The United States has deployed a new low-yield nuclear warhead that experts warned could increase the likelihood of a conflict going nuclear, according to a new report.
The Federation of American Scientists reported Wednesday that the W76-2 low-yield nuclear warhead was supplied to Ohio-class USS Tennessee ballistic missile submarine, which deployed to the Atlantic Ocean from Kings Bay, Georgia, late last month. The report estimated that the new warhead was fitted on at least one or two of the vessel's 20 Trident submarine-launched ballistic missiles, each of which could carry up to eight warheads.
The report was authored by military analyst William M. Arkin and Federation of American Scientists Nuclear Information Project director Hans M. Kristensen. Earlier this month, Arkin authored a Newsweek article featuring quotes by Kristensen on how the recent introduction of the W76-2 was the result of Pentagon planning a potential first strike scenario against adversaries, especially Iran.
While the authors of the February 2018 Nuclear Posture Review said that the new warhead was "not intended to enable, nor does it enable, 'nuclear war-fighting.' Nor will it lower the nuclear threshold," critics have long argued that such a tool could be viewed as more usable in the event of a potential war scenario.
The W76-2 is estimated to produce about an explosive yield of about five kilotons, about a third of that produced by the atomic bomb dropped on the Japanese city of Hiroshima by the U.S. military in the final days of World War II in August 1945. Other Trident missiles are equipped with either the W76-1, which produces around a 90-kiloton blast, or the W88, capable of unleashing around a 455-kiloton yield.
Though the W76-2 may appear milder in comparison, analysts point out just how destructive such a weapon really is in comparison with non-nuclear assets. Writing for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Publishing Manager Andrew Mancini said Tuesday that "it's worth noting that a six-kiloton weapon is still 500 times more powerful than the most powerful conventional explosive in the American arsenal."
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/worl...erts-worried-about-war-report-says/ar-BBZwGqg
The Federation of American Scientists reported Wednesday that the W76-2 low-yield nuclear warhead was supplied to Ohio-class USS Tennessee ballistic missile submarine, which deployed to the Atlantic Ocean from Kings Bay, Georgia, late last month. The report estimated that the new warhead was fitted on at least one or two of the vessel's 20 Trident submarine-launched ballistic missiles, each of which could carry up to eight warheads.
The report was authored by military analyst William M. Arkin and Federation of American Scientists Nuclear Information Project director Hans M. Kristensen. Earlier this month, Arkin authored a Newsweek article featuring quotes by Kristensen on how the recent introduction of the W76-2 was the result of Pentagon planning a potential first strike scenario against adversaries, especially Iran.
While the authors of the February 2018 Nuclear Posture Review said that the new warhead was "not intended to enable, nor does it enable, 'nuclear war-fighting.' Nor will it lower the nuclear threshold," critics have long argued that such a tool could be viewed as more usable in the event of a potential war scenario.
The W76-2 is estimated to produce about an explosive yield of about five kilotons, about a third of that produced by the atomic bomb dropped on the Japanese city of Hiroshima by the U.S. military in the final days of World War II in August 1945. Other Trident missiles are equipped with either the W76-1, which produces around a 90-kiloton blast, or the W88, capable of unleashing around a 455-kiloton yield.
Though the W76-2 may appear milder in comparison, analysts point out just how destructive such a weapon really is in comparison with non-nuclear assets. Writing for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Publishing Manager Andrew Mancini said Tuesday that "it's worth noting that a six-kiloton weapon is still 500 times more powerful than the most powerful conventional explosive in the American arsenal."
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/worl...erts-worried-about-war-report-says/ar-BBZwGqg