Equipping US submarines with W76−2 warheads makes war with Russia more likely


Nuclear war is usually considered a kind of horror story that can scare the townsfolk, but it will never really happen. It is customary to talk about Doomsday, a nuclear apocalypse, which, of course, will never come, since no one in their right mind would want to live on a radioactive ashes. But is it really so simple?


Speaking of nuclear war, they usually mean a conflict between Russia and the United States, the owners of the largest arsenals and a full-fledged nuclear triad. For some reason, it is believed that any "sneeze" from the Americans in our direction will immediately be followed by a blow by "strategists" at decision centers. However, as it turned out, the United States has a slightly different opinion on this issue.

The most likely collision point between Russia and NATO, where the US violin plays the first fiddle, is the Kaliningrad region and this entire region. November 11, 2019 on the "Reporter" came out publication entitled "Why is a nuclear war in the Baltic possible." Either we “got into a mess”, or were too insightful.

In that material, we cited the opinion of the American analytical agency RAND, considered one of the unofficial structures of the CIA, that Moscow might not respond with a nuclear strike to a US nuclear strike against Russian troops in the Baltic states. What gave them reason to think so?

It is customary to distinguish three stages of the use of nuclear weapons. The first is a demonstration of determination, that is, the demonstration of the use of low-power nuclear weapons in some desert area or enemy military facilities of secondary importance. The second is a demonstration intimidation, which means a single nuclear strike on the troops or infrastructure of the opposing side, which should reduce the effectiveness of their command, but not cause critical losses.

The third includes intimidation itself: delivering small-scale nuclear strikes against an advancing enemy with the goal of stopping him, "thinning the ranks" and changing the balance of forces in his favor. That is, the path to a strategic missile strike on “decision centers” is not a short one, which is not so bad, actually.

It turns out that in the modern world the real need for the Tsar Bomb is much lower than for a low-powered but numerous tactical nuclear weapons. According to the Nuclear Review policy Pentagon from 2018, in Washington, thought about creating and expanding such an arsenal. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation reacted to this a year ago:

This topic was already included in last year’s review of Washington’s nuclear policy. Even then, we expressed serious concern that the development of such low-power ammunition lowers the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons and, of course, increases the risk of a nuclear conflict.

But the US did not stop it. In the shortest possible time, low-powered sea-based W76−2 nuclear warheads were developed with a capacity of about 6 kilotons. For this, thermonuclear fuel was removed from the Trident II rocket, significantly reducing the charge force. It cost the Pentagon some $ 65 million, but with incredible speed, it received new weapons that could become the "missing link." Now it has entered combat duty aboard the Tenessee nuclear submarine (USS Tennessee (SSBN-734), Ohio class).

In the United States, this new round of the arms race was commented as follows by Dr. Melissa Hanham of the One Earth Future Foundation:

We will simply believe that you recognize the attack as a “small nuclear weapon” and do not take revenge on everyone that you have. Remember: the United States only intends to bite you a bit.

It seems that in Washington, for some reason, they are convinced that the inhabitants of the Kremlin are not prepared to erase the US into radioactive powder using ICBMs, while becoming "martyrs." The most annoying sequence of actions of Americans in an effort to verify this.
27 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in
  1. Arkharov Offline Arkharov
    Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 1 February 2020 15: 06
    -4
    If they had not reduced the power, but, for example, increased it, the title, I think, would have been the same. Here the phenomenon itself does not matter, the author’s statement would not have changed. Interestingly, how would the author file such actions from any other side? Rejection of the concept of strikes in large cities? A manifestation of humanity and concern for civilians? Or how?
    1. Tatyana Offline Tatyana
      Tatyana 1 February 2020 16: 58
      +6
      Globalists in the USA / Pentagon will never give up a nuclear war with Russia, counting on military success from an initial strike on Russia from their side and from the territory of their proxy colonial states.
      1. Arkharov Offline Arkharov
        Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 1 February 2020 17: 04
        -6
        Tatyana
        And why are you talking about slogans and editorials? I can't guess .. "Agitator's Notebook", or "Pravda" for 1976?
        1. S.V.YU Offline S.V.YU
          S.V.YU 1 February 2020 18: 01
          +5
          Arkharov, you are in any way at the boarding house of the US STATE DEPARTMENT !? Look how you stand up for the "breadwinners"! And Tatiana did NOT voice the headlines, but her THOUGHT! Move on! Practice your cookies ...
          1. Arkharov Offline Arkharov
            Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 2 February 2020 08: 42
            -3
            S.V.YU
            It doesn’t feel like “my own thought”. And what thoughts can the "kremlebot" have?
            1. plabu Offline plabu
              plabu 4 February 2020 06: 54
              +1
              Quote: Arkharov
              S.V.YU
              It doesn’t feel like “my own thought”. And what thoughts can the "kremlebot" have?

