Just when we thought we had the nuclear weapons discussion was rationally settled to prevent immediate growth of nuclear weapons arsenals throughout the world, Tweety Twump says "let's do it!" Let's make more and better bombs? What we and Russia already have can turn the planet into a piece of coal. Why would anyone want more and "better" of these planet ending bombs?
"Status of World Nuclear Forces"
By Hans M. Kristensen and Robert S. Norris
https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/
"Trump Said the U.S. Should Expand Nuclear Weapons. He’s Right."
America needs to bolster its deterrence not to start a war, but to prevent one.
By Matthew Kroenig
December 23, 2016
"The United States needs a robust nuclear force, therefore, not because anyone wants to fight a nuclear war, but rather, the opposite: to deter potential adversaries from attacking or coercing the United States and its allies with nuclear weapons of their own."
BUT, I thought Tweety Twump did ot want to foreshadow what he plans to do? Now he announces his strategy?
Is Tweety schizo?
By the way I assure that DoD has continuously assessed the nuke threats in all the world and properly prepared to defend against them. Do you think the Triad is static? Really? It is not static and is modernized continuously.
This is a good article, but here is a writer trying to make it seem like he knows more than current military planners for the sake of readership. I suspect DoD is already doing all three of his ideas. I hope DoD is doing all three! ; < ) lol
"So, what would expanding and strengthening the nuclear arsenal look like?
First, the United States must modernize all three legs of the nuclear triad (submarines; long-range bombers, including a new cruise missile; and intercontinental ballistic missiles, or ICBMs). The Obama administration announced plans to modernize the triad under Republican pressure, but critics are already trying to kill off the ICBM and the cruise missile, and production timelines for these weapon systems keep slipping into the future. The Trump administration must make the timely modernization of all three legs of the triad a top priority.
[My comment: "Duh!" Do you really think the Triad is not kept modern? List what is out-of-date for us to show you have a point. By the way, trade off are needed and if Tweety Twump thinks he can make trade offs for huge weapon systems on the "real estate-cheap," he has a lesson coming. If he thought Air Force 1 and the F-35 were expensive I doubt he will do anything with the nukes.]
Second, the United States should increase its deployment of nuclear warheads, consistent with its international obligations. According to New START, the treaty signed with Russia in 2011, each state will deploy no more than 1,550 strategic nuclear warheads, but those restrictions don’t kick in until February 2018. At present, according to the State Department, the United States is roughly 200 warheads below the limit while Russia is almost 250 warheads above it. Accordingly, Russia currently possesses a nuclear superiority of more than 400 warheads, which is worrisome in and of itself and also raises serious questions about whether Moscow intends to comply with this treaty at all. The United States, therefore, should expand its deployed arsenal up to the treaty limits and be fully prepared for further expansion should Russia break out — as Moscow has done with several other legacy arms control agreements.
[Aha! What a great way to inspire a reaction from Russia. Put out more nukes and surround Russia! Clever way to start the next war. Russia will react. Russia is paranoid of our nukes. We will not prevent war by sending out more nukes. That's a dumb idea.] like we have with NATO forces already
Third, and finally, the United States and NATO need more flexible nuclear options in Europe. In the event of a losing war with NATO, Russian strategy calls for limited nuclear “de-escalation” strikes against European civilian and military targets. At present, NATO lacks an adequate response to this threat. As I explain in a new report, the United States must develop enhanced nuclear capabilities, including a tactical, air-to-surface cruise missile, in order to disabuse Putin of the notion that he can use nuclear weapons in Europe and get away with it."
[OK, it is reasonable to place tactical nukes in Europe, but maybe these countries can build their own tactical nukes? Why does the US have to build them? I am sure Tweety Twump is OK with other countries building their own tac nukes because he essentially said so during his campaign. but I would not announce it, or say where they are. Tweety goes along with this too because he said so during his campaign.]
The bottom line tho is that sabre rattling, and war like behavior in 2016 is so much more dangerous than it has ever been in human history. The US needs to keep the rhetoric down, be mature, enjoy peaceful times. After all, George Bush took America to war in Iraq over a bunch of rhetoric. Do we need to throw away another trillion dollars and commit more war crimes in 2017-2020? Do we want to kill millions of people and risk ending the planet to prove we are the big bad bully on the block?
Be aware! Beware!
