US has 14 "Boomers" each armed with 24 Trident II nuclear armed SLBMs in service

[NNN0LHI]

Don't need to be flying around nuclear weapons here in the US for an attack on Iran. To suggest such tripe is silly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_class_submarine

Don

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. How many have we lost recently, anyway?

I'd hate to learn that one outside the Red Sea went "missing".

[BadgerLaw2010]

2. As if even the approximate locations of Ohio SSBN's are public...

:eyes:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. As americans we wear blinders. What if you were in charge of defense of

China, India, Russia, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Malaysia, Belgium or France, and you measured the man with his cowboy finger on the nucular trigger, AND your defense sources told you that an Ohio was parked outside your front door? Frankly, I would be somewhat pissed, slightly nervous and not willing to trust anything the Americans said or did.

[BadgerLaw2010]

4. If my defense sources knew where an Ohio was, the Americans would have made a massive mistake.

First, the Ohio can fire its missiles from US territorial waters unless it's trying to get short flight times against Russia or China, due to their nuclear response times.

Second, the entire point of the Ohios is that no one can find them. If they can be found, they can either be sunk or nuked in an exchange, and that's not good. Of all parts of the US nuclear force, they are supposed to be the most undetectable and thus, indestructable.

Their locations and patrols are some of the most tightly guarded secrets in the United States.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

7. that's not the point. Is it NOT a provocation

to have a dozen hugely powerful weapons loose on the seas, pointing at those countries?

[BadgerLaw2010]

9. Actually, SSBN's make for very stable deterrance.

You can't shoot at them, and they will shoot back at you even if you launch a successful surprise attack on the country that owns the SSBN's.

Having an entirely known, land based force is far, far more dangerous because it makes first strikes look viable if the other guy thinks they can catch you napping and deliver enough nuclear warheads to take out yours. If you die regardless of how good your attack was, you won't launch it. Subs are perfect for this.

Unless you want to argue that nukes shouldn't exist at all, which is unrealistic. They are known and they are powerful. They're not going away.

[izzie]

5. How would we know if one was missing? Are you saying one is?

My ex spent 10 years on these things , in other class, so they are always an interest to me. I frankly am not sure we need them any more but once we have these things we never give them up and military things are really in style right now. Even if we are doing more over seas jobs to keep that going. Like the days of old Rome and the Brits I guess. One needs the out posts to keep the Empire. These are just part of the show.

[Ganja Ninja]

6. Why is it silly?

Tridents are loaded with multiple warheads. They are designed to destroy targets that might require more than one nuke or to destroy a large area of land by spreading the warheads out and combining the shock waves. It would be silly to think they would fire a Trident at a single target they are trying to destroy with as little collateral damage as possible. If we use a nuke on Iran it will be delivered on a cruise missile or a guided bomb not by an intercontinental missile.

[Jim__]

8. Larry Johnson suggests that this is not "silly tripe."

From Kos:

So I called a old friend and retired B-52 pilot and asked him. What he told me offers one compelling case of circumstantial evidence. My buddy, let’s call him Jack D. Ripper, reminded me that the only times you put weapons on a plane is when they are on alert or if you are tasked to move the weapons to a specific site.

Then he told me something I had not heard before.

Barksdale Air Force Base is being used as a jumping off point for Middle East operations. Gee, why would we want cruise missile nukes at Barksdale Air Force Base. Can’t imagine we would need to use them in Iraq. Why would we want to preposition nuclear weapons at a base conducting Middle East operations?

His final point was to observe that someone on the inside obviously leaked the info that the planes were carrying nukes. A B-52 landing at Barksdale is a non-event. A B-52 landing with nukes. That is something else.

Larry Johnson's resume gives him credibility on this issue:

From 1989 until October 1993, Larry Johnson served as a Deputy
Director in the U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism.
He managed crisis response operations for terrorist incidents
throughout the world and he helped organize and direct the US
Government’s debriefing of US citizens held in Kuwait and Iraq, which
provided vital intelligence on Iraqi operations following the 1990
invasion of Kuwait. Mr. Johnson also participated in the investigation
of the terrorist bombing of Pan Am 103. Under Mr. Johnson’s leadership
the U.S. airlines and pilots agreed to match the US Government’s two
million-dollar reward.

From 1985 through September 1989 Mr. Johnson worked for the Central
Intelligence Agency. During his distinguished career, he received
training in paramilitary operations, worked in the Directorate of
Operations, served in the CIA’s Operation’s Center, and established
himself as a prolific analyst in the Directorate of Intelligence. In
his final year with the CIA he received two Exceptional Performance
Awards.

The well-known fact that we have SLBMs does not eliminate the possibility that we would launch a nuclear attack from the air.

[cali]

10. On resumes

Not saying I don't listen to Johnson, but a resume in and of itself is NOT enough.

[Netbeavis]

11. its all just posturing...just ask Kim Jong Il

Iran claims is has a bazillion centrifuges on the heels of Korea bending over and accepting the US deal to disarm. Korea got a good deal and Iran says....hey, what about us? Boogie Boogie!

US just sent them a little message via a "Top Secret Security breech" to settle down as we have the weapons ready at a moments notice and a bunch of nut-job zealots in charge ready to give the word. It proliferation on a new level.


The fact that this information was leaked tells me the story is not 100% legit. I grew up near a military installation that could not confirm or deny the existence of nuclear weapons in their storage arsenals. Many who worked there, never ever spoke a word despite working there 20 or 30 years. Same goes for a bunch of Air Force Airmen I knew. If you spoke of the weapons....you either were making false boasts in order to impress someone or hauled off in the night. Nothing ever made it to the press. Even today.

[SidDithers]

12. Good post Don...nt

Sid