Nuclear Weapons of The United States

16/01/2024, 09:56 Nuclear weapons of the United States - Wikipedia
Nuclear weapons of the United States

The United States was the first country to manufacture
United States
nuclear weapons and is the only country to have used them
in combat, with the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
in World War II. Before and during the Cold War, it
conducted 1,054 nuclear tests, and tested many long-range
nuclear weapons delivery systems.[Note 1]
Between 1940 and 1996, the U.S. federal government spent

at least US$10.9 trillion in present-day terms[5] on nuclear
weapons, including platforms development (aircraft,
rockets and facilities), command and control, maintenance,
waste management and administrative costs.[6] It is
estimated that the United States produced more than
70,000 nuclear warheads since 1945, more than all other
nuclear weapon states combined.[7] Until November 1962,
the vast majority of U.S. nuclear tests were above ground. Nuclear program 21 October 1939
After the acceptance of the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, start date
all testing was relegated underground, in order to prevent
First nuclear 16 July 1945
the dispersion of nuclear fallout.[8]
weapon test
By 1998, at least US$759 million had been paid to the First thermonuclear 1 November
Marshall Islanders in compensation for their exposure to weapon test 1952
U.S. nuclear testing.[9][10] By March 2021 over US$2.5
Last nuclear test 23 September
billion in compensation had been paid to U.S. citizens
1992[1]
exposed to nuclear hazards as a result of the U.S. nuclear
weapons program.[11] Largest yield test 15 Mt (63 PJ) (1
March 1954)
In 2019, the U.S. and Russia possessed a comparable
Total tests 1,054
number of nuclear warheads; together, these two nations
detonations
possess more than 90% of the world's nuclear weapons
stockpile.[12][13] As of 2020, the United States had a Peak stockpile 31,255
stockpile of 3,750 active and inactive nuclear warheads plus warheads
approximately 2,000 warheads retired and awaiting (1967)[2]
dismantlement.[14] Of the stockpiled warheads, the U.S. Current stockpile 3,708 (2023)[3]
stated in its March 2019 New START declaration that 1,365
were deployed on 656 ICBMs, SLBMs, and strategic Maximum missile ICBM:
bombers.[15] The projected costs for maintaining U.S. range 15,000 km
nuclear forces are $60 billion per year during the 2021– (9,321 mi)
2030 period.[16] SLBM:
12,000 km
Development history (7,456 mi)

NPT party Yes (1968)
Manhattan Project
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_of_the_United_States 1/26
The United States first began developing nuclear weapons

during World War II under the order of President Franklin
Roosevelt in 1939, motivated by the fear that they were
engaged in a race with Nazi Germany to develop such a
weapon. After a slow start under the direction of the National
Bureau of Standards, at the urging of British scientists and
American administrators, the program was put under the
Office of Scientific Research and Development, and in 1942 it
The Trinity test of the Manhattan
was officially transferred under the auspices of the United
Project was the first detonation of a
States Army and became known as the Manhattan Project, an
nuclear weapon.
American, British and Canadian joint venture. Under the
direction of General Leslie Groves, over thirty different sites
were constructed for the research, production, and testing of components related to bomb-making.
These included the Los Alamos National Laboratory at Los Alamos, New Mexico, under the
direction of physicist Robert Oppenheimer, the Hanford plutonium production facility in
Washington, and the Y-12 National Security Complex in Tennessee.
By investing heavily in breeding plutonium in early nuclear reactors and in the electromagnetic
and gaseous diffusion enrichment processes for the production of uranium-235, the United States
was able to develop three usable weapons by mid-1945. The Trinity test was a plutonium
implosion-design weapon tested on 16 July 1945, with around a 20 kiloton yield.[17]
Faced with a planned invasion of the Japanese home islands scheduled to begin on 1 November
1945 and with Japan not surrendering, President Harry S. Truman ordered the atomic raids on
Japan. On 6 August 1945, the U.S. detonated a uranium-gun design bomb, Little Boy, over the
Japanese city of Hiroshima with an energy of about 15 kilotons of TNT, killing approximately
70,000 people, among them 20,000 Japanese combatants and 20,000 Korean slave laborers, and
destroying nearly 50,000 buildings (including the 2nd General Army and Fifth Division
headquarters). Three days later, on 9 August, the U.S. attacked Nagasaki using a plutonium
implosion-design bomb, Fat Man, with the explosion equivalent to about 20 kilotons of TNT,
destroying 60% of the city and killing approximately 35,000 people, among them 23,200–28,200
Japanese munitions workers, 2,000 Korean slave laborers, and 150 Japanese combatants.[18]
On 1 January 1947, the Atomic Energy Act of 1946 (known as the McMahon Act) took effect, and
the Manhattan Project was officially turned over to the United States Atomic Energy Commission
(AEC).[19]
On 15 August 1947, the Manhattan Project was abolished.[20]
During the Cold War
The American atomic stockpile was small and grew slowly in

the immediate aftermath of World War II, and the size of that
stockpile was a closely guarded secret.[21] However, there were
forces that pushed the United States towards greatly increasing
the size of the stockpile. Some of these were international in
origin and focused on the increasing tensions of the Cold War,
including the loss of China, the Soviet Union becoming an
atomic power, and the onset of the Korean War.[22] And some Protest in Bonn against the
of the forces were domestic – both the Truman administration deployment of Pershing II missiles
and the Eisenhower administration wanted to rein in military in West Germany, 1981
spending and avoid budget deficits and inflation.[23] It was the
perception that nuclear weapons gave more "bang for the buck" and thus were the most cost-
efficient way to respond to the security threat the Soviet Union represented.[24]
As a result, beginning in 1950 the AEC embarked on a massive expansion of its production
facilities, an effort that would eventually be one of the largest U.S. government construction
projects ever to take place outside of wartime.[25] And this production would soon include the far
more powerful hydrogen bomb, which the United States had decided to move forward with after an
intense debate during 1949–50.[26] as well as much smaller tactical atomic weapons for battlefield
use.[27]
By 1990, the United States had produced more than 70,000 nuclear warheads, in over 65 different
varieties, ranging in yield from around .01 kilotons (such as the man-portable Davy Crockett shell)
to the 25 megaton B41 bomb.[9] Between 1940 and 1996, the U.S. spent at least $10.9 trillion in
present-day terms[5] on nuclear weapons development. Over half was spent on building delivery
mechanisms for the weapon. $681 billion in present-day terms was spent on nuclear waste
management and environmental remediation.[6]
Richland, Washington was the first city established to support plutonium production at the nearby
Hanford nuclear site, to power the American nuclear weapons arsenals. It produced plutonium for
use in cold war atomic bombs.[28]
Throughout the Cold War, the U.S. and USSR threatened with all-out nuclear attack in case of war,
regardless of whether it was a conventional or a nuclear clash.[29] U.S. nuclear doctrine called for
mutually assured destruction (MAD), which entailed a massive nuclear attack against strategic
targets and major populations centers of the Soviet Union and its allies. The term "mutual assured
destruction" was coined in 1962 by American strategist Donald Brennan.[30] MAD was
implemented by deploying nuclear weapons simultaneously on three different types of weapons
platforms.[31][32][33]
Post–Cold War
After the 1989 end of the Cold War and the 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union, the U.S. nuclear
program was heavily curtailed; halting its program of nuclear testing, ceasing its production of new
nuclear weapons, and reducing its stockpile by half by the mid-1990s under President Bill Clinton.
Many former nuclear facilities were closed, and their sites became targets of extensive
environmental remediation. Efforts were redirected from weapons production to stockpile
stewardship; attempting to predict the behavior of aging weapons without using full-scale nuclear
testing. Increased funding was directed to anti-nuclear proliferation programs, such as helping the
states of the former Soviet Union to eliminate their former nuclear sites and to assist Russia in
their efforts to inventory and secure their inherited nuclear stockpile. By February 2006, over $1.2
billion had been paid under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990 to U.S. citizens
exposed to nuclear hazards as a result of the U.S. nuclear weapons program, and by 1998 at least
$759 million had been paid to the Marshall Islanders in compensation for their exposure to U.S.
nuclear testing. Over $15 million was paid to the Japanese government following the exposure of
its citizens and food supply to nuclear fallout from the 1954 "Bravo" test.[9][10] In 1998, the country
spent an estimated $35.1 billion on its nuclear weapons and weapons-related programs.[9]
In the 2013 book Plutopia: Nuclear Families, Atomic Cities, and the Great Soviet and American
Plutonium Disasters (Oxford), Kate Brown explores the health of affected citizens in the United
States, and the "slow-motion disasters" that still threaten the environments where the plants are
located. According to Brown, the plants at Hanford, over a period of four decades, released
millions of curies of radioactive isotopes into the surrounding environment.[28] Brown says that
most of this radioactive contamination over the years at Hanford were part of normal operations,
but unforeseen accidents did occur and plant management

kept this secret, as the pollution continued unabated. Even
today, as pollution threats to health and the environment
persist, the government keeps knowledge about the
associated risks from the public.[28]
During the presidency of George W. Bush, and especially

after the 11 September terrorist attacks of 2001, rumors Large stockpile with global range (dark
circulated in major news sources that the U.S. was blue)
considering designing new nuclear weapons ("bunker-
busting nukes") and resuming nuclear testing for reasons
of stockpile stewardship. Republicans argued that small nuclear weapons appear more likely to be
used than large nuclear weapons, and thus small nuclear weapons pose a more credible threat that
has more of a deterrent effect against hostile behavior. Democrats counterargued that allowing the
weapons could trigger an arms race.[34] In 2003, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted to
repeal the 1993 Spratt-Furse ban on the development of small nuclear weapons. This change was
part of the 2004 fiscal year defense authorization. The Bush administration wanted the repeal so
that they could develop weapons to address the threat from North Korea. "Low-yield weapons"
(those with one-third the force of the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima in 1945) were
permitted to be developed.[35] The Bush administration was unsuccessful in its goal to develop a
guided low-yield nuclear weapon, however, in 2010 President Barack Obama began funding and
development for what would become the B61-12, a smart guided low-yield nuclear bomb developed
off of the B61 “dumb bomb”.[36]
Statements by the U.S. government in 2004 indicated that they planned to decrease the arsenal to
around 5,500 total warheads by 2012.[37] Much of that reduction was already accomplished by
January 2008.[38]
According to the Pentagon's June 2019 Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations,[39] "Integration of
nuclear weapons employment with conventional and special operations forces is essential to the
success of any mission or operation."[40]
Nuclear weapons testing

