|
Banned
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
any military conflict with china is purely hypothetical.
....3) chinas Nuke armament is about 10% of the US......
|
Read the assessments of nuclear weapons and delivery systems that I've included on this post, of the U.S., Russia, and China, as of 2002..
The U.S. has gone into huge, national debt, partially as a result of an obsessive
(the results of current nuclear inventory and capabilities ceratinly show it) and costly buidup in nuclear armaments, delivery systems, and the cost of maintaining high levels of functionality and quick response.
Now that fiscal, foreign, and military policy mismanagement and the resulting burden of continuing treasury, budget, and trade deficits, aggravated by uniquely American excessive consumption rates, per capita of imported energy and othe commodities have rendered the U.S. fiat currency a candidate for near certain collapse, IMO, the only realistic response is to debate whether we've reached a "use it, or lose it" crossroads.....
My point is that the U.S. will never again be stronger, fiscally or militarily, than it is at the present moment, and potenital adversaries and competitors for rapidly rising in price energy and commodity resources, will never be weaker than at this moment.
No one has offered a realistic or practical alternative to a strategy of the U.S
dictating "terms" to the rest of the world, <b>NOW</b>....before the currency collapse, as the only available solution, unthinkable as it seems to most Americans, to avoiding rapid deterioration of the U.S. government's ability to fund even the current level of military capability and readiness.
It's over, otherwise, folks. The profligate and wasteful lifestyle, the economic growth at all costs. Unless we use our military to intimidate the rest of the world into disarming and allowing permanent U.S. weapons monitors at all existing foreign weapons development and manufacturing sites, ASAP, our decline will be inevitable, and much quicker than most people think.
Look at the numbers below and the nuclear weapons delivery capabilities. I'm sure that the rest of the world expects us to pull the only trump card left in the deck. They won't be that surprised.....from their point of view, our military buildup must have seemed awesome and dysfunctionally huge, for many years. Russia is the only adversary that even has a hope of countering our "initiative". I've asked for other proposals for alternative solutions, in other threads, but there are no realistic responses, just an aversion to consider my proposal, or to accept how dire our situation is.
Observe that no one will offer another way out. Mark my words, we will attempt to pull something like this on the rest of the world, when we are weaker and mor desperate, and when they are stronger....and....even if by some lucky quirk of fate, we prevail in those circumstances, I predict that our "victory", then will be after a much greater loss of life and devastation to the planet, than if we act now.
Look at the economic trends, energy use trends, trade imbalance trends, rising defense and intellignence budgets, and the disconnect between the trends and the lack of concern manifested in this country, and tell me, after looking at our military assets and those of China, and either propose a plan that would save the purchasing power of U.S. paper money, or accept that there is no other way out and focus on how easy it will be to neutralize and set back China, and contemplate how to persuade Russia to capitulate and cooperate in the destruction of their entire nuclear capability, or face the loss of their entire infrastructure and much of their population.
Our military capabilities already convince the world that we have this option, we only need to convince ourselves, and announce our consensus to them.
I see no other option, and we'll be surprised to find that many foreigners have expect this from us for many years now:
Quote:
http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/nudb/datab11.asp
Table of US Strategic Nuclear Forces, 2002
Notes......
.......Currently we estimate that there are almost 8,000 active/operational nuclear warheads, with nearly 2,700 additional warheads kept in inactive status for a total of over 10,600 warheads in the stockpile (see table). In addition to these intact warheads, there are in storage at Pantex and Oak Ridge, respectively, approximately 5,000 plutonium pits and approximately the same number of canned subassemblies, i.e., thermonuclear secondaries, which are retained as a "strategic reserve." There are another 7,000 pits at Pantex that have been declared excess from warheads dismantled during the first Bush and Clinton administrations. The more than 10,600 intact warheads, and the 5,000 "strategic reserve" pits, so far have not been included in the Bush administration plans for nuclear reductions. What will change is how they are categorized and counted.......
