U.S. Ramping Up Major Renewal in Nuclear Arms

[Cory]

I guess only having enough nukes to destroy the world a few times isn't enough already.

This meme is old.

The reason you have to have enough nukes to destroy multiple enemies several times over is because the main target in a nuclear war is the enemy's nuclear weapons. If the enemy launches a successful first strike you need to have enough nukes and delivery systems to retain a retaliation capability. Not to mention you have to retain a second-strike capability in the even of an exchange to begin with.

So if we only have exactly enough nukes to destroy the enemy, and they launch a first-strike and knock out maybe 1/3 of them (whoever strikes first in nuclear was has a major advantage), then where does that leave us? Nuclear strategy is much more complicated then is commonly perceived in pop culture.

[Cory]

So what's a reasonable number? 1,200? 5,000+ seems just a bit much to me.

It depends on the capabilities of our possible enemies, combined. For example in theory we have to maintain at least enough nukes to destroy the capabilities of Russia and China and still have plenty extra to absorb an enemy first strike or maintain second-strike capability.