Who's Aiming Nukes at Whom?

[Halo]

The following Reuters article outlines world nuclear capability.  Not too difficult to guess targets for most of the nuke owners ... or is it?  

France has a large nuke arsenal and long ago took itself out of NATO control for its own independent nuclear deterrent.  The U.S. and Russia have been engaged in mutual nuclear weapon reduction.  

So it kinda makes you wonder what French nukes target since France more than most nations seems to be trying to have its cake and eat it too.  

Overall, gotta give humankind some mega credit for not blowing itself up ... at least so far.  

Most governments to date have shown themselves commendably responsible for nuclear restraint.  But terrorists?  There is no foreseeable end to the unimaginable consequences of terrorists getting nukes.  


(QUOTE)

Capabilities of the world's nuclear powers
10 Feb 2005 17:34:32 GMT

Source: Reuters
 
LONDON, Feb 10 (Reuters) - North Korea announced for the first time on Thursday that it has nuclear weapons and was pulling out of six-party talks on its atomic programme.

The world has five "official" nuclear powers -- the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France.

Following is a summary of the estimated capabilities of declared and undeclared nuclear powers.

DECLARED:

- UNITED STATES: The United States maintains a sizeable arsenal of nuclear weapons, including approximately 10,600 intact warheads, 7,650 of which are considered active or operational. Approximately 1,600 are deployed on land-based missile systems (Minuteman and Peacekeeper ICBMs), 1,660 on bombers (B-52 and B-2), and 2,880 on submarines (Ohio-class subs). 1,120 are tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs).

The United States is the only country to station land-based nuclear weapons outside its borders.

- RUSSIA: Russia has roughly 7,000 deployed strategic nuclear warheads but the arsenal jumps to some 20,000 when stored and tactical warheads are added in.

- FRANCE: France maintains approximately 350 nuclear warheads on 60 Mirage 2000N bombers, four nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBN), and on carrier-based aircraft.

- BRITAIN: The UK's current stockpile is thought to consist of approximately 200 strategic and "sub-strategic" warheads on Vanguard-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBN).

- CHINA: China is estimated to have about 400 strategic and tactical nuclear weapons, and stocks of fissile material sufficient to produce a much larger arsenal. China acceded to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1992 as a nuclear weapon state.

- - - - - - - - - - -

- NORTH KOREA: North Korea's declaration that it possesses nuclear weapons does not necessarily mean it has a tested nuclear weapons system that can be deployed, defence analysts said.

North Korea has test fired short- and medium-range ballistic missiles, but its missile programme has been marred by accidents and the accuracy of the weapons has been questioned.

- INDIA: India has formally declared itself a nuclear weapon state. New Delhi's stock of weapons-grade plutonium is estimated to be between 240-395 kg, which depending on the sophistication of the warhead design, could be used to manufacture 40-90 simple fission weapons.

- PAKISTAN: Pakistan says its "minimum nuclear deterrent" includes ballistic missiles that can hit deep inside India. Analysts put the Pakistani arsenal at between 10 bombs at the time of its May 1998 nuclear tests and up to 48 now. Pakistan is not a signatory to NPT.

UNDECLARED:

- ISRAEL: Israel is generally regarded as having nuclear weapons in its arsenal. Analysts estimate Israel has approximately 100-200 nuclear explosive devices. Officially, Israel has declared that it will not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons in the Middle East. It has not signed the NPT.

- IRAN: Iran is widely suspected by military experts of pursuing a nuclear weapons programme but is not considered to have capability. Iran has denied U.S. charges it is pursuing a nuclear bomb and says its programmes are only for peaceful power generation needed to keep up with its growing population.

Sources: Reuters/www.nti.org (Nuclear Threat Initiative)

(UNQUOTE)

[Wolfala]

I thought this was going to give us some insight into where they were pointed. Oh well.

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by Wolfala
I thought this was going to give us some insight into where they were pointed. Oh well.

