re: #622 lawhawk

There’s a contra-theory that notes that once you go below a certain level of nuclear weapons, it actually becomes even more destabilizing, because a first strike has the ability to destroy the other nation’s capabilities without the massive damage of a full-on exchange.

Throw in problems with an aging inventory,and you add additional complexity to the mess.

The aging inventory is one reason to actually consider reducing the inventory, but through recycling the warheads into new weapons, not destroying them altogether. The new supercomputers being touted by the DOE and news reports yesterday are going to be used to test our nuclear capabilities and ensure that the warheads will work as configured. Shutting down some of the warheads might save some money, but it may be the penny wise, pound foolish category.

Yes, below a certain level, you’re right. But second, third, fourth strike? When is enough enough?

Reagan was no fool.