.......ICBMs
As of the beginning of 2002, the U.S. has 550 intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) deployed of two types: 500 Minuteman IIIs and 50 MX/Peacekeepers. The missiles are maintained at a high alert rate (more than 98 per cent) and can be launched on short notice. To meet the third and final phase of reductions required by the START I Treaty, warheads have been removed from a portion of the ICBM force. The 150 Minuteman III missiles at F.E. Warren AFB that formerly carried three W62 warheads now carry one. The W62 is the only warhead type slated for dismantlement (presumably with pits and secondaries kept) under the Bush plan, but not until 2009.
An extensive modernization of the Minuteman missile force continues under a $5.5 billion five-part program intended to improve the accuracy and reliability of the weapon and extend the service life to beyond 2020:......
..........SSBNs and SLBMs
Eighteen Ohio class (or Trident) submarines constitute the current SSBN fleet. The administration plans to cut the number to 14 by FY 2007 (of which two in overhaul at any given time will not be counted as part of the "operationally deployed force"). The four oldest SSBNs (Ohio, Michigan, Florida, Georgia) will be converted to each carry up to 154 conventional cruise missiles. The submarines also may be used to support Special Operations Forces. There is $1 billion in the FY 2003 budget to begin the conversion. The submarines would remain accountable under the START I Treaty, though they will not carry SLBMs or the 768 warheads attributed to them. To balance the future 14 submarine fleet in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, three submarines may be moved from Kings Bay to Bangor beginning in 2002 establishing seven on each coast.
The Navy has extended the Trident hull life to 44 years. The first of the 14 SSBNs that will remain in service is scheduled for retirement in 2029. The Pentagon is currently studying two options for a new SSBN that would be introduced in 2029. The first is a variant of the Virginia-class SSN. The second is a dedicated SSBN, either a new design, or a derivative of the Trident. The new project would begin in 2016.
Trident SSBNs carry two types of SLBMs. Seven Pacific-based subs carry the Trident I C4 and 10 Atlantic-based subs carry the Trident II D5. There is also one newly converted Trident II SSBN at Bangor, the USS Alaska, which completed its refit in November 2001. The Alaska is expected to conduct its first D5 test launch this spring, but it is already counted as a Trident II SSBN under the START I treaty. The other three SSBNs slated for Trident II refit are, in order of their conversion, Nevada (SSBN-733), Henry M. Jackson (SSBN-730), and Alabama (SSBN-731).
Although the Trident I C4 is being retired, flight-testing of the missile continues. On December 9, 2001, the Ohio launched a barrage of four Trident Is. A total of 570 C4 missiles were produced between 1976 and 1986, and 221 missiles have been launched in 117 different flight test events. Each event has involved firing from one to four missiles. Of the 218 attempted launches, 184 were successful while the remaining 34 either failed or did not launch for various reasons. Until the early 1990s, Trident I flight tests were carried out in both the Atlantic and Pacific, but since July 29, 1993, after the last C4 test was conducted at the Pacific Test Range, all SLBM flight tests have been at the Atlantic Test Range off the coast of Florida.
Procurement of the Trident II D5 continues at a rate of 12 missiles per year. A total of 384 Trident II missiles had been purchased through 2001. As a result of upgrading four Trident I-equipped SSBNs, the total number of Trident II missiles to be procured will increase from 390 to 425, at an additional cost of $2.2 billion. Twenty-eight additional missiles were bought for the research and development program. The total cost of the program is now $27.183 billion, or $60 million per missile. Of the 425 Trident IIs, 288 will arm 12 operational SSBNs (with another two in overhaul at any given time), while 137 missiles are scheduled to be expended in flight tests through 2014.
Four Trident II missiles were test launched from two SSBNs during 2001. Since January 1987, 116 Trident II missiles have been expended in 72 test launch events. Each event may launch from one to four missiles. Compared to the performance of the C4 program, the D5 program has been extraordinarily successful. Of the 116 missiles launched, only five have failed or not worked, and since December 1989 the program has accomplished a record of 94 consecutive successful launches, making the Trident II the most reliable strategic nuclear missile ever built. Despite this proven reliability, DOD says that the current flight test level, which is set by Strategic Command, is the "minimum acceptable to meet weapon system reliability requirements." STRATCOM's analysis suggests that it may be necessary to increase flight test requirements in the future.
