Pentagon report on nuclear war allegedly accidentally appeared on the Internet

47

A curious document has been published on the Internet - the US Department of Defense manual on nuclear warfare. The text allegedly got into the global network by accident, but was it really so?

It all started with the fact that the US Joint Chiefs of Staff posted in the public domain, and then deleted a new version of their official doctrine on the use of nuclear weapons. weapons. But the public copy of the document was saved. American analyst Stephen Aftergood says that the Pentagon report presents a strategy for using nuclear deterrence forces, their structure, organization of command and operations.



However, many quotations from the doctrine preserved by Aftergood raise questions. What is worth, for example, such a thesis:

The use of nuclear weapons can create conditions for decisive results and the restoration of strategic stability.

Meanwhile, not so long ago, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute published a report on the current state of the nuclear forces of various states. The report emphasizes that the US and Russia currently have 9/10 of the world's nuclear arsenal, which is being gradually reduced thanks to the START-3 treaty, but is not being reduced as rapidly as it could be.

If both countries do not agree to extend START III, which expires in early 3, a new phase of the nuclear arms race could follow. Although both Russia and the United States already suspect each other of systematic violation of mutual agreements. Recall that it was precisely such suspicions that led to the termination of the INF Treaty, and now they threaten the prospects for extending START-2021.

Thus, the director of the US Department of Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Lieutenant General Robert Ashley Jr., recently directly accused Russia of non-compliance with the moratorium on nuclear tests and stressed that Russia is currently producing at least 1000 nuclear warheads a year.

The American leadership, accusing Russia of a nuclear race, is leading the US public to the conclusion that in order to deter a potential adversary, it is also necessary to strengthen and improve its own nuclear forces. President Donald Trump and his entourage use accusations against Russia to legitimize US actions to strengthen its nuclear power.

The publication of the official report of the JCS of the US Armed Forces, outlining the strategy for nuclear warfare, in this case turned out to be just in time. After all, American military analysts in this report consider nuclear forces as the most important means of deterring the enemies of the United States. The document also spells out the importance of developing nuclear forces, giving them flexibility, diversity, and expanding their ability to adapt to various situations.

It turns out that the point of view prevailing in the US armed forces is exactly the opposite of what the official representatives of the civilian leadership say. While politicians talk about reducing nuclear arsenals and accuse Russia of not carrying out this reduction, the military is convinced that only the preservation and further development of nuclear weapons can protect the interests of the United States of America.

It is likely that the very appearance of a curious document on the global network was also the result of some political games of the American elite on the eve of such an important event as the expiration of START-3 and the discussion of the prospects for its further extension or, conversely, refusal to extend it.

In any case, one thing is clear - the American state is not really going to reduce and weaken its nuclear potential, as it sees in nuclear weapons one of the most important means of confronting such potential adversaries and competitors as China and Russia.
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    April 13 2020 10: 09
    The stakes are rising. I think that START-3 will order a long life. And for a while, everything will be fine. I think objectively the countries are not yet ready to agree. But it seems to me that everything will change after an exchange of strikes with tactical nuclear weapons somewhere in the Middle East... Syria? Afghanistan? India or Pakistan maybe Iran? And again, everyone will pretend for a while that everything is fine.
    1. -10
      April 13 2020 10: 19
      With this level of precision-guided missile weapons,
      nuclear acts more like a scarecrow.
    2. +6
      April 13 2020 10: 25
      I think objectively the countries are not yet ready to agree.
      There is a fundamental mistake in your words. The capitalist countries are in principle not prepared to agree on a voluntary reduction of their military strength. Because the cornerstone of the capitalist system is competition, not cooperation. Cooperation is considered only if competition is impossible. And nuclear weapons are such an ace up the sleeve of the country that only a completely imbecile will refuse him.
      1. +2
        April 13 2020 12: 37
        I would add, not only the capitalist countries... When you are stronger, you are not interested in equal cooperation with the weaker ones. And all the countries of the world used it, whoever is stronger is right.
      2. 0
        April 14 2020 07: 36
        There is a fundamental mistake in your words. The capitalist countries are in principle not prepared to agree on a voluntary reduction of their military strength.

