New Threats Demand Rapid Reconstitution of Space-Based Nuclear C3

U.S. Naval Institute ^ | September 2025 | Joseph Labrum

[Retain Mike]

Nuclear weapons have played a crucial role in U.S. national security since their development in the 1940s. Over time, Presidents adjusted nuclear deterrence strategies, and the stockpile peaked at more than 30,000 warheads during the Cold War.1 In 1991, however, President George H. W. Bush cut the stockpile to about 10,000 warheads and entered a moratorium on nuclear testing.2 The Clinton administration subsequently signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and, despite the treaty’s lack of Senate ratification, the United States has continued to forgo nuclear testing. The United States once again finds itself having to deter Russia and China, two peer nuclear powers, neither of which have been following its lead in reducing stockpiles.

Over the past 20 years, Russia has updated its Soviet-era arsenal with modern tactical and strategic nuclear weapons. Of these, only the strategic warheads are limited by the New START treaty; Russia has stockpiled more than 2,000 tactical nuclear weapons.4 In addition, it has abandoned its policy of no first use and adopted an escalate-to-deescalate posture.5 This change has proved more destabilizing, with threats from Russia that it “would not hesitate to use tactical nuclear weapons against NATO” and nuclear saber rattling during its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.

While China’s nuclear arsenal still is smaller than that of the United States, some estimates indicate it could achieve parity by 2030.7 This is supported by a nuclear force buildup and modernization that has included road-mobile intermediate-range ballistic missiles and intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs); new silo fields with approximately 250 new ICBM silos; 12 ballistic-missile submarines and plans to complete the next-generation submarine deterrent by 2030, including improved submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs); and bomber modernization.

[Retain Mike]

I think “adjusted nuclear deterrence strategies” is a much too polite a term to use for the morons who decimated our forces.

[MikelTackNailer]

I’m concerned about nuclear-capable nations incorporating artificial intelligence into their command structures without fully understanding the possibility of that backfiring on them (and everyone).

It’s bad enough that the power to ruin the planet several times over rests in the hands of human beings prone to misjudgements and fallibility. Adding simulated conscious lacking moral constraints or any concern about mortality seems like playing Russian Roulette with a semi-automatic pistol.

[Retain Mike]

Here is a US Naval Institute article I posted on the subject.

What Threatens Human Control of Military AI

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2025/june/what-threatens-human-control-military-ai

[BiteYourSelf]

Do you want to play a game?🙄

[Revel]

There are so many massively powerful nukes on earth right now that I really do think that in a full exchange that it could wipe human and animal life from the planet.

[MikelTackNailer]

I read one study that said no more than 12 modern high-yield nukes, fairly distributed and in quick succession, are enough to block enough light to cause "nuclear winter" for years, destroying most plant life and thus the whole shebang.

Don't worry - once opposing governments learn about how that really would cause man-made climate change they'll just hug out their differences and have a big 'kumbaya' moment.

[IndispensableDestiny]

C2
C3
C3I
C4I
C4ISR
C5ISR
C6ISR <— we are here