As a result of extending the service life of the Ohio class submarines from 30 to 44 years, the current Trident II D5 -- scheduled to begin retiring in 2019 -- will be unable to arm the SSBN fleet during its entire lifetime. The navy has therefore begun a program to extend the service life of the D5. The upgraded missile, which is not considered a new missile but a "variant" of the existing D5, is called Trident II D5A. Funding is expected to begin in 2005, purchase of motors is planned for 2010-2012, with missile production to start in 2015. Approximately 300 Trident II D5A missiles are planned, enough to arm 10 submarines.
The U.S. Department of State declared in December 2001 that the SSBN force carried a total of 3,120 warheads, a reduction from the 3,456 warheads the previous year. The reduction was necessary to comply with the warhead limit set by the START I treaty, and involved downloading all Trident I C4 SLBMs from eight to no more than six warheads each. To meet the reductions in "operationally deployed strategic forces" for 2012 there will be further SLBM downloading after 2007.
The SLBMs carry two types of reentry vehicles (RV) and warheads: either the Mk-4 with the W76 warhead, or the Mk-5 with the W88 warhead. The W76/Mk-4 is by far the more numerous, with as many as 2,736 warheads deployed on 16 submarines. Since its initial construction began in 1976, Lockheed Martin's Missile and Space Operations has manufactured more than 5,000 Mk-4 reentry body assembly kits for the U.S. and U.K. navies. In order to ensure that the W76/Mk-4 reentry body can support SSBN operations until 2040, refurbishment of the W76 is scheduled to begin in 2007.
The Mk-5 carries the W88, the most powerful missile warhead in the U.S. arsenal. W88 warhead production ceased after the Rocky Flats Plant (where pits were made) was forced to close in 1989 because of safety and environmental reasons. The total number of warheads produced is estimated to be approximately 400. President Bush announced in February 1992 that no more W88s would be built, but in the late 1990s small-scale production of plutonium pits for the W88 resumed at the TA55 facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory. A total of four "development pits" had been fabricated by February 2000. This minimal production is intended to replenish the W88 pits destroyed in reliability testing and will not increase the number of W88s in the stockpile -- though TA55's capability makes this a possibility. The current plan for TA55 is to produce 20 pits per year in 2007 with an eventual goal of 50 pits annually. The first "war reserve" pits are scheduled to enter the stockpile late in this decade.
Design of a new SLBM warhead is underway in Navy's SLBM Warhead Protection Program (SWPP). This program maintains the capability to develop replacement nuclear warheads for both the W88/Mk-5 and W76/Mk-4. One design is described as "near-term" and the other as "long-term."
Bombers
The U.S. has two types of long-range heavy bombers for nuclear missions: the B-2A Spirit and the B-52H Stratofortress. Neither is maintained on day-to-day alert. The B-52 can deliver either cruise missiles or gravity bombs or a combination of both, while the B-2 only carries bombs.
Twenty-one 21 B-2A bombers are deployed with the 509th Bombardment Wing at Whiteman AFB, Missouri. The first B-2 bomber was delivered to the 509th Bombardment Wing at Whiteman AFB, Missouri, on December 17, 1993. The B-2 is scheduled to be replaced around 2040, and a follow-on bomber program was begun in 1998.
Of the 21 aircraft, only 16 are Primary Mission Inventory (PMI) aircraft assigned nuclear missions with a variety of weapons. The B-2's nuclear weapons include B61-7, B61-11, and B83-1 bombs. Each B-2 can be armed with either B83s or B61s, but reportedly is not able to mix the two. The B-2 is the only carrier of the new B61-11 earth-penetrating nuclear bomb introduced in November 1997. The B61-11 is a modified B61-7. To the B61-7's original weight of 763 pounds an additional 450 pounds were added to the casing. It is only through the kinetic force of the fast-moving 1,200 lb bomb hitting the earth that allows it to penetrate perhaps just a few tens of feet underground. The resulting explosion of even a low-yield option will cause widespread dispersal of radioactive debris, contaminating the surrounding area.
