Replies

Liberal propaganda, read the article. Our entire slbm and strategic bomber program can be taken out with FIVE missiles. That we are down to only 400 single warhead ICBMs is terrible in itself.

I disagree on the vulnerability of SLBMs. Assuming an SSBN is on patrol, with orders to "remain undetected", taking it out is a major challenge for Russia and impossible for anyone else. Subs in port are vulnerable, but I would expect the boats on patrol to respond adversely, in accordance with NCA orders, to anyone who launched on their home ports.

[Note: This is not an anti-Russia comment; just the reverse. Their capabilities are why President Trump was right, and Graham/McCain/RINOs/Democrats are wrong. We need to work with Russia in the very large number of areas in which our interests overlap.]

We need the triad. SSBNs are survivable, in the sense that they are very hard to find, completely outside the scope of what China or any country other than Russia could threaten. Our land-based ICBMs are survivable because they are spread out, and completely outside the scope of what China or any country other than Russia could wipe out - especially at a cost of one nuke to take out each ICBM. Our bombers have the advantage that they can be launched and then called back (assuming Slim Pickens is not involved).

I’m with you.

The fact that to disarm the US of a significant portion of our nuclear deterrent would require a relatively massive nuclear attack on our homeland (at least two warheads per each of the 400 hardened missile silos), instead of just two sub bases and three bomber bases, raises the threshold any potential adversary would have to cross to defeat us.

Not to mention that it would put Several other countries with a disarming first strike capability since the target list goes from over 400 to just 5 primary targets. On top of that, then Russia is relieved of obligating 800 warheads to our missile fields, about half their deployed treaty limited strategic Arsenal.

Of course some would say this doesn’t account for the few subs at sea or bombers aloft, but a technological breakthrough in Anti sub or air defense could, combined with missile defense, make nuclear conflict “winnable” and thus thinkable, diminishing deterrence.