              You might think that Russophobes, like you, express their thoughts ... bully
      2. cmonman Offline cmonman
        cmonman (Garik Mokin) 1 February 2020 18: 38
        -5
        .. counting on military success from an initial strike on Russia.

        Tatyana, my friends from the 60s and I were cynics / optimists - we did not believe the Soviet propaganda about the US nuclear strike, we listened to the GA, the Air Force and danced to the black market records. Is it now, after 60 years, someone in Russia is the first to believe in a US attack? Yeah, well you got hooked on this "dope." And turn on the logic? What Russia will answer and the world's population will die out as a result? But then internal problems against this background are insignificant ....!
        1. plabu Offline plabu
          plabu 1 February 2020 22: 14
          +3
          Quote: cmonman
          ... my friends from the 60s and I were cynics / optimists - we did not believe the propaganda of the USSR on the US nuclear strike, we listened to the GA, the Air Force and danced to the black market records ...

          And how do records affect or could affect YU ???

          Quote: cmonman
          ... Really now, after 60 years, someone in Russia believes the first to attack the US? Yeah, well you got hooked on this "dope." And turn on the logic? What Russia will answer and the world's population will die out as a result? But then internal problems against this background are insignificant ....!

          IS THIS EXACTLY DOPING ?? Especially when I watched the plans of the Americans to destroy the USSR, though long-standing, with my own eyes?
          And taking into account the fact that the Americans are "masters of their word", they want - they give, and then they can easily take it back ... bully
          1. cmonman Offline cmonman
            cmonman (Garik Mokin) 1 February 2020 23: 37
            -5
            Sorry, specifically for you, 321, I did not intend to reassure!
            Have you been ordered to believe? So do it!
            1. plabu Offline plabu
              plabu 2 February 2020 06: 52
              +1
              Quote: cmonman
              Sorry, specifically for you, 321, I did not intend to reassure!
              Have you been ordered to believe? So do it!

              Is that what you decided? Do you want the ball to crack? Then continue with at least humor, at least make fun of YaU, and all that is connected with it - you will have fun in the end, but this is YOUR CHOICE ...
              1. cmonman Offline cmonman
                cmonman (Garik Mokin) 3 February 2020 18: 22
                0
                Here are the words from the Military Review article.

                https://topwar.ru/167348-vms-ssha-razvertyvajut-boezarjady-w76-2.html

                According to the 2018 US Nuclear Policy Review, the W76-2 project was designed to respond to new challenges from third countries. The main reason for its appearance is called the recent actions of Russia, China and other countries in the field of strategic and tactical nuclear weapons. A few years ago, Russia revised its defense doctrine and changed the principles of the use of nuclear weapons. According to the United States, this led to a decrease in the threshold of use, which significantly changes the balance of forces and can affect the military-political situation in the world. In response to Russia's actions, Washington launched several new projects, including modernization of cash warheads according to the modern project W76-2.

                I want to say that Russia does not need to be fluffy-soft-warm.
                1. plabu Offline plabu
                  plabu 3 February 2020 21: 37
                  0
                  Quote: cmonman
                  ... According to the United States ... I want to say that Russia does not need to be fluffy-soft-warm.