Between 16 July 1945 and 23 September 1992, the United
States maintained a program of vigorous nuclear testing, with
the exception of a moratorium between November 1958 and
September 1961. By official count, a total of 1,054 nuclear tests
and two nuclear attacks were conducted, with over 100 of them
taking place at sites in the Pacific Ocean, over 900 of them at
the Nevada Test Site, and ten on miscellaneous sites in the
United States (Alaska, Colorado, Mississippi, and New
Mexico).[4] Until November 1962, the vast majority of the U.S.
tests were atmospheric (that is, above-ground); after the The U.S. conducted hundreds of
acceptance of the Partial Test Ban Treaty all testing was nuclear tests at the Nevada Test
relegated underground, in order to prevent the dispersion of Site.
nuclear fallout.[41]
The U.S. program of atmospheric nuclear testing exposed a number of the population to the
hazards of fallout. Estimating exact numbers, and the exact consequences, of people exposed has
been medically very difficult, with the exception of the high exposures of Marshall Islanders and
Japanese fishers in the case of the Castle Bravo incident in 1954. A number of groups of U.S.
citizens—especially farmers and inhabitants of cities downwind of the Nevada Test Site and U.S.
military workers at various tests—have sued for compensation

and recognition of their exposure, many successfully. The
passage of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990
allowed for a systematic filing of compensation claims in
relation to testing as well as those employed at nuclear
weapons facilities. By June 2009 over $1.4 billion total has
been given in compensation, with over $660 million going to
"downwinders".[10]
A few notable U.S. nuclear tests include:
Trinity test on 16 July 1945, was the world's first test of a

nuclear weapon (yield of around 20 kt).
Operation Crossroads series in July 1946, was the first
postwar test series and one of the largest military
operations in U.S. history.
Members of Nevada Desert
Operation Greenhouse shots of May 1951 included the first
Experience hold a prayer vigil during
boosted fission weapon test ("Item") and a scientific test
the Easter period of 1982 at the
that proved the feasibility of thermonuclear weapons
entrance to the Nevada Test Site.
("George").
Ivy Mike shot of 1 November 1952, was the first full test of
a Teller-Ulam design "staged" hydrogen bomb, with a yield
of 10 megatons. It was not a deployable weapon, however
—with its full cryogenic equipment it weighed some 82
tons.
Castle Bravo shot of 1 March 1954, was the first test of a
deployable (solid fuel) thermonuclear weapon, and also
(accidentally) the largest weapon ever tested by the United
States (15 megatons). It was also the single largest U.S.
radiological accident in connection with nuclear testing. The
unanticipated yield, and a change in the weather, resulted
in nuclear fallout spreading eastward onto the inhabited Shot "Baker" of Operation
Rongelap and Rongerik atolls, which were soon evacuated. Crossroads (1946) was the first
Many of the Marshall Islanders have since suffered from underwater nuclear explosion.
birth defects and have received some compensation from
the federal government. A Japanese fishing boat, Daigo
Fukuryū Maru, also came into contact with the fallout, which caused many of the crew to grow
ill; one eventually died.
Shot Argus I of Operation Argus, on 27 August 1958, was the first detonation of a nuclear
weapon in outer space when a 1.7-kiloton warhead was detonated at an altitude of 200
kilometres (120 mi) during a series of high altitude nuclear explosions.
Shot Frigate Bird of Operation Dominic I on 6 May 1962, was the only U.S. test of an
operational submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) with a live nuclear warhead (yield of
600 kilotons), at Christmas Island. In general, missile systems were tested without live
warheads and warheads were tested separately for safety concerns. In the early 1960s,
however, there mounted technical questions about how the systems would behave under
combat conditions (when they were "mated", in military parlance), and this test was meant to
dispel these concerns. However, the warhead had to be somewhat modified before its use, and
the missile was a SLBM (and not an ICBM), so by itself it did not satisfy all concerns.[42]
Shot Sedan of Operation Storax on 6 July 1962 (yield of 104 kilotons), was an attempt to show
the feasibility of using nuclear weapons for "civilian" and "peaceful" purposes as part of
Operation Plowshare. In this instance, a 1,280-foot (390 m) diameter 320-foot (98 m) deep
crater was created at the Nevada Test Site.
A summary table of each of the American operational series may be found at United States' nuclear
test series.
Delivery systems
The original Little Boy and Fat Man weapons, developed by the
United States during the Manhattan Project, were relatively
large (Fat Man had a diameter of 5 feet (1.5 m)) and heavy
(around 5 tons each) and required specially modified bomber
planes[43] to be adapted for their bombing missions against
Japan. Each modified bomber could only carry one such
weapon and only within a limited range. After these initial
weapons were developed, a considerable amount of money and
research was conducted towards the goal of standardizing Early weapons models, such as the
nuclear warheads so that they did not require highly "Fat Man" bomb, were extremely
specialized experts to assemble them before use, as in the case large and difficult to use.
with the idiosyncratic wartime devices, and miniaturization of
the warheads for use in more variable delivery systems.
Through the aid of brainpower acquired through Operation

Paperclip at the tail end of the European theater of World War
II, the United States was able to embark on an ambitious
program in rocketry. One of the first products of this was the
development of rockets capable of holding nuclear warheads.
The MGR-1 Honest John was the first such weapon, developed
in 1953 as a surface-to-surface missile with a 15-mile (24 km)
maximum range. Because of their limited range, their potential
use was heavily constrained (they could not, for example,
threaten Moscow with an immediate strike).
Development of long-range bombers, such as the B-29

Superfortress during World War II, was continued during the
Cold War period. In 1946, the Convair B-36 Peacemaker
became the first purpose-built nuclear bomber; it served with From left are the Peacekeeper, the
the USAF until 1959. The Boeing B-52 Stratofortress was able Minuteman III and the Minuteman I
by the mid-1950s to carry a wide arsenal of nuclear bombs,
each with different capabilities and potential use situations.
Starting in 1946, the U.S. based its initial deterrence force on
the Strategic Air Command, which, by the late 1950s,
maintained a number of nuclear-armed bombers in the sky at
all times, prepared to receive orders to attack the USSR
whenever needed. This system was, however, tremendously
expensive, both in terms of natural and human resources, and
raised the possibility of an accidental nuclear war.
During the 1950s and 1960s, elaborate computerized early

warning systems such as Defense Support Program were The MGR-1 Honest John was the
developed to detect incoming Soviet attacks and to coordinate first nuclear-armed rocket
response strategies. During this same period, intercontinental developed by the U.S.
ballistic missile (ICBM) systems were developed that could
deliver a nuclear payload across vast distances, allowing the
U.S. to house nuclear forces capable of hitting the Soviet Union in the American Midwest. Shorter-
range weapons, including small tactical weapons, were fielded in Europe as well, including nuclear
artillery and man-portable Special Atomic Demolition Munition. The development of submarine-
launched ballistic missile systems allowed for hidden nuclear

submarines to covertly launch missiles at distant targets as
well, making it virtually impossible for the Soviet Union to
successfully launch a first strike attack against the United
States without receiving a deadly response.
Improvements in warhead miniaturization in the 1970s and

1980s allowed for the development of MIRVs—missiles which
The B-36 Peacemaker in flight
could carry multiple warheads, each of which could be
separately targeted. The question of whether these missiles
should be based on constantly rotating train tracks (to avoid
being easily targeted by opposing Soviet missiles) or based in heavily fortified silos (to possibly
withstand a Soviet attack) was a major political controversy in the 1980s (eventually the silo
deployment method was chosen). MIRVed systems enabled the U.S. to render Soviet missile
defenses economically unfeasible, as each offensive missile would require between three and ten
defensive missiles to counter.
Additional developments in weapons delivery included cruise missile systems, which allowed a
plane to fire a long-distance, low-flying nuclear-armed missile towards a target from a relatively
comfortable distance.
The current delivery systems of the U.S. make virtually any part of the Earth's surface within the
reach of its nuclear arsenal. Though its land-based missile systems have a maximum range of
10,000 kilometres (6,200 mi) (less than worldwide), its submarine-based forces extend its reach
from a coastline 12,000 kilometres (7,500 mi) inland. Additionally, in-flight refueling of long-
range bombers and the use of aircraft carriers extends the possible range virtually indefinitely.
Command and control

