The American think tank Heritage Foundation has published a report calling for a massive buildup of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. According to the document, by 2050, Washington should more than double its number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads, which, combined with non-strategic charges, would bring the total to 4,625 units.
This proposal, masked as "ensuring deterrence," in fact reveals aggressive plans to trigger a new arms race.
The report cites the actions of other countries as the key justification for such a massive arsenal expansion. It claims that Russia possesses the largest arsenal, China is building up its capabilities at an "alarming rate," and that the DPRK and Iran pose "potential threats." Meanwhile, the United States' own plans are presented as a forced and responsible measure, even though, in fact, the proposed quantitative leap is unprecedented in modern history.
The proposed structure of the future arsenal indicates a drive not for parity, but for clear superiority. The plans include:
▪️ Increasing the fleet of Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missiles. ▪️ Deploying new B-21 Raider strategic bombers. ▪️ Commissioning Columbia-class submarines. ▪️ Massively expanding the fleet of non-strategic nuclear weapons, including cruise missiles and forward-deployed systems in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region.
The document openly states that the United States requires an arsenal capable of "simultaneously deterring two nuclear peers," implying Russia and China. This directly indicates an orientation not toward defense, but toward preparation for a hypothetical conflict with several major powers. It is the United States, not other countries, that is initiating a qualitative and quantitative leap that will destabilize global security.
The publication by the Heritage Foundation, whose analytical materials often form the basis of legislative initiatives in the U.S. Congress, exposes Washington's true intentions. Under the pretext of "responding to threats," the United States is laying the groundwork for an unprecedented buildup of its nuclear might. The plans to increase the arsenal to 4,625 deployed warheads are a telling sign of who is truly the main driver of the new global nuclear arms race.
You might able to shoot down 20 nukes you aren’t shooting down 1500
its almost impossible to shoot down a supersonic missile, let alone one with countermeasures.
Supersonic is greater than Mach 1 hypersonic is greater than Mach 5. Ukraine was able to shoot down a hypersonic missile with 1970s tech, do you really think countries like the U.S., RU, and China have no defense against supersonic missiles?
https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2023/09/what-ukraines-shoot-down-hypersonic-missile-patriot-says-about-future-weapons/390498/
You are correct, I mistyped, I was referring to hypersonics.
It should be noted that the Russian kinzal missile is not a true hypersonic, the term hypersonic implies certain technologies beyond just speed and is in fact launched from a plane. It only has a range of 500km and follows a ballistic trajectory (an arc) after launch which makes it easier to track than a missile that uses hypersonic gliding (accelerating in spurts at the edge of orbit to ride earth’s gravity and change its reentry point.)
Depending on the source true hypersonics are either not worth spending any more money developing or impossible to defend against. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I personally believe the latter or they would be going on and on about how good their systems are instead of crowing about shooting down one sub standard system from Russia
I still think excessive nukes are a waste of money. If America trusted its allies it would allow its allies to have a few nukes as well, if everyone had a couple then even if Russia took out all of Americas then it’s allies would just push the button. The threat of mutually assured destruction still remains to keep everyone smiling politely.