I've already checked wikipedia, but wikipedia isn't always right
2007-01-29 00:41:47 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I am not asking for moral positions.
2007-01-29 01:03:08 · update #1
To the best of my knowledge, it is. The SS18 was respected by even the US Strategic Air Command during the cold war. It could carry a warhead with up to 20MT of destructive power of a bus of 10 MRV. The closest the US ever came was the Titan II warhead of about 10MT (which was remarkably similar though smaller than the SS18).
It is possible that the US might have gone further and built a bigger missile, but at the time the US was undergoing a strategy shift away from big missiles with huge warheads to smaller missiles that were more accurate.
2007-01-29 01:51:06 · answer #1 · answered by sparc77 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
at this time it is still the (R-36) which in NATO lingo is called the SS-18 Satan, so yes you are correct. this ICBM is to be scrapped under the Nuclear Proliferation Act in the near future as far as i know. the second is the LGM-118A Peacekeeper and we have about 50 active in the U.S at this time.
2007-01-29 19:49:37 · answer #2 · answered by Ranger 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The american peace keeper missle carries 20 warheads.
2007-01-30 04:10:17 · answer #3 · answered by firetdriver_99 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whatever it is, it shouldn't exist in the hands of ANY government. As long as some countries (like the USA) claim the right to have nuclear weapons, nobody else can be denied that right.
2007-01-29 08:54:37 · answer #4 · answered by Vango 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
we will get a first hand look in our lifetime.
2007-01-29 08:51:47 · answer #5 · answered by 007 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