US says it has 5,113 nuclear warheads

Has anyone explained the concept of 'national security' to this Administration? What a bunch of fucking morons.

National security? Telling people we have enough nukes to bomb every major population center in the world a few times?

Kinda trumps the gun nuts "this property protected by smith and wesson" signs a bit doesn't it?

But the with all our private guns if anyone does want to take us on they would likely use nukes becuase invasion would cost too many lives.
The USA/Japan rationalle back at us?

Or they could just wait till we bankrupt ourselves and just buy us.
WE are eager to sell America to foreign interests.
 
Last edited:
Standard nukes are so old fashioned and will contaminate the oil rich areas. Neutron bombs are much more efficient.

Ah, Neutron bombs were actually enhanced radiation devices.

I think you got that backwards.

I think the Reagan administration thought them a bad idea, and dumped them.

I wonder why they thought transparency on this would be a good idea. Their argument doesn't sound convincing.

Enhanced in the way that they killed living creatures and did not contaminate the area as much.

Do you really think we did not make nor have any neutron bombs?

I know we had the Neutron Dance...
 
I hadn't heard of the darn things since 1981. I don't believe they ever got funded. It went against US doctrine at the time that nukes were the final option. We didn't do any training in fighting in nuke contaminated areas. Once the nukes got dropped, the belief was that civilization had been a failure and was over.

All through the Reagan years, the assumption was that Party Over was the only way nukes would work. even with the START talks, the idea was that both sides would improve the quality of the arsenal, while reducing quantities, and would work to make sure that third parties didn't join in the fun.
 
Ah, Neutron bombs were actually enhanced radiation devices.

I think you got that backwards.

I think the Reagan administration thought them a bad idea, and dumped them.

I wonder why they thought transparency on this would be a good idea. Their argument doesn't sound convincing.

Enhanced in the way that they killed living creatures and did not contaminate the area as much.

Do you really think we did not make nor have any neutron bombs?

.


I know we had the Neutron Dance...

:D
Now that is something worth forgetting
 
I hadn't heard of the darn things since 1981. I don't believe they ever got funded. It went against US doctrine at the time that nukes were the final option. We didn't do any training in fighting in nuke contaminated areas. Once the nukes got dropped, the belief was that civilization had been a failure and was over.

All through the Reagan years, the assumption was that Party Over was the only way nukes would work. even with the START talks, the idea was that both sides would improve the quality of the arsenal, while reducing quantities, and would work to make sure that third parties didn't join in the fun.

Umm Black ops budgets?

You can believe that the talk of a new type of bomb was talked about openly by our government before they were built if you want to.
 
Would have been as pointless as building a wooden paddlewheel aircraft carrier. As I recall the debase was an either or issue with the MX. Reagan went with the MX.

Not to say there aren't a lot of stupid things in the black ops budget, but the enhanced radiation device just plain had no place in the US arsenal. We were not expecting that there would be more than a single exchange, and both sides would loose.

The russians had ABM missles around Moscow. We didn't bother. The Russians thought they could save the capital. But loose the rest. As far as we could tell, the DC was not even on the Russian priority list.

All the Enhanced radiation device talk did was make the US look stupid. It would not have been a viable threat, and would have been a draw against more important systems. Even now, the folks who remember the things regard it as stupid.
 
I recall the duck and cover drills in school.
LIke getting under your desk was going to help ;)
I think those that were not around it 50's and 60's don't realize just how pessimistic people were about the future. There were so many people that didn't expect mankind to make it to 2000. That's one reason the 60's were so crazy. Most young people didn't really expect to be around that much longer.
 
Has anyone explained the concept of 'national security' to this Administration? What a bunch of fucking morons.

Well, to make a point, they did not tell everything. And like I highlighted, none of this was new information to anyone paying attention for the last twenty years. If they were giving out locations, I might agree with you CG.

However, over 5,000 warheads can still do a lot of damage for anyone who chooses to fuck with us.

I tend to view it the same way I do waterboarding.... It's preferable not to announce to our enemies exactly what we will and will not do, or what we do or do not have. Politicians are some of the very few people in the world that I would ever use the term "shut the fuck up" to.
 
Has anyone explained the concept of 'national security' to this Administration? What a bunch of fucking morons.

Because the Russians and the Chinese wouldn't have any idea how many nukes the Yanks have, right?? :cool::eusa_whistle:

They might think they do. Is there any real value in confirming such information? Seriously? I'm not paranoid about Russia or China, I just happen to think that keeping secrets is not a bad thing.
 
Why spent money on nukes when we can be giving that money to ACORN, or whatever the fuck it's calling itself today to beat a RICO indictment
 

Forum List

Back
Top