Command and control procedures in case of nuclear war were given by the Single Integrated
Operational Plan (SIOP) until 2003, when this was superseded by Operations Plan 8044.
Since World War II, the President of the United States has had sole authority to launch U.S.
nuclear weapons, whether as a first strike or nuclear retaliation. This arrangement was seen as
necessary during the Cold War to present a credible nuclear deterrent; if an attack was detected,
the United States would have only minutes to launch a counterstrike before its nuclear capability
was severely damaged, or national leaders killed. If the President has been killed, command
authority follows the presidential line of succession. Changes to this policy have been proposed,
but currently the only way to countermand such an order before the strike was launched would be
for the Vice President and the majority of the Cabinet to relieve the President under Section 4 of
the Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.[44][45]
Regardless of whether the United States is actually under attack by a nuclear-capable adversary,
the President alone has the authority to order nuclear strikes. The President and the Secretary of
Defense form the National Command Authority, but the Secretary of Defense has no authority to
refuse or disobey such an order.[46] The President's decision must be transmitted to the National
Military Command Center, which will then issue the coded orders to nuclear-capable forces.[47]
The President can give a nuclear launch order using their nuclear briefcase (nicknamed the nuclear
football), or can use command centers such as the White House Situation Room. The command
would be carried out by a Nuclear and Missile Operations Officer (a member of a missile combat
crew, also called a "missileer") at a missile launch control center. A two-man rule applies to the
launch of missiles, meaning that two officers must turn keys simultaneously (far enough apart that
this cannot be done by one person).
When President Reagan was shot in 1981, there was confusion about where the "nuclear football"
was, and who was in charge.[48]
In 1975, a launch crew member, Harold Hering, was dismissed from the Air Force for asking how
he could know whether the order to launch his missiles came from a sane president.[45] It has been
claimed that the system is not foolproof.[45]
Starting with President Eisenhower, authority to launch a full-scale nuclear attack has been
delegated to theater commanders and other specific commanders if they believe it is warranted by
circumstances, and are out of communication with the president or the president had been
incapacitated.[49] For example, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, on 24 October 1962, General
Thomas Power, commander of the Strategic Air Command (SAC), took the country to DEFCON 2,
the very precipice of full-scale nuclear war, launching the SAC bombers of the US with nuclear
weapons ready to strike.[50] Moreover, some of these commanders subdelegated to lower
commanders the authority to launch nuclear weapons under similar circumstance. In fact, the
nuclear weapons were not placed under locks (i.e., permissive action links) until decades later, and
so pilots or individual submarine commanders had the power to launch nuclear weapons entirely
on their own, without higher authority.[49]
Accidents
The United States nuclear program since its inception has
experienced accidents of varying forms, ranging from single-
casualty research experiments (such as that of Louis Slotin
during the Manhattan Project), to the nuclear fallout
dispersion of the Castle Bravo shot in 1954, to accidents such as
crashes of aircraft carrying nuclear weapons, the dropping of The Castle Bravo fallout plume
nuclear weapons from aircraft, losses of nuclear submarines, spread dangerous levels of
and explosions of nuclear-armed missiles (broken arrows). radioactive material over an area
How close any of these accidents came to being major nuclear over 100 miles (160 km) long,
disasters is a matter of technical and scholarly debate and including inhabited islands, in the
interpretation. largest single U.S. nuclear accident.
Weapons accidentally dropped by the United States include

incidents off the coast of British Columbia (1950) (see 1950 British Columbia B-36 crash), near
Atlantic City, New Jersey (1957); Savannah, Georgia (1958) (see Tybee Bomb); Goldsboro, North
Carolina (1961) (see 1961 Goldsboro B-52 crash); off the coast of Okinawa (1965); in the sea near
Palomares, Spain (1966, see 1966 Palomares B-52 crash); and near Thule Air Base, Greenland
(1968) (see 1968 Thule Air Base B-52 crash). In some of these cases (such as the 1966 Palomares
case), the explosive system of the fission weapon discharged, but did not trigger a nuclear chain
reaction (safety features prevent this from easily happening), but did disperse hazardous nuclear
materials across wide areas, necessitating expensive cleanup endeavors. Several US nuclear
weapons, partial weapons, or weapons components are thought[9] to be lost and unrecovered,
primarily in aircraft accidents. The 1980 Damascus Titan missile explosion in Damascus,
Arkansas, threw a warhead from its silo but did not release any radiation.[51]
The nuclear testing program resulted in a number of cases of fallout dispersion onto populated
areas. The most significant of these was the Castle Bravo test, which spread radioactive ash over an
area of over 100 square miles (260 km2), including a number of populated islands.[52] The
populations of the islands were evacuated but not before suffering radiation burns.[52] They would
later suffer long-term effects, such as birth defects and increased cancer risk. There are ongoing
concerns around deterioration of the nuclear waste site on Runit Island and a potential radioactive
spill.[53] There were also instances during the nuclear testing program in which soldiers were
exposed to overly high levels of radiation, which grew into a major scandal in the 1970s and 1980s,
as many soldiers later suffered from what were claimed to be diseases caused by their
exposures.[54]
Many of the former nuclear facilities produced significant environmental damages during their
years of activity, and since the 1990s have been Superfund sites of cleanup and environmental
remediation. Hanford is currently the most contaminated nuclear site in the United States[55] and
is the focus of the nation's largest environmental cleanup.[56] Radioactive materials are known to
be leaking from Hanford into the environment.[57] The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of
1990 allows for U.S. citizens exposed to radiation or other health risks through the U.S. nuclear
program to file for compensation and damages.
Deliberate attacks on weapons facilities

In 1972, three hijackers took control of a domestic passenger flight along the east coast of the U.S.
and threatened to crash the plane into a U.S. nuclear weapons plant in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The
plane got as close as 8,000 feet above the site before the hijackers' demands were met.[58][59]
Various acts of civil disobedience since 1980 by the peace group Plowshares have shown how
nuclear weapons facilities can be penetrated, and the group's actions represent extraordinary
breaches of security at nuclear weapons plants in the United States. The National Nuclear Security
Administration has acknowledged the seriousness of the 2012 Plowshares action. Non-
proliferation policy experts have questioned "the use of private contractors to provide security at
facilities that manufacture and store the government's most dangerous military material".[60]
Nuclear weapons materials on the black market are a global concern,[61][62] and there is concern
about the possible detonation of a small, crude nuclear weapon by a militant group in a major city,
with significant loss of life and property.[63][64]
Stuxnet is a computer worm discovered in June 2010 that is believed to have been created by the
United States and Israel to attack Iran's nuclear fuel enrichment facilities.[65]
Development agencies
The initial U.S. nuclear program was run by the National Bureau of Standards starting in 1939
under the edict of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Its primary purpose was to delegate
research and dispense funds. In 1940 the National Defense Research Committee (NDRC) was
established, coordinating work under the Committee on Uranium among its other wartime efforts.
In June 1941, the Office of Scientific Research and

Development (OSRD) was established, with the NDRC as one
of its subordinate agencies, which enlarged and renamed the
Uranium Committee as the Section on Uranium. In 1941,
NDRC research was placed under direct control of Vannevar
Bush as the OSRD S-1 Section, which attempted to increase the
pace of weapons research. In June 1942, the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers took over the project to develop atomic weapons,
while the OSRD retained responsibility for scientific
research.[66]
The United States Atomic Energy
This was the beginning of the Manhattan Project, run as the Commission (1946–1974) managed
Manhattan Engineering District (MED), an agency under the U.S. nuclear program after the
military control that was in charge of developing the first Manhattan Project.
atomic weapons. After World War II, the MED maintained
control over the U.S. arsenal and production facilities and
coordinated the Operation Crossroads tests. In 1946 after a long and protracted debate, the Atomic
Energy Act of 1946 was passed, creating the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) as a civilian agency
that would be in charge of the production of nuclear weapons and research facilities, funded
through Congress, with oversight provided by the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. The AEC
was given vast powers of control over secrecy, research, and money, and could seize lands with
suspected uranium deposits. Along with its duties towards the production and regulation of
nuclear weapons, it was also in charge of stimulating development and regulating civilian nuclear
power. The full transference of activities was finalized in January 1947.[67]
In 1975, following the "energy crisis" of the early 1970s and public and congressional discontent
with the AEC (in part because of the impossibility to be both a producer and a regulator), it was
disassembled into component parts as the Energy Research and Development Administration
(ERDA), which assumed most of the AEC's former production, coordination, and research roles,
and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which assumed its civilian regulation activities.[68]
ERDA was short-lived, however, and in 1977 the U.S. nuclear weapons activities were reorganized
under the Department of Energy,[69] which maintains such responsibilities through the semi-
autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration. Some functions were taken over or shared
by the Department of Homeland Security in 2002. The already-built weapons themselves are in the
control of the Strategic Command, which is part of the Department of Defense.
In general, these agencies served to coordinate research and build sites. They generally operated
their sites through contractors, however, both private and public (for example, Union Carbide, a
private company, ran Oak Ridge National Laboratory for many decades; the University of
California, a public educational institution, has run the Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore
laboratories since their inception, and will jointly manage Los Alamos with the private company
Bechtel as of its next contract). Funding was received both through these agencies directly, but also
from additional outside agencies, such as the Department of Defense. Each branch of the military
also maintained its own nuclear-related research agencies (generally related to delivery systems).
Weapons production complex

This table is not comprehensive, as numerous facilities throughout the United States have
contributed to its nuclear weapons program. It includes the major sites related to the U.S. weapons
program (past and present), their basic site functions, and their current status of activity. Not
listed are the many bases and facilities at which nuclear weapons have been deployed. In addition
to deploying weapons on its own soil, during the Cold War, the United States also stationed nuclear
weapons in 27 foreign countries and territories, including Okinawa (which was US-controlled until
1971,) Japan (during the occupation immediately following World War II), Greenland, Germany,
Taiwan, and French Morocco then independent Morocco.[70]
Site name Location Function Status
Los Alamos National Research, Design, Pit

