[PreciousLiberty]

There is no credible countermeasure to our ICBMs or SLBMs yet - at least in the open press. Bombers are more about saber rattling than an actual capability - although they’d work in a pinch.

We need to get working on maneuvering RVs, which the Russians are already deploying.

We also need to get back a capability of making new weapons. Right now we don’t have the means to manufacture the plutonium “pits” that are the heart of thermonuclear weapons.

I would also advocate resuming underground testing once we’ve produced new (probably W88) warheads. Computer simulations are no match for actual testing.

[rktman]

“Computer simulations are no match for actual testing.” WTH are you talking about? Computer models have been proven to be absolutely precise in the field of climate change/glowbull warming/3 day out forecasting. Why shouldn’t they also work for nuke simulations? /s.

I’m thinkin’ we need to bone up on intercept capabilities.

[DCBryan1]

I would also advocate resuming underground testing once we’ve produced new (probably W88) warheads. Computer simulations are no match for actual testing.

Yes...and do some nuclear engineering while we are at it, say buy building an updated nuclear -engineered SUPER Panama Canal through Nicaragua via something like Operation Plowshare