                  The keywords of your quote - as they say in the USA, everything else - from the evil one, as they "know" to count, is already very well known ... hi
      3. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  2. Oyo Sarkazmi Offline Oyo Sarkazmi
    Oyo Sarkazmi (Oyo Sarkazmi) 1 February 2020 18: 38
    +4
    The author, but how do you feel about small nuclear strike attacks in Britain and the United States. Well, at least in the Falklands and Hawaii.
    Are they too shy to strike back?
    Stop entertaining your inferiority complex. The answer is blow to blow. And it is not a fact that the answer to 10kT in Kaliningrad will not be 10 MT in New York.
    1. Conn Offline Conn
      Conn (Conn) 2 February 2020 20: 47
      0
      With a bald dwarf, I’m not sure that we will answer!
      1. Oyo Sarkazmi Offline Oyo Sarkazmi
        Oyo Sarkazmi (Oyo Sarkazmi) 3 February 2020 09: 06
        0
        What is your last name Saakashvili ??? what
  3. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 1 February 2020 19: 32
    0
    Quote: Oo sarcasm
    Stop entertaining your inferiority complex. The answer is blow to blow. And it is not a fact that the response to 10kT in Kaliningrad will not be 10 MT in New York.

    I do not have such complexes. And we didn’t go over to you.
    1. cmonman Offline cmonman
      cmonman (Garik Mokin) 1 February 2020 23: 51
      -5
      From the article:

      The third includes intimidation itself: delivering small-capacity nuclear strikes against an advancing enemy in order to stop him, “thin out the ranks” and change the balance of forces in his favor.

      And these are 2018 Putin’s words about the doctrine of Russia to use tactical nuclear bombs in a conventional war.

      Putin's “nuclear” statement: doctrine change or information war?

      https://inosmi.ru/politic/20181023/243517856.html

      The greatest concern is not even the improvement of strategic systems that are designed for the most extreme cases, and the Russian tactical nuclear arsenal. In this regard, the Russian military doctrine, especially its secret part, is not at all so straightforward. She provides application of the “de-escalation” method, that is, delivering a limited nuclear strike in the event of a development of conventional conflict unfavorable for Moscow. As planned, such a move would demonstrate the Kremlin’s determination and prevent the war from reaching a strategic level when the existence of the Russian state is jeopardized. So, regardless of Putin’s statements, delivering a “preventive” tactical strike remains one of the steps for Russia, which she can take.

      Those. Americans are now doing what Putin did in the year, that way 2016/18, i.e. create a tactical nuclear arsenal to be on an equal footing with Russia. And why blame them?
      1. General Black Offline General Black
        General Black (Gennady) 2 February 2020 11: 07
        +6
        Monkin, let the US create a tactical nuclear arsenal on its territory. Then the conversation will be somewhat different, and so - sorry. Be on equal footing with Russia in your own United States.
    2. Conn Offline Conn
      Conn (Conn) 2 February 2020 20: 50
      -3
      All complexes remained in the closed joint-stock company of the organized criminal group "Putin and Co"! They will not be responsible for their ... and real estate!
    3. Oyo Sarkazmi Offline Oyo Sarkazmi
      Oyo Sarkazmi (Oyo Sarkazmi) 3 February 2020 09: 08
      0
      I do not have such complexes. And we didn’t go over to you.

