U.S. Reveals Size of Nuclear Stockpile
May 4th, 2010As with just about everything that the rotten to the core Obama regime does, this apparently straightforward story requires heavy context fitting.
1. The Obama regime’s most recent nuclear weapons budget request, “A complete surrender to Senate Republicans,” represents the biggest increase in nuclear weapons related activities since the, “Early years of Ronald Reagan.”
2. Strategic nuclear weapons are seen as less useful now, that’s why the treaties are mentioned at press conferences about the reduction of nuclear weapons. However, there are no treaty obligations for thousands of tactical nuclear weapons. The U.S. is thought to have fewer tactical nuclear weapons deployed than Russia, and a likely reason why brings us to the next point…
3. Prompt Global Strike: Provides the range and time-to-target characteristics of an ICBM, the blast equivalent of a tactical nuclear weapon, but uses conventional explosives. How do states tell the difference between a strategic ICBM launch and a tactical Prompt Global Strike launch?
They can’t!
In terms of launch detection systems, both events are identical. All sides acknowledge that Prompt Global Strike increases the likelihood of the release of strategic nuclear weapons.
Keep smilin', Barry
So, while Obama is grinning like the Cheshire Cat and his zombies continue to roll along the floor in fits of Hope and Change glossolalia, expect the minute hand to move closer to midnight in the years to come.
Via: Washington Post:
Shattering a taboo dating from the Cold War, the Obama administration revealed Monday the size of the American nuclear arsenal — 5,113 weapons — as it embarked on a campaign for tougher measures against countries with hidden nuclear programs.
The figure was in line with previous estimates by arms-control groups. But Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton emphasized that it was the very disclosure of the long-held secret that was important.
“We think it is in our national security interest to be as transparent as we can about the nuclear program of the United States,” she told reporters at a high-level nuclear conference in New York, where she announced the change in policy. “We think that builds confidence.”
…
The disclosure comes less than a month after President Barack Obama unveiled a new policy restricting the U.S. use of nuclear weapons and signed a landmark arms reduction accord with Russia.
Obama, who won a Nobel Peace Prize in part for his vision of a nuclear free world, has also renounced the development of new atomic weapons.
I came across this article wich also analyse the nuclear weapon reduction treaty in relation to the new “prompt global strike”.
http://www.voltairenet.org/article164992.html
I think anyone interested in this topic will find it interesting.
I dunno what to think about Hilary revealing the number of active US nuclear weapons. In my experience, that has been classified, top-secret information. So, we now have transparency.
The reason I think, for the budget increase re nuclear programs is that this nation has (I don’t know how many) but possibly thousands of nuclear warheads that are being dismantled and disposed of and we also took on Russia’s stockpile to do the same and it is a nightmare of logistical proportions.
I am not sure if it was in Reagan’s, Bush I or Bill Clinton’s tenure, but when underground testing was banned (thank God/dess), whether the nuclear arsenal around the world would be effective without explosions meant that computer simulations, etc. would be needed to ensure the efficacy of the nuclear weapons. The U.S. btw hired many Russian scientists after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
There is a need to hire and train workers who are willing to act as stewards for the bombs. Much work and constant training, as well as invasive testing of human fluids for these workers. Not to mention someone living with you for weeks at a time to evaluate your total human profile as to whether you are the kind of person who should be trusted around a nuclear weapon.
Yea verily, there are nut jobs who propose new weapons, etc.
They are probably, and unfortunately being developed off program. Dunno why, I think it is the way of the world for a scientist trained in weapons development.
Its a pity really. Same as it ever was.Wanted a peace dividend after the end of the Cold War and didn’t get it because it cost too much to manage the Nuclear Weapons Complex Infrastructure.
I for one don’t mind how much Obama grins like a Cheshire Cat.It would be more realistic I think, if we showed pictures of him crying. What to do with the world nuclear arsenal is, I think, a terrible burden to bear.