Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 10/12/2026 9:45:15 AM PDT by Retain Mike
In 2019, Princeton University’s Program on Science and Global Security simulated a potential nuclear conflict between the United States and Russia. In one series of escalatory exchanges, the United States expended between 930 and 1,080 nuclear warheads.1 These simulated figures represent 65–76 percent of U.S. strategic warheads deployed on missiles and bombers as of March 2023.2 With limited remaining warheads and a degraded NC3 network, could the United States effectively deter China in the aftermath?
In a 2024 report to Congress, DoD updated its estimate of China’s stockpile of nuclear weapons to more than 600 operational warheads.4 If this trajectory continues, China could surpass 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030, creating a multipolar nuclear dynamic with increased risk of destabilization. This rapid modernization threatens global stability and further complicates a potential arms-control treaty.
The Navy’s role in strategic deterrence will only increase in the coming years, mandating serious thought as to the constitution and deployment of its seaborne nuclear forces. The Columbia class will provide 12 SSBNs to replace 14 Ohio-class submarines approaching the end of their active service.10 These new ships will be the backbone of a nuclear triad tasked with simultaneously deterring two peer adversaries. Each Columbia-class boat will carry 16 Trident II D5 missiles.11 When coupled with the smaller class size, this equates to a 31 percent decrease in deployed SLBMs. (See “Fewer Boomers. Fewer Tubes. More Adversaries,” pp. 34–39.)
The rapid growth of China’s nuclear arsenal means the Navy must consider whether a smaller SSBN force will provide a credible deterrent in the coming decades. SSBNs are just one leg of the triad, but their survivability, share of deployed warheads, and maintenance requirements demand considerable forethought to ensure their continued success in that role.
(Excerpt) Read more at usni.org ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Now that we are revamping the W76 warheads in our subs, I’m not really worried.
Back in the 70’s they got too close to the edge on critical mass.
The rest of the stockpile is in good shape.
You need to get better sources.
Thanks for pointing out the improbability of targeting Three Gorges Dam. Is there something else of China’s that would be a high priority target?
Deindustrialization has moved us from being the "arsenal of democracy" to being the "ossuary of democracy."
“ Note:
The ChiComs will drain down the 3 Gorges reservoir prior to serious hostilities. In fact, if they start doing that then war is probable.”
Bery, bery interesting. 🤔
I’ll keep this info in my memory banks for this eventuality.
I'm not so sure they can't target long distance and with great accuracy.
“… fiber optic gyros, and was stunned to note that they were all from China.”
Fiber optic gyros 🥙?
I like chicken gyros :).
Best not to start one.
Trying to hit it with a cruise missile would be stupid. The US military isn’t stupid.
High value targets get an ICMB/SLBM with MIRVs or a B2 stealth mission. In fact, China’s a growing threat that the B21 is being made for. Their production is accelerating and the USAF is asking for 100.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=u86ZqmdZ18A&t=1665s
If the balloon ever goes up, Russia, China, the USA, India, Pakistan, North Korea, Britain and France will all launch immediately, based on use it or lose it logic.
Sad but true. There will be no surviving governments, just a few people crawling thru the rubble.
Truman, Kennedy, Nixon, and Reagan said NO to nuclear war!!
We should have nuked Red China in the 1950s. By now they’d be another Japan.
As nuclear weapons capabilities proliferate among countries, so should definitions of winning. I find that a bit scary.
Nonsense. We'll be fine as long as we retain our advantage in the "mine shaft gap."
They all said yes to deterrence. They all pursued limits on nuclear weapons. A new START agreement becomes difficult to meaningless to detrimental as other nuclear weapons countries become potential adversaries.
Oh please. if any nukes hit us...we lose. If any hit them they lose.
In what world do we win a nuclear war with Russia & China (and soon France & UK)?
The only way to win, is not to play.
“the United States faces two major nuclear competitors simultaneously”
Both competitors know their destruction shall be Mutually Assured!!
How old are you? You've never seen "Dr. Strangelove"?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.