The bat-winged B-2 has been plagued by technical problems, partly due to its sensitive radar-absorbing surface. In March the Air Force announced that cracks had developed on titanium plates behind the rear exhausts of 16 of the 21 aircraft. During 2001, the average B-2 was available for combat duty just 31 percent of the time, half of the Air Force's goal of 60 percent.
The aging B-52H is referred to by the Air Force as the "workhorse of nuclear weapons employment." The B-52H first entered service in 1961 and is scheduled to remain in operation until 2044. Of a current total of 93 aircraft, 56 are considered PMI aircraft assigned nuclear weapons missions. Only the B-52 carries the AGM-86B Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM) and the AGM-129A Advanced Cruise Missile (ACM).
ALCMs are equipped with the W80-1 warhead. Although only an estimated 400 ALCMs are deployed, hundreds of others are held in reserve. According to the Air Force there are a total of 1,142 ALCMs in the inventory. This is a reduction of 251 from the 1,393 reported for March 1997, and reflects an ongoing conversion of nuclear ALCMs to conventional cruise missiles (CALCMs, AGM-86C). In addition to these active missiles, an additional 200 ALCMs are kept in long-term storage. Full reconstitution of stored missiles will take approximately six months. A life-extension program is underway to extend the service of ALCMs to at least 2030.
The ACM -- also equipped with the W80-1 warhead -- has a longer range and greater accuracy than the ALCM. The ACM was designed with stealth features to permit use against heavily defended targets. Originally 1,461 ACMs were planned, but the Pentagon announced in January 1992 that production would stop at 640 missiles. A program is underway to extend the service life of the ACM until 2030.
ALCM and ACM operational test launches (minus warhead) are conducted from B-52H aircraft of the 2nd Bomb Wing at Barksdale AFB, Louisiana and the 5th Bomb Wing at Minot AFB, North Dakota. About half a dozen tests are conducted each year at the Utah Test and Training Range or the Tonopah Test Range in Nevada.
Although the B-1B was described as a "conventional-only" aircraft for years, the Air Force maintained the bomber in a "Rerole" status, able to return it to nuclear missions within months if necessary. Under this plan, spare B61 and B83 nuclear bombs are maintained in STRATCOM's Active Reserve Stockpile. According to the NPR the B-1 will no longer have the "Rerole" status. Of the original 100 B-1Bs, 92 are left.
In addition to front-line air force personnel, the Pentagon in late 1997 approved nuclear certification of full-time personnel from the Air Force Reserve in support of the nuclear war plans.
Non-strategic forces
The U.S. retains approximately 1,620 non-strategic nuclear weapons, consisting of 1,300 B61 gravity bombs of three modifications and 320 Tomahawk Land-Attack Cruise Missiles (TLAM/N), a portion of which are in reserve or inactive. Although the number of non-strategic nuclear weapons has declined dramatically compared with the Cold War and the deployment may change further in the future, the NPR announced no new reductions.
An ample supply of B61 tactical nuclear bombs, numbering almost 1,300 exists for various U.S. and European NATO aircraft. Most of the bombs are stored at Kirtland AFB, New Mexico, and Nellis AFB, Nevada, for delivery by F-16C/D Fighting Falcon and F-15E Strike Eagle, with a small portion deployed in Europe (see below). The F-117A Nighthawk is also considered nuclear-capable, but is normally not listed in the Air Force budget for nuclear weapons support, but maintained at a lower level of nuclear readiness than the other aircraft. Air Combat Command recommended de-nuclearizing the F-117A in 1992 to free resources for training and onboard computer capacity, but the Air Staff intervened and decided to maintain the platform in a nuclear-capable configuration. The Pentagon is considering whether to extend the life of the dual-capable F-16s and F-15Es or to make a block upgrade to the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). The JSF is being designed to permit future nuclear capability after it enters service in 2012.
Approximately 150 B61 bombs remain forward deployed at 10 air bases in seven European NATO nations. The Weapons Storage and Security System (WS3) used to store the weapons at these locations was installed between 1990 and 1998, and plans are underway to modernize WS3 before 2005 to maintain the system for another decade. A service life extension study for the B61 began in 1999. Allied aircraft assigned nuclear missions include U.S.-supplied F-16 aircraft and German and Italian Tornado bombers. Several NATO countries currently assigned strike missions with U.S. nuclear bombs are considering purchase of the Joint Strike Fight.