      Internet after all. Everyone is equal here. Be you the White Sahib from the State Department, or the Ural locksmith from Chelyabinsk.
  4. Dzafdet Offline Dzafdet
    Dzafdet (Sergei) 2 February 2020 15: 11
    +1
    They dropped 10 kilotons on Hiroshima and did not frown. And they can shoot Trident. There’s only a small one: the boat-killer always strives to cleave to strategists And in the case of preparation for launch or launch, they can drown it. And to put on the Iskander the nuclear warhead can be quickly and smacked on NATO with all its might.
  5. duchy Offline duchy
    duchy (Salih) 2 February 2020 15: 22
    +5
    The Americans argue strangely, who believe that by reducing the power of the warhead, they can avoid a retaliatory strike. After all, it’s a no brainer that having found a flying missile and calculating the point of impact of the BG, the country at which the missile is directed will respond with a full blown and not with firecrackers, but specifically. Who will find out what charge the BG carries? Do they fully meet the definition of the unforgettable Mikhail Zadornov "Well, stupid." I wonder who will shout from the former continent: "We have launched ma-a-scarlet" ???
  6. bear040 Offline bear040
    bear040 2 February 2020 21: 29
    +5
    If Putin does not respond with a nuclear strike against the United States in response to a nuclear strike by the United States on the territory of the Russian Federation, then a new president will appear in the Russian Federation very soon, because neither the army nor the people will drain such a drain, and only ash will remain from the United States. .. So, gentlemen, the Yankees, if you were afraid to fight North Korea, with its ten nuclear warheads, then unleashing a war with the Russian Federation, you are pulling death for a mustache ... You are hoping for a new Gorbachev and a new drain of the interests of the Russian Federation, but a new Gorbachev RF simply will not tolerate! In Russia, and the first Gorbachev, most hate!
  7. Upmost Offline Upmost
    Upmost (Innocent) 3 February 2020 03: 04
    -1
    It seems that in Washington, for some reason, they are convinced that the inhabitants of the Kremlin are not prepared to erase the US into radioactive powder using ICBMs, thus becoming “martyrs.” The most annoying sequence of actions of Americans in an effort to verify this

    Which, in principle, is not surprising. There is a militaristic bravado. And there is a reality.
    As part of bravado, the weapons of the Russian Federation are the coolest, have no analogues, and everything from this is written in pants.
    In the framework of harsh reality, the United States has a huge submarine and surface fleet equipped with a huge number of missiles, and capable of delivering such a huge amount closer to the shores of the Russian Federation.
    And this is the whole AUG, a lot of Ticonderoger and a lot of Arly Berkov.

    In contrast to a handful of first-ranking officers of the Russian Federation with a small number of calibers on board, but a few smaller ships, with literally a few missiles in reserve - so, to intimidate the natives.

    Submerging is also ambiguous and heterogeneous. Like the missiles on it - the same Mace is far from Trident 2 in almost all respects, so the missiles themselves are smaller. And to deliver them is not enough.

    As for the "bogeymen" of Yars-Topols, Sarmatians, Iskander, Vanguards, and further on the list - what is tens of thousands of kilometers away should fly over NATO position areas in Europe and other parts of the world.
    So, it is unlikely that such missiles will be fired (too many "buts"), but if so - will be shot down, because the Russian military itself has long recognized that Russian silos have long been under the gun of NATO missiles, and their missiles can be shot down (in case of launch) even over the territory of the Russian Federation.

    In such conditions, the United States can afford not to strain, but to systematically loop the Russian Federation into its defense / attack system, whether in the form of deploying new missile defense / air defense facilities, or creating and putting on duty such small "vigorous loaves".

    All this, of course, is very unpleasant, but it’s better to speak as it is than to pour fake oil.
    1. Oyo Sarkazmi Offline Oyo Sarkazmi
      Oyo Sarkazmi (Oyo Sarkazmi) 3 February 2020 09: 17
      +1
      Just do not give out their mriy for reality. In two years, three American frigates committed suicide on bulk carriers and tankers (one Norwegian, but there was an American officer on the bridge). The meager salary in the U.S. Navy has led to those who go there who even became a janitor in Harlem wasn’t smart.
      1. Upmost Offline Upmost
        Upmost (Innocent) 3 February 2020 18: 20
        -1
        Blessed is he who believes.
  8. g1washntwn Offline g1washntwn
    g1washntwn (George Washington) 3 February 2020 06: 12
    +2
    "Limited strikes" and "environmentally friendly nuclear weapons" are typically US drug-addicted delusions.
    After fixing the launch and calculating the trajectories, no one will find out how much warhead there is and its decay is clean or with cobalt, the return launch will be immediately at the decision centers. Just hundreds of kilotons and megatons, if necessary, so that such thoughts would never occur to anyone else.
    Want to bite us a bit? Get ready to collect teeth from the floor.