Los Alamos, New Mexico Active
Laboratory Production
Lawrence Livermore
Livermore, California Research and design Active
National Laboratory
Livermore, California;
Sandia National
Albuquerque, New Research and design Active
Laboratories
Mexico
Material production
Hanford Site Richland, Washington Not active, in remediation
(plutonium)
Oak Ridge National Material production (uranium-

Oak Ridge, Tennessee Active to some extent
Laboratory 235, fusion fuel), research
Component fabrication,
Y-12 National Security
Oak Ridge, Tennessee stockpile stewardship, Active
Complex
uranium storage
Active; no tests since 1992,

Nuclear testing and nuclear
Nevada Test Site Near Las Vegas, Nevada now engaged in waste
waste disposal
disposal
Waste disposal (primarily

Yucca Mountain Nevada Test Site Pending
power reactor)
Waste Isolation Pilot East of Carlsbad, New Radioactive waste from
Active
Plant Mexico nuclear weapons production
Pacific Proving
Marshall Islands Nuclear testing Not active, last test in 1962
Grounds
Rocky Flats Plant Near Denver, Colorado Components fabrication Not active, in remediation
Weapons assembly,
Pantex Amarillo, Texas Active, esp. disassembly
disassembly, pit storage
Material fabrication (uranium-

Fernald Site Near Cincinnati, Ohio Not active, in remediation
238)
Material production (uranium-

Paducah Plant Paducah, Kentucky Active (commercial use)
235)
Material fabrication (uranium- Active, (centrifuge), but not
Portsmouth Plant Near Portsmouth, Ohio
235) for weapons production
Kansas City Plant Kansas City, Missouri Component production Active

Research, component
Mound Plant Miamisburg, Ohio Not active, in remediation
production, tritium purification
Manufacture of electrical Active, but not for weapons

Pinellas Plant Largo, Florida
components production
Near Aiken, South Material production Active (limited operation), in

Savannah River Site
Carolina (plutonium, tritium) remediation
Proliferation
Early on in the development of its nuclear weapons, the United
States relied in part on information-sharing with both the
United Kingdom and Canada, as codified in the Quebec
Agreement of 1943. These three parties agreed not to share
nuclear weapons information with other countries without the
consent of the others, an early attempt at nonproliferation.
After the development of the first nuclear weapons during
World War II, though, there was much debate within the
political circles and public sphere of the United States about
whether or not the country should attempt to maintain a
monopoly on nuclear technology, or whether it should
undertake a program of information sharing with other nations
(especially its former ally and likely competitor, the Soviet A sign pointing to an old fallout
Union), or submit control of its weapons to some sort of shelter in New York City.
international organization (such as the United Nations) who
would use them to attempt to maintain world peace. Though
fear of a nuclear arms race spurred many politicians and
scientists to advocate some degree of international control or
sharing of nuclear weapons and information, many politicians
and members of the military believed that it was better in the
short term to maintain high standards of nuclear secrecy and to
forestall a Soviet bomb as long as possible (and they did not
believe the USSR would actually submit to international
controls in good faith).
The Atoms for Peace program
Since this path was chosen, the United States was, in its early distributed nuclear technology,
days, essentially an advocate for the prevention of nuclear materials, and know-how to many
proliferation, though primarily for the reason of self- less technologically advanced
preservation. A few years after the USSR detonated its first countries.
weapon in 1949, though, the U.S. under President Dwight D.
Eisenhower sought to encourage a program of sharing nuclear
information related to civilian nuclear power and nuclear physics in general. The Atoms for Peace
program, begun in 1953, was also in part political: the U.S. was better poised to commit various
scarce resources, such as enriched uranium, towards this peaceful effort, and to request a similar
contribution from the Soviet Union, who had far fewer resources along these lines; thus the
program had a strategic justification as well, as was later revealed by internal memos. This overall
goal of promoting civilian use of nuclear energy in other countries, while also preventing weapons
dissemination, has been labeled by many critics as contradictory and having led to lax standards
for a number of decades which allowed a number of other nations, such as China and India, to
profit from dual-use technology (purchased from nations other than the U.S.).
The Cooperative Threat Reduction program of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency was
established after the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991 to aid former Soviet bloc countries in the
inventory and destruction of their sites for developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons,
and their methods of delivering them (ICBM silos, long-range bombers, etc.). Over $4.4 billion has
been spent on this endeavor to prevent purposeful or accidental proliferation of weapons from the
former Soviet arsenal.[71]
After India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapons in 1998, President Bill Clinton imposed economic
sanctions on the countries. In 1999, however, the sanctions against India were lifted; those against
Pakistan were kept in place as a result of the military government that had taken over. Shortly after
the September 11 attacks in 2001, President George W. Bush lifted the sanctions against Pakistan
as well, in order to get the Pakistani government's help as a conduit for US and NATO forces for
operations in Afghanistan.[72]
The U.S. government has been vocal against the proliferation of such weapons in the countries of
Iran and North Korea. The 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was carried out under the pretext of
disarming Iraq from possessing weapons of mass destruction; however, no such weapons were
discovered.[73][74]
In September 2018, then South Korean president Moon Jae-in travelled to Pyongyang, North
Korea to attend the September 2018 inter-Korean summit along with North Korean supreme
leader, Kim Jong Un. A joint declaration consisting of conditions on nuclear non-proliferation was
signed. The DPRK agreed to dismantle its nuclear complex in the presence of international experts
if the U.S. takes correlative action.[75]
Nuclear disarmament in international law

The United States is one of the five nuclear weapons states with a declared nuclear arsenal under
the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), of which it was an original drafter
and signatory on 1 July 1968 (ratified 5 March 1970). All signatories of the NPT agreed to refrain
from aiding in nuclear weapons proliferation to other states.
Further under Article VI of the NPT, all signatories, including the US, agreed to negotiate in good
faith to stop the nuclear arms race and to negotiate for complete elimination of nuclear weapons.
"Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective
measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear
disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament."[76] The International Court
of Justice (ICJ), the preeminent judicial tribunal of international law, in its advisory opinion on the
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, issued 8 July 1996, unanimously interprets the
text of Article VI as implying that:
There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations
leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international
control.[77]
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 2005 proposed a comprehensive ban on fissile
material that would greatly limit the production of weapons of mass destruction. 147 countries
voted for this proposal, but the United States voted against. The US government has also resisted
the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, a binding agreement for negotiations for the
total elimination of nuclear weapons, supported by more than 120 nations.[78]
International relations and nuclear weapons

In 1958, the United States Air Force had considered a plan to
drop nuclear bombs on China during a confrontation over
Taiwan but it was overruled, previously secret documents
showed after they were declassified due to the Freedom of
Information Act in April 2008. The plan included an initial
plan to drop 10–15 kiloton bombs on airfields in Amoy (now
called Xiamen) in the event of a Chinese blockade against
Taiwan's Offshore Islands.[79][80] Soviet General Secretary
Gorbachev and U.S. President
Occupational illness Reagan signing the INF Treaty in
1987
The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation

Program (EEOICP) began on 31 July 2001. The program provides compensation and health
benefits to Department of Energy nuclear weapons workers (employees, former employees,
contractors and subcontractors) as well as compensation to certain survivors if the worker is
already deceased.[81] By 14 August 2010, the program had already identified 45,799 civilians who
lost their health (including 18,942 who developed cancer) due to exposure to radiation and toxic
substances while producing nuclear weapons for the United States.[82]
Current status
The United States is one of the five recognized nuclear powers
by the signatories of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons (NPT). As of 2017, the US has an estimated
4,018 nuclear weapons in either deployment or storage.[86]
This figure compares to a peak of 31,225 total warheads in 1967
and 22,217 in 1989 and does not include "several thousand"
warheads that have been retired and scheduled for
dismantlement. The Pantex Plant near Amarillo, Texas, is the
only location in the United States where weapons from the U.S. nuclear warhead stockpile,
aging nuclear arsenal can be refurbished or dismantled.[8] 1945–2002.
In 2009 and 2010, the Obama administration declared policies

that would invalidate the Bush-era policy for use of nuclear weapons and its motions to develop
new ones. First, in a prominent 2009 speech, U.S. President Barack Obama outlined a goal of "a
world without nuclear weapons".[87] To that goal, U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev signed a new START treaty on 8 April 2010, to reduce the number of
active nuclear weapons from 2,200 to 1,550.[88][89] That same week Obama also revised U.S.
policy on the use of nuclear weapons in a Nuclear Posture Review required of all presidents,
declaring for the first time that the U.S. would not use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear, NPT-
compliant states. The policy also renounces development of any new nuclear weapons.[90]
However, within the same Nuclear Posture Review of April of 2010, there was a stated need to
develop new “low yield” nuclear weapons. This resulted in the development of the B61 Mod 12. [91]
Despite President Obama's goal of a nuclear-free world and

reversal of former President Bush’s nuclear policies, his
presidency cut fewer warheads from the stockpile any previous
post-Cold War presidency. [92]
Following a renewal of tension after the Russo-Ukrainian War

started in 2014, the Obama administration announced plans to
continue to renovate the US nuclear weapons facilities and
platforms with a budgeted spend of about a trillion dollars over
30 years.[93] Under these news plans, the US government A graph showing the amount of
would fund research and development of new nuclear cruise nuclear weapons stockpiled by
missiles.[94][95] The Trump and Biden administrations either country during the nuclear
continued with these plans.[96] race.
As of 2021, American nuclear forces on land consist of 400