All of the approximately 320 TLAM/Ns (with W80-0 warheads) were removed from their previous storage areas at Naval Air Station North Island in San Diego, California, and Naval Weapon Station Yorktown in Norfolk, Virginia, and are now stored at the Strategic Weapons Facilities alongside strategic weapons for the SSBNs. NWS Yorktown was decertified in August 1997 after its complement of TLAM/Ns was shipped south to the Strategic Weapons Facility Atlantic at Kings Bay, Georgia, which was first certified to receive the missiles in April 1997. NAS North Island's nuclear certification expired in April 1998 after all of its TLAM/Ns had been airlifted to the Strategic Weapons Facility Pacific in Bangor, Washington.
As a result of the 1994 NPR, surface vessels are no longer equipped to carry nuclear-armed Tomahawk missiles. The option was retained, however, to re-deploy them on attack submarines if necessary. While most U.S. attack submarines were credited with some nuclear capability during the Cold War, most SSNs today do not have nuclear missions. In the Pacific Fleet, for example, less than half of the attack submarines regularly undergo nuclear certification. The reduced nuclear requirement is further illustrated by the fact that SSNs that pass inspection are subsequently de-certified to save resources for more urgent non-nuclear responsibilities. If ordered to do so, however, TLAM/Ns can be redeployed in only 30 days. To ensure training and force integration, TLAM/N operations are now included in USSTRATCOM's annual Global Guarding nuclear exercises.
As directed in the 2002 NPR the Pentagon will evaluate the future of the TLAM/N and decide whether to replace, retire, or retain and enhance the missile.......
The Nuclear Complex and Infrastructure
According to the NPR the administration plans to revitalize the U.S. nuclear infrastructure, by upgrading existing systems, developing and fielding entirely new systems, and being able to rapidly produce weapons ("surge"). This is designed to "discourage" other countries from "competing militarily with the United States," according to the document
The administration believes that the current arsenal -- a subset of what was in place at the end of the Cold War -- is not what is needed for the future. That arsenal was developed and deployed mainly to deter the former Soviet Union and to carry out the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP). In the administration's view, significantly modified and quite possibly new nuclear warheads will be required to accomplish new military missions, and thus the NPR calls for a revitalized nuclear weapon complex......
......Plans are underway to expand the capacity and capability of the Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) Pantex nuclear weapons assembly-disassembly plant near Amarillo, Texas, to meet a planned workload of some 600 warheads (assemblies or dismantlement) per year, up from the current capacity of 350......
......The NNSA is also launching a program intended to shorten the 2-3 year time period that it would take to resume testing at the Nevada Test Site.
last revised 11.25.02
|
Several years ago, Janes described China's ICBM "arsenal" as closer to 1 percent of the size of the U.S. arsenal:
Quote:
http://www.janes.com/security/intern...0307_1_n.shtml
.....China's nuclear forces were developed to defend the country's national security interests against the possibility of nuclear blackmail. Initially, China possessed only a symbolic nuclear deterrence with no real capability to retaliate, but from 1980, when China acquired the ability to launch inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), its deterrence has been based on the quantitative ambiguity of its nuclear force rather than the size of its arsenal.
The two dozen Chinese land-based ICBMs that have been detected and located by US intelligence agencies would have very little chance of surviving a US preemptive nuclear strike. However, because China has neither confirmed nor denied any US estimates of its ICBM strength, it is difficult for the USA to rule out some margin of error. In its current nuclear strategy the possibility of a few undetected Chinese ICBMs being launched in retaliation is considered enough to deter the USA from attempting a pre-emptive nuclear strike against China. Thus, it is the uncertainty of US estimates, rather than the total number of Chinese ICBMs, that is directly relevant to the credibility of Chinese deterrence in its current form.
Now, however, China is about to enter a new stage of nuclear development, in which it aims to acquire a deterrent capability that does not rely on uncertainty to be effective. In this stage, no matter how well the USA measures the total number of Chinese nuclear weapons, at least a few Chinese ICBMs or submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) would survive a US pre-emptive strike and could be used to retaliate. This improvement in China's deterrent capability is designed to avoid any uncertainty in external perceptions of its ability to retaliate to a pre-emptive strike. .....
|
This report is just 30 days old......
