• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Current Nuclear Weapons Development

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
14,505
Reaction score
4,250
Last edited:

Josh_TN

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
816
Reaction score
427
It apparently was a bomb attack of some kind. If the cascade was running when the power was cut, a lot of centrifuges probably pulped themselves in an uncontrolled wind down.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
14,505
Reaction score
4,250
On a likely related note, from today's Times:
Row over China-bound ship with nuclear cargo

Sri Lanka A ship found to be carrying uranium hexaflouride —
which can be enriched for use in nuclear weapons or power stations
— was ordered to leave Sri Lankan waters. The BBC Naples, registered
in Antigua, had arrived at Hambantota, a port on the south coast which
is run by China on a 99-year lease, from Rotterdam. It was bound for a
destination in China. (AFP)
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
10,820
Reaction score
1,928
Responding to a question from Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., Richard described the situation: “Both China and Russia have significant capability in their nuclear weapons complexes. … We have no capability right now to actually make a new weapon.”
————————-
“We have NO CAPABILITY........” let that sink in!
 

In_A_Dream

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
260
Reaction score
116
Meanwhile

This shouldn't come as a shock. Rapidly growing superpower, knows it has the economy to back it, wants to assert itself and control the world, will need a sizeable deterrent to help insulate themselves from foreign aggression.
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
10,820
Reaction score
1,928

Josh_TN

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
816
Reaction score
427
Honestly costs too much for what is a second tier system for the US.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,880
Reaction score
2,155
Honestly costs too much for what is a second tier system for the US.
You spelled "first tier" incorrectly.
 

Josh_TN

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
816
Reaction score
427
Honestly costs too much for what is a second tier system for the US.
You spelled "first tier" incorrectly.
I'm all for a new ICBM, but it will always play second fiddle to US SLBMs in terms of deterrent value.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,880
Reaction score
2,155
Honestly costs too much for what is a second tier system for the US.
You spelled "first tier" incorrectly.
I'm all for a new ICBM, but it will always play second fiddle to US SLBMs in terms of deterrent value.
Nah. ICBMs are far more of a deterrent.
 

David N

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Apr 7, 2007
Messages
9
Reaction score
10
Meanwhile

This shouldn't come as a shock. Rapidly growing superpower, knows it has the economy to back it, wants to assert itself and control the world, will need a sizeable deterrent to help insulate themselves from foreign aggression.
The Chinese stated nuclear deference policy used to be that they needed to pose a credible second strike capability to impose unacceptable damage on the "enemy" (similar to the French policy on the Force de Frappe). This lead to a need for a modest nuclear arsenal. When the US left the ABM treaty and declared the aim to establish a capability to stop the presumed N Korean and Iranian ICBMs the Chinese said they had to increase their nuclear deterrent size. If I remember correctly the US stated they understood this and were not concerned.
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
10,820
Reaction score
1,928
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
10,820
Reaction score
1,928
Admiral Charles Richard, Commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, painted a dire picture of the nuclear threats the United States faces from abroad, and claimed that they could only be met by renewing the U.S. commitment to nuclear dominance over the coming century
—————————
“Renewing the....commitment to nuclear dominance......”

Being two decades behind your adversaries, modernizing 30 and 40 year old weapons, having not produced a new warhead since 1991, as your production capacity disappears is renewing nuclear dominance!!! There’s not a big enough eye roll emoji for that statement.
 

Similar threads

Top