Minuteman III ICBMs spread among 450 operational
launchers, staffed by Air Force Global Strike Command. Those
in the seas consist of 14 nuclear-capable Ohio-class Trident
submarines, nine in the Pacific and five in the Atlantic. Nuclear
capabilities in the air are provided by 60 nuclear-capable heavy
bombers, 20 B-2 bombers and 40 B-52s.[97]
The Air Force has modernized its Minuteman III missiles to

last through 2030, and a Ground Based Strategic Deterrent
(GBSD) is set to begin replacing them in 2029.[98] The Navy
has undertaken efforts to extend the operational lives of its
missiles in warheads past 2020; it is also producing new U.S. ground-based nuclear
Columbia-class submarines to replace the Ohio fleet beginning weapons (all LGM-30 Minuteman
2031.[99] The Air Force is also retiring the nuclear cruise missiles) are deployed in three
missiles of its B-52s, leaving only half nuclear-capable. It areas, spanning five states. These
intends to procure a new long-range bomber, the B-21, and a locations were chosen to be far
new long-range standoff (LRSO) cruise missile in the away from the coasts, to maximize
warning of an incoming attack from
2020s.[97][100]
submarines; far away from
populated areas, since the silos
Nuclear disarmament movement would likely be targeted in a nuclear
war; and relatively close to the
In the early 1980s, the revival of the nuclear arms race Soviet Union via the polar
triggered large protests about nuclear weapons.[101] On 12 June route.[83][84][85]
1982, one million people demonstrated in New York City's
Central Park against nuclear weapons and for an end to the
cold war arms race. It was the largest anti-nuclear protest and the largest political demonstration
in American history.[102][103] International Day of Nuclear Disarmament protests were held on 20
June 1983 at 50 sites across the United States.[104][105] There were many Nevada Desert
Experience protests and peace camps at the Nevada Test Site during the 1980s and 1990s.[106][107]
There have also been protests by anti-nuclear groups at the Y-12 Nuclear Weapons Plant,[108] the
Idaho National Laboratory,[109] Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository proposal,[110] the
Hanford Site, the Nevada Test Site,[111] Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,[112] and
transportation of nuclear waste from the Los Alamos National Laboratory.[113]
On 1 May 2005, 40,000 anti-nuclear/anti-war protesters marched past the United Nations in New
York, 60 years after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.[114][115] This was the largest
anti-nuclear rally in the U.S. for several decades.[101] In May 2010, some 25,000 people, including
members of peace organizations and 1945 atomic bomb

survivors, marched from downtown New York to the United
Nations headquarters, calling for the elimination of nuclear
weapons.[116]
Some scientists and engineers have opposed nuclear weapons,

including Paul M. Doty, Hermann Joseph Muller, Linus
Pauling, Eugene Rabinowitch, M.V. Ramana and Frank N. von
Hippel. In recent years, many elder statesmen have also
advocated nuclear disarmament. Sam Nunn, William Perry,
Henry Kissinger, and George Shultz—have called upon
governments to embrace the vision of a world free of nuclear April 2011 OREPA rally at the Y-12
weapons, and in various op-ed columns have proposed an nuclear weapons plant entrance
ambitious program of urgent steps to that end. The four have
created the Nuclear Security Project to advance this agenda.
Organizations such as Global Zero, an international non-partisan group of 300 world leaders
dedicated to achieving nuclear disarmament, have also been established.
United States strategic nuclear weapons arsenal

New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms, 14 June 2023[117]
Category of Data United States of America
Deployed ICBMs, Deployed SLBMs,

665
and Deployed Heavy Bombers
Warheads on Deployed ICBMs, on Deployed SLBMs,

1,389
and Nuclear Warheads Counted for Deployed Heavy Bombers
Deployed and Non-deployed Launchers of ICBMs,
Deployed and Non-deployed Launchers of SLBMs,

800
and Deployed and Non-deployed Heavy Bombers
Total 2,854
Notes:
Each heavy bomber is counted as one warhead (The New START Treaty)[118]
The nuclear weapon delivery capability has been removed from B-1 heavy bombers.[119]
See also
Anti-nuclear movement in the United States
Global Security Institute
History of nuclear weapons
International Day against Nuclear Tests
List of nuclear weapons tests
National Security Strategy (United States)

