US nuclear weapons: first low-yield warheads roll off the production line

[editor]

And so the world continues to move backwards with that almighty prick Trump at the helm.

The US has begun making a new, low-yield nuclear warhead for its Tridentmissiles that arms control advocates warn could lower the threshold for a nuclear conflict.

The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) announced in an email it had started manufacturing the weapon at its Pantex nuclear weapons plant in Texas, as ordered by Donald Trump’s nuclear posture review (NPR) last year.

The NNSA said the first of the new warheads had come off the production line and that it was on schedule to deliver the first batch – an unspecified number referred to as “initial operational capability” – before the end of September, according to the email, first sent in response to an enquiry from Exchange Monitor, which covers the nuclear weapons complex.

The Trump administration has argued the development of a low-yield weapon would make nuclear war less likely, by giving the US a more flexible deterrent. It would counter any enemy (particularly Russian) perception that the US would balk at using its own fearsome arsenal in response to a limited nuclear attack because its missiles were all in the hundreds of kilotons range and “too big to use”, because they would cause untold civilian casualties.

Low-yield weapons “help ensure that potential adversaries perceive no possible advantage in limited nuclear escalation, making nuclear employment less likely”, the 2018 nuclear posture review said.

US nuclear weapons: first low-yield warheads roll off the production line

 

[editor]

It's OK. It's only a little nuke blasting you to fuck.

Many critics say that is an optimistic scenario that assumes there will be no miscalculation on the US side.

“There are many other scenarios, especially with a president who takes pride in his unpredictability and has literally asked: ‘Why can’t we use our nuclear weapons?’”, Young said.

Melissa Hanham of the One Earth Future foundation pointed out that adversaries would have no way of knowing if a full-force Trident was being fired at them, or its low-yield cousin.

“Hey all you nuclear powers out there. We’re just going to trust that you recognize this is “just a little nuclear weapon” and won’t retaliate with all you’ve got,” Hanham wrote in a tweet. “Remember! The US only intends to nuke you “a little bit.””
Hans Kristensen, the director of the nuclear information project at the Federation of American Scientists said the new warhead marked a sharp break from the Obama administration policy of making no new weapons or capabilities. He said it risked starting an arms race with Russia involving smaller nuclear weapons

 

[Argonia]

Nuclear weapons make the use of nuclear weapons less likely has to be the most insane delusion out there

 

[Idris2002]

We will all go together when we go.

 

[8ball]

It's OK. It's only a little nuke blasting you to fuck.

I doubt the people getting blown up with regular high-explosives feel that great about it, either, to be fair.

These are still much, much bigger than the smallest nukes the US ever produced, but the whole point of getting rid of all those intermediates was to avoid a gradually escalating situation (of course, they still kept the really big ones because mutually-assured destruction was such a mightily sound idea and would never have gone tits up).

Bringing back weapons in this yield range is about the dumbest thing I can think of.

Would have been more accurate of the Graun to have said the first of the *new* low-yield nukes have just rolled off the production line.

 

[mauvais]

In the insane world of nuclear weapons, the whole 'too big to use' thing might make a little sense, maybe. Until you stick the small one on an ICBM and fire it, only to discover that the world doesn't say, oh there goes Tiny Tim the cute little neighbourhood nuke, but does in fact say, oh shit a nuclear missile fire all of ours.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Things like this make me worry a lot less about not having a pension scheme.

 

[2hats]

They already have (have had for decades) warheads of similar yield in the enduring stockpile (eg W80 series).

 

[likesfish]

This is really really stupid coming up with ideas to use nukes is not a good idea.

 

[Yossarian]

Low-yield, "small enough to use" nuclear weapons - these people are insane, there's no good use for nuclear weapons, whatever the size. Unless they've got one small enough to be inserted into Donald Trump.

 

[ferrelhadley]

UK warheads have three detonating options thought to be in the region off 0.3 kt, 5-10 kt and 100 kt. The latter is the full thermonuclear, the middle would be fissile only and the first is a pre-detonation.

That said the world needs to be rid of nuclear weapons, but in a world where non democratic states are armed then some democracies should be armed. This will stick in the throats of those who would cheer to see our democracy crushed, but then again hatred of our democracy infects dark soulless parts of our society. The UK is abrogating its moral responsibilities by not actively promoting global disarmament.

The US has had low yield weapons for decades. I just do not think they put them on ICMB class rockets before.

 

[weltweit]

Shouldn't be building new capabilities.
I thought the nuclear non proliferation treaties banned this.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

So, having more nukes is safer than less nukes. It’s basically the NRA policy, just stepped up a bit.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Shouldn't be building new capabilities.
I thought the nuclear non proliferation treaties banned this.