Quote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060503...3838&printer=1
US experts cut by half size estimate of China nuclear arsenal
Wed May 3, 9:38 AM ET
China's nuclear arsenal is about half the size previously estimated by US experts, even as the Asian giant modernizes its atomic forces in a secret fashion, a new study shows.
China's nuclear stockpile appears to have leveled out at about 200 warheads compared with 400 as previously estimated, said Robert Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council and Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists in a study published in the latest issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
"We estimate that China deploys approximately 130 nuclear warheads for delivery by land-based missiles, sea-based missiles and bombers. Additional warheads are thought to be in storage for a total stockpile of approximately 200 warheads," they said.
Norris told AFP in an interview that the previous estimates were based on assumptions during the Cold War based on alleged Chinese development of so-called tactical nuclear delivery systems.
"More recently we decided to see if could find evidence of what happened to that. We now see that probably never happened and if it did happen, they had withdrawn them because the reason for them is gone," he explained.
"This was a rather long process that we had to deal with -- the Chinese have been very good at keeping secrets and they are not transparent about their nuclear arsenal," Norris said.
The experts used US government intelligence documents and some Chinese statements to arrive at the new figure.
Past US predictions about China's nuclear arsenal "have repeatedly proven to be highly unreliable," they said in the report.
The CIA's latest prediction of a "several-fold" increase in Chinese warheads deployed "primarily" against the United States is hardly a firm estimate, they said.
The Pentagon had predicted in 2002, 2003 and 2004 that the number of Chinese nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of hitting the United States "could increase to about 30 by 2005 and may reach up to 60 by 2010."
But only 20 of China's 200 nuclear warheads could reach the United States, the experts said.
"Even if an increase occurs, the total Chinese nuclear stockpile would rise only moderately because warheads on older liquid-fueled missiles will have to be phased out," they explained.
China has kept the composition and size of nuclear warheads in its stockpile ambiguous amid repeated calls by the United States to make its military budget more transparent.
But Norris said that the Chinese nuclear arsenal was a pale shadow of the American size of 10,000 warheads.
By 2012, under current plans, the United States has committed to reduce it to 6,000 warheads.
"The Chinese will have -- its very hard to say -- may be 300 or 400 (warheads) in six years' time but they have never decided -- wisely I think -- to enter into an arms race with the United States," Norris said.
"It's just not their way."
Norris also said that there was a lobby in Washington that tried to use the Chinese as a potential US threat in the future to boost the American military capability.
"I think they exaggerate the dimensions, they use it as a rationale for US military programs, as a matter of fact, and even if we project into the future, a rise in Chinese arsenal could happen but it would never be very, very large compared to the US arsenal," he said.
|
Quote:
http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/nudb/datab14.asp
Russian Nuclear Forces, 2002
As of mid-2002, Russia was estimated to have an arsenal of some 8,400 operational nuclear warheads, consisting of almost 5,000 strategic and nearly 3,400 non-strategic and air defense warheads. The primary changes from a year ago involve a decrease of over 600 ICBM and SLBM warheads. The number of operational non-strategic nuclear weapons declined slightly from ~3,600 to ~3,400 over the same period. The actual number of Russia warheads is probably closer to 18,000, with the bulk of them non-strategic and their status unclear. A portion may be awaiting dismantlement while others could make up a reserve that could be returned to operational service.
|
Quote:
http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/nudb/datab17.asp
The Chinese have been very effective in keeping secret the details about the size and composition of their nuclear stockpile. Thus there remains uncertainty about the size of the nuclear bomber force, the number of ballistic missiles deployed, and whether or not China has "tactical" nuclear weapons. The above table above represents our best estimate. China is believed to maintain an arsenal of about 400 warheads of two basic categories, including some 250 "strategic" weapons structured in a "triad" of land-based missiles, bombers, and SLBMs. We have listed about 150 "tactical" weapons: low yield bombs for tactical bombardment, artillery shells, atomic demolition munitions, and possibly short- range missiles.
|
|