Nuclear terrorism
Nuclear-free zone
U.S. nuclear weapons in Japan
United States Strategic Command
Nuclear technology portal
Notes
1. According to Carey Sublette's Nuclear Weapon Archive, the United States "tested (by official
count) 1054 nuclear tests" between 1945 and 1992.[4]
References
1. "23 September 1992 – Last U.S. Nuclear Test" (http://www.ctbto.org/specials/testing-times/23-s
eptember-1992-last-us-nuclear-test/). Testing Times. Preparatory Commission for the
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization. Retrieved 11 November 2017.
2. "Increasing Transparency in the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Stockpile" (http://www.defense.gov/np
r/docs/10-05-03_Fact_Sheet_US_Nuclear_Transparency__FINAL_w_Date.pdf) (PDF).
Nuclear Posture Review (Fact Sheet). United States Department of Defense. 3 May 2010.
3. "Nuclear Notebook: United States nuclear weapons, 2023" (https://thebulletin.org/premium/202
3-01/nuclear-notebook-united-states-nuclear-weapons-2023/#post-heading).
4. "Gallery of U.S. Nuclear Tests" (http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/index.html). The
Nuclear Weapon Archive. 6 August 2001.
5. 1634–1699: McCusker, J. J. (1997). How Much Is That in Real Money? A Historical Price Index
for Use as a Deflator of Money Values in the Economy of the United States: Addenda et
Corrigenda (https://www.americanantiquarian.org/proceedings/44525121.pdf) (PDF). American
Antiquarian Society. 1700–1799: McCusker, J. J. (1992). How Much Is That in Real Money? A
Historical Price Index for Use as a Deflator of Money Values in the Economy of the United
States (https://www.americanantiquarian.org/proceedings/44517778.pdf) (PDF). American
Antiquarian Society. 1800–present: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. "Consumer Price
Index (estimate) 1800–" (https://www.minneapolisfed.org/about-us/monetary-policy/inflation-cal
culator/consumer-price-index-1800-). Retrieved 28 May 2023.
6. "Estimated Minimum Incurred Costs of U.S. Nuclear Weapons Programs, 1940–1996" (https://
web.archive.org/web/20131004220043/http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/archive/nucwe
apons/figure1). Brookings Institution. Archived from the original (http://www.brookings.edu/abou
t/projects/archive/nucweapons/figure1) on 4 October 2013. Retrieved 18 August 2013.
7. Paine, Christopher E.; Cochran, Thomas B.; Norris, Robert S. (4 January 1996). "The Arsenals
of the Nuclear Weapons Powers: An Overview" (https://web.archive.org/web/20160303230734/
http://docs.nrdc.org/nuclear/files/nuc_01049601a_160.pdf) (PDF). Natural Resources Defense
Council. Archived from the original (http://docs.nrdc.org/nuclear/files/nuc_01049601a_160.pdf)
(PDF) on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 22 July 2013.
8. Gross, Daniel A. (2016). "An Aging Army" (https://www.sciencehistory.org/distillations/magazin
e/an-aging-army). Distillations. 2 (1): 26–36. Retrieved 28 March 2022.
9. "50 Facts About U.S. Nuclear Weapons" (https://www.brookings.edu/50-facts-about-u-s-nuclea
r-weapons/). Brookings Institution. 1998. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/201603131637
40/http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/archive/nucweapons/50) from the original on 13
March 2016.
10. "Radiation Exposure Compensation System Claims to Date Summary of Claims Received by
08/15/2013 All Claims" (https://www.usdoj.gov/civil/omp/omi/Tre_SysClaimsToDateSum.pdf)
(PDF). United States Department of Justice. 16 August 2013. – updated regularly
11. Montoya Bryan, Susan (20 April 2021). "People downwind of atomic blasts renew push for US
payout" (https://apnews.com/article/people-near-atomic-tests-seek-us-payout-89290c43c3af08
600f34c8914528b029). AP NEWS. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
12. Reichmann, Kelsey (16 June 2019). "Here's how many nuclear warheads exist, and which
countries own them" (https://www.defensenews.com/global/2019/06/16/heres-how-many-nucle
ar-warheads-exist-and-which-countries-own-them/). Defense News. Retrieved 16 April 2021.
13. "Global Nuclear Arsenal Declines, But Future Cuts Uncertain Amid U.S.-Russia Tensions" (http
s://www.rferl.org/a/nuclear-weapons-russia-start-inf-warheads/30003088.html). Radio Free
Europe/Radio Liberty. 17 June 2019.
14. Nuclear Stockpile Transparency (https://www.energy.gov/nnsa/nuclear-stockpile-transparency),
National Nuclear Security Administration.
15. Fact Sheet: Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance (https://www.armscontrol.org/factsh
eets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat), Arms Control Association (updated: July 2019).
16. "Projected Costs of U.S. Nuclear Forces, 2021 to 2030" (https://www.cbo.gov/publication/5713
0). Congressional Budget Office. 24 May 2021.
17. "The Light of Trinity, the World's First Nuclear Bomb" (https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-
of-technology/the-first-light-of-the-trinity-atomic-test). The New Yorker. 16 July 2015. Retrieved
17 August 2021.
18. Nuke-Rebuke: Writers & Artists Against Nuclear Energy & Weapons (The Contemporary
anthology series). The Spirit That Moves Us Press. 1 May 1984. pp. 22–29.
19. Hewlett, Richard G.; Anderson, Oscar E. (1962). The New World, 1939–1946 (https://www.gov
ernmentattic.org/5docs/TheNewWorld1939-1946.pdf) (PDF). University Park: Pennsylvania
State University Press. p. 641. ISBN 978-0-520-07186-5. OCLC 637004643 (https://www.world
cat.org/oclc/637004643). Retrieved 26 March 2013.
20. Jones, Vincent (1985). Manhattan: The Army and the Atomic Bomb. Washington, D.C.: United
States Army Center of Military History. p. 600. OCLC 10913875 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/
10913875).
21. Young and Schilling, Super Bomb, pp. 156–157.
22. Schwartz, "Introduction", in Atomic Audit, pp. 12–13.
27. Schwartz, "Introduction", in Atomic Audit, p. 13.
28. Robert Lindley (2013). "Kate Brown: Nuclear "Plutopias" the Largest Welfare Program in
American History" (http://hnn.us/article/153096). History News Network.
29. Stone, Oliver and Kuznick, Peter, "The Untold History of the United States," (Gallery Books,
2012), pages 280–281
30. Daniel., Deudney (1983). Whole earth security : a geopolitics of peace. Washington, D.C.,
USA: Worldwatch Institute. p. 80. ISBN 978-0916468545. OCLC 9833320 (https://www.worldca
t.org/oclc/9833320).
31. John Barry (12 December 2009). "Do We Still Need a Nuclear 'Triad'?" (http://www.newsweek.
com/id/226494). Newsweek. Retrieved 8 October 2010.
32. Office for the Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Matters. "Nuclear
Stockpile" (https://web.archive.org/web/20100510015329/http://www.acq.osd.mil/ncbdp/nm/US
NuclearDeterrence.html). US Department of Defense. Archived from the original (http://www.ac
q.osd.mil/ncbdp/nm/USNuclearDeterrence.html) on 10 May 2010. Retrieved 8 October 2010.
33. "Toning Up the Nuclear Triad" (https://web.archive.org/web/20080307080808/http://www.time.c
om/time/magazine/article/0,9171,959948,00.html). Time. 23 September 1985. Archived from
the original (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,959948,00.html) on 7 March
2008. Retrieved 8 October 2010.
34. "Bush move will spark arms race, say Democrats" (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/bush-mov
e-will-spark-arms-race-say-democrats-1.478292). The Irish Times. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
35. Dao, James C. (10 May 2003). "Senate Panel Votes to Lift Ban on Small Nuclear Arms" (http
s://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/10/world/senate-panel-votes-to-lift-ban-on-small-nuclear-arms.ht
ml). The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0362-4331).
Retrieved 27 October 2019.
36. Broad, William J. (21 March 2022). "The Smaller Bombs That Could Turn Ukraine Into a
Nuclear War Zone" (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/21/science/russia-nuclear-ukraine.html).
The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0362-4331). Retrieved
22 December 2022.
37. Norris, Robert S.; Kristensen, Hans M. (September–October 2007). "The U.S. stockpile, today
and tomorrow" (http://bos.sagepub.com/content/63/5/60.full.pdf#page=2) (PDF). Nuclear
Notebook. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 63 (5): 60–63. doi:10.2968/063005013 (https://doi.
org/10.2968%2F063005013).
38. Norris, Robert S.; Kristensen, Hans M. (March–April 2008). "U.S. nuclear forces, 2008" (http://b
os.sagepub.com/content/64/1/50.full.pdf#page=2) (PDF). Nuclear Notebook. Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists. 64 (1): 50–53, 58. Bibcode:2008BuAtS..64a..50N (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.
edu/abs/2008BuAtS..64a..50N). doi:10.2968/064001012 (https://doi.org/10.2968%2F06400101
2). S2CID 150943840 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:150943840).
39. "Nuclear weapons: experts alarmed by new Pentagon 'war-fighting' doctrine" (https://www.theg
uardian.com/world/2019/jun/19/nuclear-weapons-pentagon-us-military-doctrine). The
Guardian. 19 June 2019.
40. "The Pentagon Revealed Its Nuclear War Strategy and It's Terrifying" (https://www.vice.com/en
_ca/article/mb84db/the-pentagon-revealed-its-nuclear-war-strategy-and-its-terrifying). Vice. 21
June 2019.
41. Oberhaus, Daniel (16 July 2020). "Nuclear Tests Have Changed, but They Never Really
Stopped" (https://www.wired.com/story/nuclear-tests-have-changed-but-they-never-really-stopp
ed/). Wired. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
42. MacKenzie, Donald A. (1993). Inventing Accuracy: A Historical Sociology of Nuclear Missile
Guidance (https://archive.org/details/inventingaccurac00dona). Cambridge, Massachusetts:
MIT Press. pp. 343 (https://archive.org/details/inventingaccurac00dona/page/343)–344.
ISBN 978-0-262-63147-1.
43. Magazine, Smithsonian; Kindy, David. "Why the Aircraft That Dropped the First Atomic Bomb
Will Always Inspire Debate" (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/why-airc
raft-dropped-first-atomic-bomb-will-always-inspire-debate-180975421/). Smithsonian
Magazine. Retrieved 13 June 2022.
44. "Why President Trump Has Exclusive Authority To Order A Nuclear Strike" (https://www.npr.org/
2017/10/03/555266383/why-president-trump-has-exclusive-authority-to-order-a-nuclear-strike).
NPR.org.
45. Ron Rosenbaum (28 February 2011). "An Unsung Hero of the Nuclear Age – Maj. Harold
Hering and the forbidden question that cost him his career" (http://www.slate.com/articles/life/th
e_spectator/2011/02/an_unsung_hero_of_the_nuclear_age.single.html). Slate. Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20111014232809/http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_spectator/2011/
02/an_unsung_hero_of_the_nuclear_age.single.html) from the original on 14 October 2011.
46. Broad, William J. (4 August 2016). "Debate Over Trump's Fitness Raises Issue of Checks on
Nuclear Power" (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/science/donald-trump-nuclear-codes.ht
ml). The New York Times. Retrieved 9 November 2020.
47. Merrill, Dave; Syeed, Nafeesa; Harris, Brittany (7 September 2016). "To Launch a Nuclear
Strike, President Trump Would Take These Steps" (https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphic
s/2016-nuclear-weapon-launch/). Bloomberg. Retrieved 9 November 2020.
48. Nuclear button chaos behind Reagan (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1251601.stm), BBC,
30 March 2001
49. Stone, Oliver and Kuznick, Peter "The Untold History of the United States" (Gallery Books,
2012), pages 286–87
50. Stone, Oliver and Kuznick, Peter "The Untold History of the United States" (Gallery Books,
2012), page 309
51. Pincus, Walter (29 October 1980). "At the Titan Site, the Blasts Came at 3 a.m. . . " (https://ww
w.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1980/10/29/at-the-titan-site-the-blasts-came-at-3-am/68
1b9b0c-5516-4423-9573-c2fec1426023/). The Washington Post. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
52. "People and Events: The "Bravo" Test" (https://web.archive.org/web/20000819120112/https://w
ww.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/peopleevents/pandeAMEX51.html). Race for the Superbomb (htt
ps://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/peopleevents/pandeAMEX51.html). American Experience.
Public Broadcasting Service. 1999. Archived from the original (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/
bomb/peopleevents/pandeAMEX51.html) on 19 August 2000.
53. Rust, Susanne (10 November 2019). "How the U.S. betrayed the Marshall Islands, kindling the
next nuclear disaster" (https://www.latimes.com/projects/marshall-islands-nuclear-testing-sea-l
evel-rise/). Los Angeles Times.
54. Rampton, James (23 June 2021). "The 'Atomic Marines' of America's botched Bikini Atoll
nuclear test demand justice" (https://inews.co.uk/news/long-reads/the-atomic-marines-of-ameri
cas-botched-bikini-atoll-nuclear-test-demand-justice-1066321). inews.co.uk. Retrieved
17 August 2021.
55. "Welcome to 'the Most Toxic Place in America' " (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/welc
ome-most-toxic-place-america-n689141). NBC News. 29 November 2016.
56. "Nation's most ambitious project to clean up nuclear weapons waste has stalled at Hanford" (ht
tps://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hanford-nuclear-cleanup-20190604-story.html). Los
Angeles Times. 4 June 2019.
57. "Inside America's most toxic nuclear waste dump, where 56 million gallons of buried
radioactive sludge are leaking into the earth" (https://www.businessinsider.com/hanford-nuclear
-site-photos-toxic-waste-2019-9). Business Insider. 23 September 2019.
58. Threat Assessment: U.S. Nuclear Plants Near Airports May Be at Risk of Airplane Attack (http://
www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/thisweek/2003_6_13_terr.html) Archived (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20101110110238/http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/thisweek/2003_6_13_terr.html)
10 November 2010 at the Wayback Machine, Global Security Newswire, 11 June 2003.
59. Newtan, Samuel Upton (2007). Nuclear War 1 and Other Major Nuclear Disasters of the 20th
Century, AuthorHouse, p. 146.
60. Kennette Benedict (9 August 2012). "Civil disobedience" (http://thebulletin.org/web-edition/colu
mnists/kennette-benedict/civil-disobedience). Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
61. Jay Davis. After A Nuclear 9/11 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/
03/24/AR2008032402291_pf.html) The Washington Post, 25 March 2008.
62. Brian Michael Jenkins. A Nuclear 9/11? (https://www.rand.org/commentary/2008/09/11/CNN.ht
ml) CNN.com, 11 September 2008.
63. Orde Kittrie. Averting Catastrophe: Why the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty is Losing its
Deterrence Capacity and How to Restore It (http://students.law.umich.edu/mjil/article-pdfs/v28n
2-kittrie.pdf) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20100607150719/http://students.law.umich.
edu/mjil/article-pdfs/v28n2-kittrie.pdf) 7 June 2010 at the Wayback Machine 22 May 2007, p.
338.
64. Nicholas D. Kristof. A Nuclear 9/11 (https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE0D
7143EF933A25750C0A9629C8B63) The New York Times, 10 March 2004.
65. "Legal Experts: Stuxnet Attack on Iran Was Illegal 'Act of Force' " (https://www.wired.com/threat
level/2013/03/stuxnet-act-of-force/). Wired. 25 March 2013.
66. "Henry DeWolf Smyth Papers Collection Overview 1885–1987" (https://web.archive.org/web/20
080511094050/http://www.amphilsoc.org/library/mole/s/smythoverview.htm). American
Philosophical Society. Archived from the original (http://www.amphilsoc.org/library/mole/s/smyt
hoverview.htm) on 11 May 2008. Retrieved 21 June 2009.
67. "The Atomic Energy Commissions (AEC), 1947" (https://web.archive.org/web/2009051423204

