I am not an expert
Sums up the whole exchange. You are consistently wrong in every assertion numbers, readiness and how they are deployed, so, you right..there is no point.
The US maintains a current arsenal of around 9,960 intact warheads, of which 5,735 are considered active or operational, and of these only a certain number are deployed at any given time. These break down into 5,021 "strategic" warheads, 1,050 of which are deployed on land-based missile systems (all on Minuteman ICBMs), 1,955 on bombers (B-52 and B-2), and 2,016 on submarines (Ohio class), according to a 2006 report by the Natural Resources Defense Council.Of 500 "tactical" "nonstrategic" weapons, around 100 are Tomahawk cruise missiles and 400 are B61 bombs. A few hundred of the B61 bombs are located at seven bases in six European NATO countries (Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey and the United Kingdom), the only such weapons in forward deployment. Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen (Jan/Feb 2006). "U.S. nuclear forces, 2006". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 62 (1): 68-71.
The US maintains a current arsenal of around 9,960 intact warheads, of which 5,735 are considered active or operational, and of these only a certain number are deployed at any given time. These break down into 5,021 "strategic" warheads, 1,050 of which are deployed on land-based missile systems (all on Minuteman ICBMs), 1,955 on bombers (B-52 and B-2), and 2,016 on submarines (Ohio class), according to a 2006 report by the Natural Resources Defense Council.Of 500 "tactical" "nonstrategic" weapons, around 100 are Tomahawk cruise missiles and 400 are B61 bombs. A few hundred of the B61 bombs are located at seven bases in six European NATO countries (Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey and the United Kingdom), the only such weapons in forward deployment.
Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen (Jan/Feb 2006). "U.S. nuclear forces, 2006". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 62 (1): 68-71.
again..cherry picking.. I said I am not an expert on the technical terms and word play, but I do get the gist.
You did not address the broader issue I was talking about, but instead you pick on terms you see is convenient for you to argue about and cut and paste from websites. This does not make you an expert either!