People who like weapons of industrial-scale mass murder in 'not playing fair' shocker.

 

[Yossarian]

So, having more nukes is safer than less nukes. It’s basically the NRA policy, just stepped up a bit.

"This horror could have been prevented by a good guy with a nuke."

 

[MickiQ]

The USA doesn't need baby nukes it has so much conventional firepower it could completely flatten any opponent with that.

 

[Pickman's model]

The USA doesn't need baby nukes it has so much conventional firepower it could completely flatten any opponent with that.

Yeh but some days you want to be Indiana Jones taking a gun to a sword fight

 

[SpookyFrank]

The USA doesn't need baby nukes it has so much conventional firepower it could completely flatten any opponent with that.

The Russians have enough nukes to obliterate all life on Earth ten times over. I'd have stopped at three or four times myself, but these decisions are not made by sensible people.

 

[8ball]

They already have (have had for decades) warheads of similar yield in the enduring stockpile (eg W80 series).

Yeah, just not been making new ones.

 

[2hats]

Yeah, just not been making new ones.

All warheads are re-engineered, all the time - it's a constant on-going maintenance/QA process.

 

[likesfish]

Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider - Wikipedia is the latest piece of death tech.
although Russia and China both want to play
Tupolev PAK DA - Wikipedia
China has its D21 "carrier-killing missiles" which they have been boasting about even our tosser tried to get into the game but I don't think anyone listening.
Russia's quite poor if you want to play world domination its only a 1/4 of the yank budget but they have loads of nukes so nobody's going to invade them.

 

[8ball]

All warheads are re-engineered, all the time - it's a constant on-going maintenance/QA process.

“Re-furbishment”

 

[bendeus]

The discerning gentlemen will pack a nuke for every occasion.

 

[cheesethief]

The Russians have enough nukes to obliterate all life on Earth ten times over. I'd have stopped at three or four times myself, but these decisions are not made by sensible people.

TBF to the Russians, I'm the same with spiders. I can't just stamp on them, I have to do it repeatedly until there's no recognisable trace left, just in case the remains spontaneously reanimate zombie style.

 

[Idris2002]

Vhy didn't you tell ze vorld, eh?

 

[SpookyFrank]

TBF to the Russians, I'm the same with spiders. I can't just stamp on them, I have to do it repeatedly until there's no recognisable trace left, just in case the remains spontaneously reanimate zombie style.

But what if the spider is a whole planet. One which you live on.

 

[mwgdrwg]

 

[klang]

I can never decide what I love most: Nukes, famines or strawberries.

 

[T & P]

As I understand it, the development of a new class of warhead is not near as troublesome as the abandonment by Trump of the START (or whatever the fuck it was called) treaty that governed missile deployment rather than warheads, and had been pivotal in depopulating Europe of short and middle range nuclear missiles.

This move was apparently triggered by the deployment of a next-generation family of intermediate missiles by Russia that Putin claims are purely defensive and comply with existing treaties, and NATO says they’re plainly a new type of nuclear ballistic missile. Which some would say in turn that it was only created to counter the equally treaty-breaching anti-missile ‘defence’ shield the US is planting all around Russia’s border. All in all a fine mess.

Ultimately I don’t think this new warhead increases the likelihood of being used against Russia. Regardless of its size, even a single nuclear warhead used by the US against Russia or vice versa would certainly IMO develop into a large or full nuclear exchange between the two nations at least, if not necessarily the rest of the nuclear club nations.

What this new warhead increases the chance of is the US using it as a tactical battlefield weapon against a non-nuclear nation or armed group. Or to give a practical scenario, if Trump had been President during 9/11 and this warhead had just become operational, I wouldn’t have been surprised if he’d given the order to drop it over the Bora Bora area and the fuck with it.

 

[CRI]

Shouldn't be building new capabilities.
I thought the nuclear non proliferation treaties banned this.

Once upon a time, yes . . .

Russia to abandon nuclear arms treaty after Trump pulls plug on 1987 pact

Following in the footsteps of the U.S., Russia will abandon a centerpiece nuclear arms treaty but will only deploy intermediate-range nuclear missiles if Washington does so, President Vladimir Putin said Saturday.

U.S. President Donald Trump accused Moscow on Friday of violating the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty with “impunity” by deploying banned missiles. Trump said in a statement that the U.S. will “move forward” with developing its own military response options to Russia’s deployment of banned cruise missiles that could target Western Europe.

It's dressed up to look like a bunfight between Donnie and Vlad, but the goal for both is pretty obviously to restart the "arms race." Deep joy.