4/http://www.ch.doe.gov/html/site_info/atomic_energy.htm). Office of Science – Chicago Office.
United States Department of Energy. Archived from the original (http://www.ch.doe.gov/html/sit
e_info/atomic_energy.htm) on 14 May 2009. Retrieved 21 June 2009.
68. "The Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA)" (https://web.archive.org/web/
20090514232021/http://www.ch.doe.gov/html/site_info/energy_research.htm). Office of
Science – Chicago Office. United States Department of Energy. Archived from the original (htt
p://www.ch.doe.gov/html/site_info/energy_research.htm) on 14 May 2009. Retrieved 21 June
2009.
69. "The Department of Energy (DOE)" (https://web.archive.org/web/20090514232035/http://www.
ch.doe.gov/html/site_info/department_energy.htm). Office of Science – Chicago Office. United
States Department of Energy. Archived from the original (http://www.ch.doe.gov/html/site_info/d
epartment_energy.htm) on 14 May 2009. Retrieved 21 June 2009.
70. "United States Secretly Deployed Nuclear Bombs in 27 Countries and Territories During Cold
War" (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/19991020/index.html). National Security Archive
(Press release). Natural Resources Defense Council. 20 October 1999. Retrieved 6 August
2006.
71. Larsen, Jeffrey Arthur; Smith, Dr. James M. (2005). Historical Dictionary of Arms Control and
Disarmament (https://archive.org/details/historicaldictio0000lars). Scarecrow Press. p. 65 (http
s://archive.org/details/historicaldictio0000lars/page/65). ISBN 9780810850606.
72. "U.S. lifts final sanctions on Pakistan" (https://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/10/29/gen.us.pak.sanct
ions/index.html). CNN.com. 30 October 2001. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
73. "Iraq Survey Group Final Report: Regime Strategic Intent – Key Findings" (https://web.archive.
org/web/20170324220357/https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_200
4/Comp_Report_Key_Findings.pdf) (PDF). Archived from the original (https://www.cia.gov/libra
ry/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_2004/Comp_Report_Key_Findings.pdf) (PDF) on 24
March 2017. Retrieved 7 April 2017.
74. "The Iraq War and WMDs: An intelligence failure or White House spin?" (https://www.washingto
npost.com/politics/2019/03/22/iraq-war-wmds-an-intelligence-failure-or-white-house-spin/). The
Washington Post. 2019.
75. "South Korea says North agrees to dismantle nuclear site — if US takes reciprocal action" (htt
p://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-19/north-korea-agrees-to-dismanlte-nuclear-test-site/102820
40). abc.net.au. 19 September 2018.
76. "Information Circulars" (https://web.archive.org/web/20070807060917/http://www.iaea.org/Publi
cations/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc140.pdf) (PDF). iaea.org. Archived from the original (h
ttp://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc140.pdf) (PDF) on 7 August
2007.
77. The ICJ (8 July 1996). "Legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons" (http://www.lcnp.org/w
court/opinion.htm). Retrieved 6 July 2011.
78. "United Nations Conference to Negotiate a Legally Binding Instrument to Prohibit Nuclear
Weapons, Leading Towards their Total Elimination, 27 April to 22 May 2015" (https://www.un.or
g/disarmament/ptnw/index.html). www.un.org. Retrieved 7 July 2017.
79. "Air Force Histories Released through Archive Lawsuit Show Cautious Presidents Overruling
Air Force Plans for Early Use of Nuclear Weapons" (http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb24
9/index.htm). Washington, D.C.: National Security Archive. 30 April 2008. Retrieved 15 March
2016.
80. "US Air Force planned nuclear strike on China over Taiwan: report" (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20080621075459/http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jujIhYgbkZqmcHmmcXzVQiivkwVA).
Agence France-Presse. 30 April 2008. Archived from the original (http://afp.google.com/article/
ALeqM5jujIhYgbkZqmcHmmcXzVQiivkwVA) on 21 June 2008. Retrieved 21 June 2009.
81. "Division of Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation (DEEOIC)" (http://www.dol.
gov/owcp/energy/index.htm). United States Department of Labor.
82. "Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP) EEOICP Program Statistics" (http://www.
dol.gov/owcp/energy/regs/compliance/weeklystats.htm). United States Department of Labor. –
Updated weekly
83. These 5 states were designed to act as America’s ‘nuclear sponge’ (https://www.fastcompany.c
om/90732588/5-states-nuclear-sponge-missile-silos)
84. Minuteman Missiles on the Great Plains (https://www.nps.gov/articles/minuteman-missiles-on-t
he-great-plains.htm)
85. Minuteman Missile Deployment and Site Selection (https://www.nps.gov/articles/mimiarmsrace-
09.htm)
86. "Status of World Nuclear Forces" (https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-
forces/).
87. "Obama sets goal of world without nuclear weapons" (https://web.archive.org/web/2009040510
4959/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/obama-sets-goal-of-world-without-nucle
ar-weapons-1661727.html). The Independent. London. Associated Press. 3 April 2009.
Archived from the original (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/obama-sets-goal
-of-world-without-nuclear-weapons-1661727.html) on 5 April 2009. Retrieved 21 June 2009.
88. "U.S., Russia Agree To Pursue Nuclear Reduction" (https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p
hp?storyId=106292556). NPR.org. 6 July 2009.
89. Michael D. Shear (8 April 2010). "Obama, Medvedev sign treaty to reduce nuclear weapons" (h
ttps://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/08/AR2010040801677.html).
The Washington Post. Retrieved 9 April 2010.
90. David E. Sanger; Peter Baker (5 April 2010). "Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear
Arms" (https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/06arms.html). New York Times. Retrieved
8 April 2010.
91. Broad, William J. (21 March 2022). "The Smaller Bombs That Could Turn Ukraine Into a
Nuclear War Zone" (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/21/science/russia-nuclear-ukraine.html).
The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0362-4331). Retrieved
21 December 2022.
92. "Obama Administration Announces Unilateral Nuclear Weapon Cuts" (https://fas.org/blogs/secu
rity/2017/01/obama-cuts/). Federation Of American Scientists. Retrieved 21 December 2022.
93. William Broad; David Sanger (21 September 2014), "U.S. Ramping Up Major Renewal in
Nuclear Arms" (https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/22/us/us-ramping-up-major-renewal-in-nucle
ar-arms.html?_r=0), New York Times
94. Thompson, Loren. "Obama Backs Biggest Nuclear Arms Buildup Since Cold War" (https://www.
forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2015/12/15/obama-backs-biggest-nuclear-arms-buildup-since-
cold-war/). Forbes. Retrieved 21 December 2022.
95. Mehta, Aaron (21 July 2016). "Senators Urge Obama To Cancel Nuclear Cruise Missile" (http
s://www.defensenews.com/congress/2016/07/21/senators-urge-obama-to-cancel-nuclear-cruis
e-missile/). Defense News. Retrieved 21 December 2022.
96. "U.S. Nuclear Modernization Programs" (https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/USNuclearMo
dernization). Arms Control Association. 2022. Retrieved 28 March 2022.
97. Woolf, Amy F. (13 July 2021). U.S. Strategic Nuclear Forces: Background, Developments, and
Issues (https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL33640.pdf) (PDF) (Report). Congressional Research
Service. Retrieved 23 July 2021.
98. "Department of the Air Force awards contract for new ICBM system that enhances,
strengthens US triad" (https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2340139/department-of-t
he-air-force-awards-contract-for-new-icbm-system-that-enhances-s/). Secretary of the Air
Force Public Affairs. United States Air Force. 8 September 2020. Retrieved 23 July 2021.
99. Larter, David B. (5 November 2020). "US Navy inks $9.4B contract for two Columbia-class
nuclear missile submarines" (https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/11/05/navy-inks-contra
ct-for-two-columbia-class-nuclear-missile-submarines/). Defense News. Retrieved 23 July
2021.
100. Insinna, Valerie (6 July 2021). "Raytheon wins $2B contract for new nuclear cruise missile" (htt
ps://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/07/06/raytheon-wins-2b-for-new-nuclear-cruise-missile/).
Defense News. Retrieved 23 July 2021.
101. Lawrence S. Wittner. "Disarmament movement lessons from yesteryear" (https://web.archive.o
rg/web/20160117043945/http://thebulletin.org/disarmament-movement-lessons-yesteryear). 27
July 2009. Archived from the original (http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/op-eds/disarmame
nt-movement-lessons-yesteryear) on 17 January 2016. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 27
July 2009.
102. Jonathan Schell. The Spirit of June 12 (http://www.thenation.com/article/spirit-june-12) The
Nation, 2 July 2007.
103. "1982 – a million people march in New York City" (https://web.archive.org/web/2008051608011
7/http://www.icanw.org/1982). Archived from the original (http://www.icanw.org/1982) on 16
May 2008.
104. Harvey Klehr (1988). Far Left of Center: The American Radical Left Today (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=8YSmiFins9sC&pg=PA150). Transaction Publishers. p. 150. ISBN 978-1-
4128-2343-2.
105. 1,400 Anti-nuclear protesters arrested (http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_produ
ct=MH&s_site=miami&p_multi=MH&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p
_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB35CC6CE191FBE&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage
=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM) Miami Herald, 21 June 1983.
106. Robert Lindsey. 438 Protesters are Arrested at Nevada Nuclear Test Site (https://query.nytime
s.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE5DE113EF935A35751C0A961948260) New York Times, 6
February 1987.
107. 493 Arrested at Nevada Nuclear Test Site (https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E
0CE0D7153AF933A15757C0A964958260) New York Times, 20 April 1992.
108. Stop the Bombs! April 2010 Action Event at Y-12 Nuclear Weapons Complex (http://www.stopth
ebombs.org/news/join-us-at-the-april-2010-action-event-to-stop-the-bombs),
109. Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free (2003). Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free (http://www.yellowston
enuclearfree.com/about_us/) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20091122092038/http://ww
w.yellowstonenuclearfree.com/about_us/) 22 November 2009 at the Wayback Machine
110. Sierra Club. (undated). Deadly Nuclear Waste Transport (http://www.sierraclub.org/nuclearwast
e/yucca_factsheet.asp)
111. 22 Arrested in Nuclear Protest (https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE7DD153
DF933A2575BC0A96F948260) New York Times, 10 August 1989.
112. Hundreds Protest at Livermore Lab (http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/Livermore-Lab-Protest
11aug03.htm) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20130117040235/http://www.mindfully.org/
Nucs/2003/Livermore-Lab-Protest11aug03.htm) 17 January 2013 at the Wayback Machine The
TriValley Herald, 11 August 2003.
113. Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety (undated). About CCNS (http://www.nuclearactive.org/C
CNS/ccnsindex.html)
114. Lance Murdoch. Pictures: New York MayDay anti-nuke/war march (http://indymedia.us/en/200
5/05/6861.shtml) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20110728132228/http://indymedia.us/e
n/2005/05/6861.shtml) 28 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine, IndyMedia, 2 May 2005.
115. "Anti-Nuke Protests in New York" (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155210,00.html), Fox
News, 2 May 2005.
116. A-bomb survivors join 25,000-strong anti-nuclear march through New York (http://www.ananucl
ear.org/Issues/GlobalNuclearEnergyPartnership/Library/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/articleI
d/314/Default.aspx) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20130512133429/http://www.ananuc
lear.org/Issues/GlobalNuclearEnergyPartnership/Library/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/article
Id/314/Default.aspx) 12 May 2013 at the Wayback Machine Mainichi Daily News, 4 May 2010.
117. "New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms" (https://www.state.gov/n
ew-start-treaty-aggregate-numbers-of-strategic-offensive-arms/). United States Department of
State. Retrieved 5 August 2019.
118. "New START" (https://2009-2017.state.gov/t/avc/newstart/index.htm). 2009-2017.state.gov.
119. Pawlyk, Oriana. "START Lanced the B-1's Nukes, But the Bomber Will Still Get New Bombs" (h
ttp://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/07/12/start-lanced-the-b-1s-nukes-but-bomber-will-still-
get-new-bombs.html). Military.com. Military Advantage. Retrieved 25 September 2017. "[The B-
1] complies with the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty negotiations, which specifies the once-
nuclear bomber remains disarmed of nukes. ... it will never be a nuclear-capable bomber
again"
Notes 2
Sources
Biello, David. "A Need for New Warheads?" Scientific American, November 2007
Hacker, Barton C. Elements of Controversy: The Atomic Energy Commission and Radiation
Safety in Nuclear Weapons Testing, 1947–1974. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press,
1994. ISBN 978-0-520-08323-3
Hansen, Chuck. U.S. Nuclear Weapons: The Secret History. Arlington, TX: Aerofax, 1988.
ISBN 978-0-517-56740-1
Schwartz, Stephen I. Atomic Audit: The Costs and Consequences of U.S. Nuclear Weapons.
Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998. 50 Facts About U.S. Nuclear Weapons |
Brookings Institution (https://web.archive.org/web/20160313163740/http://www.brookings.edu/
about/projects/archive/nucweapons/50) ISBN 978-0-8157-7773-1
Weart, Spencer R. Nuclear Fear: A History of Images. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1985. ISBN 978-0-674-62835-9
Woolf, Amy F. U.S. Strategic Nuclear Forces: Background, Developments, and Issues. (https://f
as.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL33640.pdf) Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, 8
August 2017.
Young, Ken and Schilling, Warner R. Super Bomb: Organizational Conflict and the
Development of the Hydrogen Bomb (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 2019).
ISBN 978-1-5017-4516-4
Further reading
"Presidency in the Nuclear Age" (http://www.jfklibrary.org/Events-and-Awards/Forums.aspx?f=2
009), conference and forum at the JFK Library, Boston, 12 October 2009. Four panels: "The
Race to Build the Bomb and the Decision to Use It", "Cuban Missile Crisis and the First
Nuclear Test Ban Treaty", "The Cold War and the Nuclear Arms Race", and "Nuclear Weapons,
Terrorism, and the Presidency".
External links
Video archive of US Nuclear Testing (http://sonicbomb.com) at sonicbomb.com (http://
www.sonicbomb.com)
Nuclear Threat Initiative: United States (https://web.archive.org/web/20111115025921/
http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/USA/index.html)
NDRC's data on the US Nuclear Stockpile, 1945–2002 (https://web.archive.org/web/20160303
234733/http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/nudb/dafig9.asp)
Snapshot of the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Complex, April 2004 (http://www.lasg.org/sites/siteover
view.htm) by the Los Alamos Study Group
New nuclear warhead design for US (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6414197.stm)

