our nukes is largely one of the good will gestures that are apt to be taken seriously by the world at large, and economically, they're just taking up space and eating up dollars that could be better spent elsewhere any way.

Take my political philosophy quiz! | Candiru? No can do. | Current events discussion and other nonsense
Order of the Owl
Pinkfrog
Posts: 26,584
Registered: ‎09-03-2003
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to Josey - Message ID#: 63729287


Josey wrote:

 

We don't really have any reason to have so many nukes that we can destroy the world 10 times over, the Soviet Union is dead and Russia has not interest in going to war with us and vice versa. That fight is over, the days of mutually assured destruction are gone. China isn't going to go to war with us, India is not going to go to war with us, Pakistan's nukes exist to deter India from attacking them. We don't have to worry about nukes raining down from the sky anymore. 

 



Your view of the world is completely off if that is what you believe lol let me give you some facts you know.. SCIENCE!!!!

 

The United States Plans Further Reductions in Its Nuclear Arsenal

The plan indicates that the United States currently intends to reduce its nuclear arsenal by 30 to 40 percent from today’s total of approximately 5,000 weapons. Reductions begun under the last administration will reduce the arsenal to 4,700 weapons by the end of 2012. In addition, the Obama administration’s Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), released in April, indicated that additional weapons now in storage will be retired. This is consistent with the new plan, which states, “The future NNSA infrastructure will support total stockpiles up to a range of approximately 3,000 to 3,500 … warheads.” That is about twice the limit on the number of strategic weapons permitted by the New START treaty. Of course, the United States could reduce its arsenal to still lower levels through additional negotiated agreements with Russia and other nuclear weapon states.

Reductions Will Not Save Much or Reduce Size of Nuclear Complex

According to the plan, once the stockpile drops below a given level, the costs to maintain the weapons and infrastructure are “essentially independent of the size of the stockpile.” The plan suggests that even with a stockpile of some 500 warheads, the size and cost of the weapons complex would only be a little smaller than what is proposed for a stockpile of 3,000 to 3,500 weapons. The plan states that to maintain the required nuclear weapons expertise and facilities, a minimal number of nuclear weapons would have to be produced each year as part of the ongoing efforts to extend the lifetimes of existing weapons. It does not specify the number.

 

http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_weapons_and_global_security/nuclear
_weapons/policy_issues/stockpile-ba...

We wont save money

And it doesnt change the dynamic

What were you saying again?

 

SwimHotshot
Josey
Posts: 7,410
Registered: ‎08-31-2003
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to Pinkfrog - Message ID#: 63729373

You're not giving me science and you're giving me an article based on speculation that actually says there will be a reduced cost, albeit small, but only if current practices are maintained. But still, you're not really giving a reason why they shouldn't be reduced.

 

I see you've given up on the idea that we need them for protection though.

Take my political philosophy quiz! | Candiru? No can do. | Current events discussion and other nonsense
SwimIcon
GaiusIuliusCesar
Posts: 18,042
Registered: ‎10-25-2007
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to westpark - Message ID#: 63724159

Its about dam time, the cold war ended the year I was born, do people have any idea how much it costs to maintain nuclear weapons? Its not like we can actually use them anyway, if we do that, its the end of the world. 

 

They are tactically worthless and their cost is a long term strategic reliability. As long as we have the materials to make them, we can turn out enough to scare off any Russian or Chinese aggression, which isn't likely anytime soon.

"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Christopher Hitchens ; if you don't like Hitchens you can take a number, get in line, and kiss my ass.
SwimHELPeR
4-HBabe
Posts: 22,915
Registered: ‎02-23-2005

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to EvilsergE - Message ID#: 63727799


EvilsergE wrote:
Instead of being big pusies, everyone should do sword fights like real men.

Indeed.

"It doesn't matter how black you think you are." - SwimMod_Bast smack down of the week

also, boobs, lesbians, undergarments

Swimmortal
westpark
Posts: 59,269
Registered: ‎10-26-2005
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to crapshot2 - Message ID#: 63727537


crapshot2 wrote:

TheGreatUrameshi13 wrote:

My opinion has always been, yes, nuclear weapons are bad.  But we'll get rid of ours just as soon as they get rid of theirs.

 

Besides, there have been no huge wars since the development of them, so that's a plus.



we will still be able to blow up the world several times over. we have what, 2000 nukes right now?

 

we will be fine, and this will save a ton of money


I dunno the exact number we need or don't need to blow up the planet but I imagine even with a 90% cut we'll have enough to blow China & Russia skyhigh -- these things are pricey & they have to be maintained -- we need to save money & defense is a great place to cut.

WESTPARK THE KING OF ASMB

"westpark ran a train on this thread" - Stilgar

"Every woman needs a good slap now & again." - Sir Sean Connery
SwimHotshot
crapshot2
Posts: 9,561
Registered: ‎04-14-2011

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to westpark - Message ID#: 63732837

if congress would get off it's lazy ass you could cut 15% of the bureaucracy from every department and have them work better without loosing any services.

 

but actually doing what the voters sent them to do doesn't get them the money they want

all hail the crimson king
SwimHELPeR
Jingai
Posts: 61,198
Registered: ‎12-07-2006
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to Josey - Message ID#: 63729287

Actually, Iran's current ballistic missile could hit us, from the bases they are building in Venezeula.

Is Happiness to be found in a Future Grasped with bloodstained hands?
-Lacus Clyne.
R.I.P. Gecko Zero, Aliediz and The-Green-Hornet The burdens of this world are yours no more.
Such Beauty Ciddy is STILL mah BFF, Ghostrek 2020 Also Nrrdgirl, Tomoe242004,Hertz, Mewn, Ali ... and Vadz
The real American idea is not that every man shall be equal, but that every man shall have the liberty without hindrance to be what God has made him. The office of government is not to confer happiness but to give men the opportunity to work out happiness for themselves.
-Ronald Reagan

SwimStar
Zaphod_209
Posts: 6,791
Registered: ‎07-29-2006
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to westpark - Message ID#: 63724159

Fine.

 

Get rid of all of them.

 

Take out the radioactive material and keep a few empty shells for museums.

 

You can sell the rest for scrap to the Koreans to use in the KIAs.  At least then the steel will be used for something decent.

Dude, that was my heat sink.
Now where am I gonna sink my heat?
SwimHotshot
crapshot2
Posts: 9,561
Registered: ‎04-14-2011
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to Jingai - Message ID#: 63734653

only that iran is not building the bomb because they are not building a reprocessing plant.

all hail the crimson king
SwimHotshot
Josey
Posts: 7,410
Registered: ‎08-31-2003
0

Re: US to cut 80% of our nuke capacity?

Reply to Jingai - Message ID#: 63734653


Jingai wrote:
Actually, Iran's current ballistic missile could hit us, from the bases they are building in Venezeula.



You mean the discredited report on alleged missile bases?

 

The U.S. State Department said Saturday that it reviews all information pertaining to Iranian military involvement in the hemisphere, but that it could not vouch for the report.


"We have no evidence to support this claim and therefore no reason to believe the assertions made in the article are credible," the department said in a statement.

In the wake of the questions raised by the report, Venezuelan Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro described the allegations as an "extravagant lie."

 

"There is an international war machine against the prestige of Venezuelan democracy, against the prestige of the Bolivarian Revolution," Maduro said, referring to the country's social revolution. "There is no other way to describe this information that has spread through international media and spokespeople, ex-(Venezuelan) servicemembers."

 

Anyway, Venezuela doesn't have any interest in attacking us, considering we're one of their best customers.

Take my political philosophy quiz! | Candiru? No can do. | Current events discussion and other nonsense