Posted on 01/16/2018 11:10:40 AM PST by shove_it
WASHINGTON—The Pentagon is planning to develop two new sea-based nuclear weapons to respond to Russia and China’s growing military capabilities, according to a sweeping Defense Department review of nuclear strategy.
The planned move has ignited a broad debate over future U.S. nuclear strategy at a time when the nation also faces the threat of proliferation, in particular from North Korea’s efforts to expand its arsenal of nuclear weapons and develop long-range missiles capable of delivering them.
Supporters of the Pentagon’s plan say it is time for the U.S. to update its nuclear forces to deal with changing threats some three decades after the end of the Cold War. Critics worry that the Pentagon’s search for more flexible nuclear options could lower the threshold for their use.
One weapon, which experts say could be deployed in about two years, is a “low yield” warhead for the Trident missile, which currently is deployed with more powerful warheads on the Navy’s submarines that carry ballistic missiles.
The U.S. also would pursue the development of a new nuclear-tipped sea-launched cruise missile, reintroducing a system that was retired from the American arsenal in 2010...
...snip...
A major concern for the Pentagon is a new Russian ground-launched cruise missile that American officials say violates the treaty banning intermediate-range missiles based on land, which was signed in 1987 by President Ronald Reagan and Mikhail S. Gorbachev, leader of the then-Soviet Union. Russia’s decision to develop and deploy that system is described by the review as part of a Russian doctrine that calls for threatening the limited use of nuclear weapons, or perhaps even carrying out a limited nuclear strike, to end a conventional war on terms favorable to the Kremlin.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Cue the pearl clutchers.
What ever happened to the kinetic energy weapons... tungsten rods dropped from orbit or from an ICBM that have a nuclear level blast without radiation or fallout?
Haven't you heard that was all a lie perpetuated by Reagan.
There were some practical engineering problems (nothing insurmountable) and some logistical issues (such as thanks to various factors each shot would cost $230 million) but the program was killed by the Democrats under Obama.
Joking aside, the program was revived under Bush II. http://www.businessinsider.com/air-force-rods-from-god-kinetic-weapon-hit-with-nuclear-weapon-force-2017-9
“...But this is superb physics.” —Enrico Fermi to Robert Oppenheimer, “Day One” (1989)
The f---ing chicoms have nearly EVERYTHING we have made. No reason to give this to them, as well.
The Pentagon regretfully realizes that the nuclear shield provided by the mere Presence of Obama was equivalent to at least one part of the nuclear triad, if not two, so this is good.
“Tungsten rods dropped from orbit”
—
Either a fantasy or an ultra-classified mil secret - I’d go with the first option.
—
“ICBM that have a nuclear level blast without radiation or fallout”
—
You are thinking of neutron bomb weapons - Clinton did away with them - only China, thanks to the same Clinton, has them and has tested them on several mussulman villages with the required favorable results ... twice.
Russia may have them, but they are more interested in really large weapons like their underwater drone fleet with 100 megaton warheads ...
We are using 60s tech with weapons that MAY still work. Meanwhile, the rest of the world has moved on into the 21st century militarily.
Planning? That’s a bit too late. We should already have them at the ready.
My thinking on several trials is that they did not work. I was not cleared high enough to really know, in which case I could not tell you either.
My thinking on several trials is that they did not work. I was not cleared high enough to really know, in which case I could not tell you either.
It’s about bloody well time. Let’s also resume testing them while we’re at it.
Neutron bombs are *enhanced radiation* nukes, killing disproportionately with the radiation pulse than via explosive yield. More initial radiation, less blast effect (and less fallout). Much different than an inert kinetic-impact weapon.
Yes I know. Perhaps you were clarifying for others?
Heard of The Israeli Sampson option?
get over run, all citizens in bunkers, blow the neutron bombs in place, all die above ground..come out and reclaim nation..rinse lather repeat until victory..
I’m interested in the Chinese use of neutron bombs against cities. Where can I read about that?
The story appeared on the early web back in the 90s. The site may still exist or have gone subscription only. There were pictures of the results as I recall - black & white shots of the villages at ground level - some bodies were still present. locations were mapped out in a image. It may have been Stratfor, but I really cannot recall the exact address - if I had it back then it is long gone now. And Stratfor has undergone many changes since then so it really isn’t the same place and the article may be long gone.
That’s the trouble with articles from before the web was ever present. Now days every one wants links, assumes there always were links. But there actually was a time when those things did not exist.
I think that even making a ‘bookmark’ may not have been possible - hand written only - it may have been CompuServe or Apple that I used then, it was that long ago. Netscape - the forerunner of Firefox did not exist then either.
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.