• RedArmor [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Enough to destroy the world several times over. Why the fuck do we even have these anymore.

  • DefinitelyNotAPhone [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Honestly I'm pretty shocked it's that low, though I wasn't aware the US had scrapped most if not all of its tactical nuke stockpile. I'm also shocked the US still has nearly 1k bomber-based warheads left; what's the impetus to use a B-2 when you can use an ICBM?

    • ssjmarx [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      The nuclear triad (ICBMs, bombers, and submarines) is all about redundancy. If all you had were ICBMs, then your target could conceivably do something to render your ICBMs useless and then strike before you fix it.

      • baby_trump [undecided]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Do you think the real number is more or less than this? I think 3750 is more than enough to make the earth uninhabitable so if it's more then I don't see the point in lying. If it's less then I guess that would make sense but it doesn't seem unlikely to me that 3750 is more or less an accurate count.

        • ssjmarx [he/him]
          ·
          edit-2
          3 years ago

          As Dr. Strangelove pointed out, MAD only works if the other side knows you have the weapon, so the incentive is really only to lie in an upward direction, if you intend to lie at all.

          The US is probably not lying about this particular number though, since it's independently confirmed by Russia via the New START treaty that we have with them. It's not inconceivable that the US or Russia could cheat on that treaty, but it would require secretly building up nuclear facilities, bomb factories, military units, test sites, and launch sites, and letting hundreds or thousands of people in on the secret, all without the other side knowing or becoming suspicious enough to demand to investigate.