Annotated bibliography of U. S. nuclear weapons programs from the Alsos Digital Library for
Nuclear Issues (https://web.archive.org/web/20160805025731/http://alsos.wlu.edu/qsearch.asp
x?browse=warfare%2FU.S.%20Nuclear%20Weapons%20Programs)
US Test footage and veteran testimony (https://www.labrats.international/usavideos)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?

title=Nuclear_weapons_of_the_United_States&oldid=1192206103"

Nuclear Weapons of The United States - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nuclear Weapons of The United States - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

16/01/2024, 09:56 Nuclear weapons of the United States - Wikipedia

Between 1940 and 1996, the U.S. federal government spent

Development history (7,456 mi)

The United States first began developing nuclear weapons

On 15 August 1947, the Manhattan Project was abolished.[20]

During the Cold War

The American atomic stockpile was small and grew slowly in

but unforeseen accidents did occur and plant management

During the presidency of George W. Bush, and especially

Nuclear weapons testing

military workers at various tests—have sued for compensation

A few notable U.S. nuclear tests include:

Trinity test on 16 July 1945, was the world's first test of a

Through the aid of brainpower acquired through Operation

Development of long-range bombers, such as the B-29

During the 1950s and 1960s, elaborate computerized early

launched ballistic missile systems allowed for hidden nuclear

Improvements in warhead miniaturization in the 1970s and

Command and control

Weapons accidentally dropped by the United States include

Deliberate attacks on weapons facilities

In June 1941, the Office of Scientific Research and

Weapons production complex

Site name Location Function Status

Los Alamos National Research, Design, Pit

Oak Ridge National Material production (uranium-

Active; no tests since 1992,

Waste disposal (primarily

Material fabrication (uranium-

Material production (uranium-

Kansas City Plant Kansas City, Missouri Component production Active

Manufacture of electrical Active, but not for weapons

Near Aiken, South Material production Active (limited operation), in

Nuclear disarmament in international law

International relations and nuclear weapons

The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation

In 2009 and 2010, the Obama administration declared policies

Despite President Obama's goal of a nuclear-free world and

Following a renewal of tension after the Russo-Ukrainian War

As of 2021, American nuclear forces on land consist of 400

The Air Force has modernized its Minuteman III missiles to

members of peace organizations and 1945 atomic bomb

Some scientists and engineers have opposed nuclear weapons,

United States strategic nuclear weapons arsenal

Category of Data United States of America

Deployed ICBMs, Deployed SLBMs,

Warheads on Deployed ICBMs, on Deployed SLBMs,

Deployed and Non-deployed Launchers of ICBMs,

Deployed and Non-deployed Launchers of SLBMs,

National Security Strategy (United States)

67. "The Atomic Energy Commissions (AEC), 1947" (https://web.archive.org/web/2009051423204

New nuclear warhead design for US (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6414197.stm)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?

You might also like