«The administration official, who spoke on condition of anonymity said the U.S. and Russia support the idea of engaging China to avert a costly nuclear arms race» - this is not true, Russia doesn’t “support” this “idea”
Besides last thing I want is my tax dollars going towards building new missiles and nukes we will never use.
I respectfully disagree with this notion. I own several firearms along with the associated ammo. I practice with them, and I conceal carry. It was an investment I made in the hopes I would never have to use them.Besides last thing I want is my tax dollars going towards building new missiles and nukes we will never use.
Right I'd say yes if we didn't have nukes, not enough, or good enough. But they are all those things, what we have is more than enough and no need to make more or new ones.I respectfully disagree with this notion. I own several firearms along with the associated ammo. I practice with them, and I conceal carry. It was an investment I made in the hopes I would never have to use them.
American ICBMs should be thought of in the same manner. For decades, they have been one major factor keeping us alive.
I would like to see us modernize what we DO have. I have no idea if this is being done or not. I know from Russian news reports that they are modernizing their nuclear forces. I just pray we are doing the same with both the cores and delivery vehicles. I agree with you that there is only a finite amount needed. My belief is that if Russia were to pose a first strike, they would use enough to blanket East Coast US Cities and tactical targets, leaving much of the US intact and unspoiled. they would have plenty of ICBMs left over to turn to Europe and say "stick em up!" it would also leave them enough to tell China "Dont even think about it." Assuming we have the same numbers, and they are in modern working condition, I would agree we have enough.Right I'd say yes if we didn't have nukes, not enough, or good enough. But they are all those things, what we have is more than enough and no need to make more or new ones.
Because if we can begin to repair our relationship with Russia, through concrete, verifiable, trust-building treaties, then maybe we can drive a wedge between them and China. If we can convince the Russians that the Chinese are on the wrong side of history, and repair our traditional alliances, then we will be in a much better position to isolate them internationally.It's foolish to agree to arms control with Russia when China isn't aboard. Why limit yourself when China is out there doing whatever they want?
Because if we can begin to repair our relationship with Russia, through concrete, verifiable, trust-building treaties, then maybe we can drive a wedge between them and China. If we can convince the Russians that the Chinese are on the wrong side of history, and repair our traditional alliances, then we will be in a much better position to isolate them internationally.
Well this is welcoming news. Here's to hoping cooler heads will be able to prevail and show this through to the end.
Besides last thing I want is my tax dollars going towards building new missiles and nukes we will never use.
Well missle defense is worthless for this weapon.
Submarine launched nuclear powered torpedo w/10000km range and nuclear warhead to detonate in costal waters and create tsunami to inundate city or naval base.
More fear inducing than strategic. Retaliatory response still applies just as it does with any first strike.
Russia to test ‘Doomsday Drone’ in high Arctic
Powered by a small nuclear reactor and with a range of about 10,000 kilometers, the Poseidon underwater drone could when detonated send a deadly tens-of-meters-high tsunami wave into the nearest ci…asiatimes.com