Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A few hundred dispersed between ICBMs, SLBMs and bombers would be more than enough. Having thousands doesn't makes us any safer.
The other nuclear powers have much smaller arsenals than either the USA or Russian Federation. The Chinese have anywheres from 150-300 and only field 50-100 ICBMs capable of hitting the USA, they have no long range bombers, no bases within striking range of the USA and have yet to field a nuclear ballistic missile carrying submarine. Britain's force is submarine launched and has 96 warheads on about a two dozen Trident missiles on their two submarines . France has a slightly larger nuclear arsenal with submarine launched missiles some shaort range bombers and about 20 IRBMs in silos in centeral France.
Israel has neither confirmed or said it does not have nuclear weapons. Estimates based on imports of uranium and activities at the Damora facility suggest it may have from 100-150 warheads and can use F-15s,F-16 or IRBMs to carry they to targets within 1500 miles of Israel. Israel my have gotten SLCMs or ALCM from the United States and may also have gotten the USAs precise satellite mapping and GPS coordinates to improve strike accuracy. India and Pakistan have small arsenals of about 50-100 bombs and have medium range and IRBMs plus strike aircraft to drop them on each other. North Korea may have half a dozen such bombs and only the most recent test shoed a yield about that of Trinity (10 KT). They have not sucessfully launched a satellite of a sucessful IRBM so vitrtually no US territory is within its range. North Krea's principle threat is to South Korea and Japan.
Only the USA and Russia have thousands of warheads and the advanced missiles, plkanes and submarines to actually use them. The numbers are in the 5000 warheads range and the number of strategic weapons delivery systems (Systems capable of striking each other) is from 1750-2250. .
Yup.More guns and more nukes is what the world needs today.
We have never been all that safe during the entire Nuclear Age. Given this nations lack of community and completely self absorbed attitude this nation would go bizerk if. even a single nuclear bomb exploded in any American City. We are not the Cool Hand Lukes or the Harry Calahans we think we are. More Americans would die due to the breakdown of utilities, infrastructure, economy and the hail of gun fire John Q Public would unleash on his fellow citizens. In normal times about 20,000 Americans are gunned down each year. Is it so unreasonable that a nation of George Zimmermans would use their 200 million odd guns to kill millions of their fellow Americans?
We are very vunerable and frighteenly small numbers of nuclear strikes could strip the USA of all electronic devices, the ability to produce fossil fuels like gasoline or knock us out of the electric age.
A limited nuclear attack could produce enough radiological contamination to kill a majority of Americans or plunge us into a ice age climate for years if not decades. The delemma of nuclear weapons is one dares not use them lest one wants to survive a nuclear war and be able to pick up the pieces. The sooner we get over this fetish of that they make us safe, we are living on borrowed time as Arthur C. Clarke once said.
Reagan was a GOVERNOR!!! Obama had ZERO executive experience!!! Whats your point??
A governor who was a actor who armed Iran and Iraq, raised taxes 8 times and the debt ceiling 17 times. Some president he was.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.