I too doubt that 5,113 is an accurate number. None of us would think it wise of our government to divulge to the public its full nuclear capability. It could be more or it could be less. I would think we would want to keep our adversaries guessing.

This is where I part ways with my fellow "warmongers" (as some of the left wing nuts like to refer to those advocating a strong military) in light of today's military necessity. Our conventional forces are far superior to any our potential adversaries bring. We have nearly a dozen aircraft carriers in service. Correct me if I am wrong but no other nation is able to muster but a couple. Our ability to project lethal conventional force anywhere in the world is unmatched. If we can possibly get our adversaries to reduce their nuclear capability (the only real power they have against us) I am willing to take that bet.

I don't trust the Russians as far as I can take a shit. We hold the cards and need to use them. Lets make some bets while we can. We have a looming debt problem and if we don't find reasonable ways to alleviate the financial stress on both the domestic and military fronts we will be forced to fold.

The number is irrelevant. Divulging the number is not going to endanger the country. It is the deployment of the weapons that maintains deterrence. We have the Ohio class subs, out patrolling, and they are a strong deterrent. The Russians do not know were the numbers are stationed. All they know is that each sub carries 24 Trident II missiles.

The Russians also know that we have 450 Minuteman III and 14 Ohio subs, per START Treaty inspections and satellite images.
We also have a good indication of how many the Russians have as we have inspectors at their missile facilities and maintain satellite images of their facilities and bases. We would know if they cheated largely.

The Russians also know that we maintain, right now 2,200 deployed warheads, per the Moscow Treaty that the Bush administration signed in 02, the rest are in reserve. The Russians already know the numbers, just not where they are deployed, which maintains the deterrent.


The issue is also a math issue. As it is known the total plutonium total of the U.S., and it is known that it only takes 4kg of plutonium for a weapon, so you just divide the two and you get a range.

The number is accurate or extremely close, but I don't work on nuclear missiles for a living so I have no clue what I am talking about.:rolleyes:

Haha.

I'm going to trust the Navy guy and the guy who does this for a living, i think.

Not to mention Ptown is the only one who has provided any real information, links, etc., to back up his opinion, not just cries of "you can't trust the government!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111111!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Disclosure of nuclear numbers reveals high accuracy of unauthorized tracking
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/05/AR2010050505147.html?wprss=rss_nation

An example of how if you did some digging, you could find the number of weapons.