Germany probably.
Where else? LOL

[Halo]

What struck me the most about that Reuters story was the relatively large and apparently modern nuclear arsenal that France has.  And without being on the forefront of any modern confrontation.  

Maybe because of diplomacy or just plain national smarts, France strikes me as part Switzerland with nukes and part colonial lingerer.  Insists on its own independent deterrent and mostly does its own thing, usually with former colonies, but nothing requiring nukes.

Successful deterrence -- the main purpose of nukes -- requires that potential foes believe the nukes would be used against them if certain threshholds were crossed, with enough surviving any conceivable surprise attack (either by launch on warning -- scary -- or sufficient hardening) that unacceptable damage would be inflicted on the attacker.  

Otherwise nukes for deterrence would be a total failure.

So far the genie has been kept in the bottle after WWII and nukes have not been used even as small tactical battlefield supplements.  Again, commendable restraint by the nuclear powers.  

Thus with the world in general apparently wanting as few nukes as possible (e.g., the nuclear proliferation treaty), France -- with perhaps the vaguest nuke target list -- ironically might serve as an example to North Korea and Iran if it got into the nuclear arms reduction campaign in a big way.

Then again, that could be regarded as caving in to intimidation.  Or that dreaded word, appeasement.

Whatever, that Reuters list of nuclear powers provides a fairly predictable list for guessing whose nukes are aimed at who else -- except for France.  

Since France traditionally has been an international influence and remains among the most unpredictable international influences today, and its relatively large nuclear deterrent remains a major expense with an increasingly puzzling payback, it's logical to wonder if sometime France might offer some kind of nuclear deterrent initiative that the other more directly confrontational nuclear powers might not have thought of.

And if that boils down to somehow better coexistence with differing philosophies, the world is waiting.

[Otto]

France killed everyone in Springfield with a Neutron Bomb.  I saw it on the Simpons....   Bastards......

[Zulu7]

Hey heres a radical idea lets get rid of em!!! They are totaly bloody useless anyway. Conventional weapons have advanced to the stage where they are redundant.

Get rid of them and we have a better case to put when asking other nations to do so.

More a case of follow our example than do as we say not as we do which I always thought was bloody hypocrytical.

[Yeager]

heres an even better idea.  you get rid of yours first, then the french, then the chinese, then russians, then india and pakistan.....then north korea and iran....then isreal (who am I forgetting?).

We will hold on to our last just to make sure you get rid of yours first.  sound pretty good?

Oh ...and maybe we will keep a few dozen and not tell anyone just as added insurance against aggression....

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by GScholz
During the cold war I think it is safe to say the France's nukes were pointed eastwards. Now I think they're kind of in the hip holster not pointing in any particular direction ... or in all directions if you will. Same with the UK and for that matter ... the USA.

BS...

Everyone knows the French nukes were always pointed at England...

[mora]

As long as the nukes are reduced to reasonable levels I have no problem with them. They create a certain amount of stability.

[SFRT - Frenchy]

Those dam french ... always pissing off decent people.

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by SFRT - Frenchy
Those dam french ... always pissing off decent people.

I thought you were living in LA?

[SFRT - Frenchy]

There

[john9001]

Originally posted by Zulu7
Hey heres a radical idea lets get rid of em!!! They are totaly bloody useless anyway. Conventional weapons have advanced to the stage where they are redundant.

Get rid of them and we have a better case to put when asking other nations to do so.

More a case of follow our example than do as we say not as we do which I always thought was bloody hypocrytical.

zulu, the USA and russia are getting rid of their nuks, what is your country doing to get rid of your nuks?

[mora]

Originally posted by john9001
zulu, the USA and russia are getting rid of their nuks, what is your country doing to get rid of your nuks?

No they aren't.

[john9001]

sorry mora, but the usa and russia have a treaty to destroy nukes with mutual inspections, it just takes time because of the numbers involved.