![]() |
|
|||||||
|
Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board! The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today? |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Regular
|
Nuclear warheads of the world
anybody knows about the current numbers of nuclear warheads? I know that you can't know e.g. how much or if North Korea has some, but anyway, try to answer and please give me your sources.
I found this list, but it seems to be not up to date: 1 Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika 10.700 2 Russland 10.100 3 China 380 4 Frankreich 360 5 Israel 260 6 Grossbritannien 200 7 Indien 74 8 Pakistan 44 sorry, it's in German, but I think everybody can read it, right?
__________________
No matter how the next war ends, the following one will be fought with sticks and stones. (Albert Einstein) |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) | |
|
Military Professional
|
Quote:
You're going to get different numbers no matter where you go. It really is hard to find information on the number of nukes in most nation's inventories for the obvious reasons, and even countries that openly acknowledge having nukes don't really try to keep people informed as to their capabilities. Then you have tactical nuclear weapons for those countries possessing more advanced arsenals, which further complicate gathering accurate numbers (there are big differences between strategic and tactical nukes, and even some nukes that aren't really considered nukes!). I'd recommend giving up now, because you will get estimates that are all over the place, and there isn't really a good way of telling which ones are accurate. Suffice it to say that the US and Russia could blow everyone else to hell and gone. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) | |
|
Regular
|
All the countrys in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty are supposed to say how many thay have.
Quote:
__________________
Meat cutting classification NAMP 1174; the porterhouse is NAMP 1173. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 (permalink) |
|
Regular
|
Declared nuclear weapons states Country Warheads active/total* Year of first test
United States 5,735/9,960 1945 ("Trinity") Russia (formerly the Soviet Union) 7,200/16,000 1949 ("RDS-1") United Kingdom <200 1952 ("Hurricane") France 350 1960 ("Gerboise Bleue") China 400 1964 ("596") India 40-50 1974 ("Smiling Buddha") Pakistan 24-48 1998 ("Chagai-I") North Korea 0-10 none *All numbers are estimates from the Natural Resources Defense Council, published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, unless other references are given. If differences between active and total stockpile are known, they are given as two figures separated by a forward slash. If no specifics are known, only one figure is given. Stockpile number may not contain all intact warheads if a substantial amount of warheads are scheduled for but have not yet gone through dismantlement; not all "active" warheads are deployed at any given time. When a spread of weapons is given (e.g., 0-10), it generally indicates that the estimate is being made on the amount of fissile material which has likely been produced, and the amount of fissile material needed per warhead depends on estimates of a country's proficiency at nuclear weapon design. Last edited by T-bone : 05-24-2006 at 19:30 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 (permalink) | |
|
New Member
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 (permalink) | |
|
Patron
|
Quote:
many nations keep their nuclear arsenal a tight secret. but its not necessary that every nuke works or is it working condition. every country makes large stockpiles just to be in safe position. for eg if a country has 50 nukes , one-third or some proportion may not work owing to many reasons like poor maintenance etc etc and lots of time is wasted in answering a nuke attack like arranging for missiles , fighter-jets , bombers etc so to be safe and to be in a position effectively launch nukes . countries keep large stock piles. any powerful country can lauch a nuke within hour but to achieve this a very good maintanence must be in place. Regularly checking delivary systems etc etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 (permalink) |
|
Contributor
|
"Frankreich", which I assume is France has enough nukes for a single sortie of a full-out B-2 attack. Israel, the UK, India and Pakistan don't have enough for that, and North Korea doesn't have enough to arm a single B-2. The US has 21 B-2s and each B-2 can carry 16 B-61 nukes for a grand total of 336 nukes if each B-2 flys one mission. That means the US can put 336 nukes on any country within a day with complete surprise because no country possesses systems that can shoot down the B-2 currently. One fine night, everything may be calm, and all of a sudden out of nowhere, 336 B-61s drop from the sky and turn all the main cities into dust plains with an occasional irradiated tumbleweed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 (permalink) |
|
Distant Deeps or Skies
Senior Contributor
|
Somehow, I think the 460 built examples of the AGM-129 stealthy cruise missile, carried aboard B-52s with 150kt W80 warheads, and launched from a standoff range of up to 2,000nm, would be used, rather than conduct old-fashioned bombing runs with B-2s.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| US-India Nuclear Deal Clears House | Bane | Political Discussions | 17 | 08-24-2006 15:57 PM |
| British India | Grundy | Political Discussions | 187 | 07-01-2006 07:39 AM |
| Why use force when talk works so well? | Leader | International Defense Topics | 54 | 12-05-2005 04:29 AM |
| Developing countries’ goods trade share surges to 50-year peak | oneman28 | World Affairs Board Pub | 0 | 04-21-2005 13:58 PM |
| @ I don't think US should be the leader of the world.. | MIKEMUN | Political Discussions | 17 | 03-16-2005 01:41 AM |