        There is no error. Or do you think the Russian Federation is ready, almost voluntarily, to disarm its nuclear arsenal unilaterally. I hope, and so far I do not see the prerequisites for such a development of events.
    3. +11
      April 13 2020 10: 28
      And over the years, nothing has changed!
      1. +1
        April 13 2020 15: 45
        Quote from Uncle Lee
        And over the years, nothing has changed!

        They took it straight off the tongue and also remembered the magazine "Crocodile" ..
    4. +5
      April 13 2020 10: 29
      Only a loaded nuclear gun can sober up mattresses. Nothing else works on them. am
    5. 0
      April 13 2020 23: 47
      Quote: Alex2048
      The stakes are rising. I think that START-3 will order a long life.

      Yes. It's time to give up. And the coronavirus too. There is no chance.
      1. 0
        April 14 2020 07: 33
        It's time to give up. And the coronavirus too. There is no chance.

        Maybe that's what the US thinks. So Snv-3 is generally more convenient for the United States than for Russia.
  2. +4
    April 13 2020 10: 13
    The use of nuclear weapons can create conditions for decisive results and the restoration of strategic stability.

    Do they think that on a field / planet scorched by nuclear weapons, will full strategic stability be or not enough?
    1. +4
      April 13 2020 11: 30
      A little different in their view: This is precisely the first, decontaminating blow to our forces of deterrence and decision-making. We should be the nuclear desert, not them, and the countries adjacent to us.
      1. 0
        April 13 2020 11: 39
        Blessed are those who live in illusions.
        There is no technical possibility to attack Russia and survive after that.
        Those who are supposed to know this, and no one can shut up all sorts of talkers, of any level, anywhere ... well, maybe in North Korea it is stricter than in democratically oriented countries.
        So sho will chirp non-stop.
        1. 0
          April 13 2020 11: 44
          I agree, but in their doctrines, they remain invulnerable. And even the launches of strategic missiles with low-yield warheads, for them, this is not a reason, on our part, to reciprocate them. Blessed are those who believe in their dreams.
      2. 0
        April 13 2020 12: 37
        Quote: Peter is not the first
        We should be the nuclear desert, not them, and the countries adjacent to us.

        The Chernobyl release - not even an explosion !! - was recorded even in France ...
        The explosion of several hundred warheads will certainly have an impact on the US climate.

        But this is a trifle compared to the collapse of the stock exchanges ..... the removal of a global state, which is the Russian Federation, will have an extremely negative impact on the entire world economy
        1. 0
          April 13 2020 14: 29
          Some strange arguments, any military action always has economic consequences and the military defeat of the main enemy with some material losses in the process.
          Upon its completion, the winner has an economic recovery, and a lot of good things
          Remember the golden 50s of the USA
          1. 0
            April 13 2020 18: 44
            the golden 50s of the United States is kind of like the growth of the US economy on the recovery of the economies of Europe and Japan.
            and after a real nuclear war, the United States will have to physically restore its economy, like the Russian Federation.
            those. The United States will fall into the conditions of the USSR, Europe and Japan after WWII.
            most likely, all large refineries, large chip maker plants, metallurgical plants, etc. will burn out in a nuclear war. anything that costs a lot of money and takes a long time to restore.
        2. 0
          April 13 2020 15: 05
          Quote: your1970
          The explosion of several hundred warheads will certainly have an impact on the US climate.

          Not much and for a short time.
          So for reference .. in order to create conditions for the extinction of large dinosaurs, volcanoes in present-day Siberia had to erupt for a couple of hundred years. All nuclear weapons .. this is zilch, in comparison with those events. Yes, and during the existence of dinosaurs, the Earth was hit by meteorites four times ... to which our Yao .. also .. like to the Moon .. and with all this .. the cause of the extinction of large dinosaurs was a decrease in the level of oxygen in the atmosphere, and angiosperms plants captured even not very fertile lands, giving shelter to small mammals .. which took advantage of this with great pleasure and the laying of dinosaur eggs became a dining room for them ..
          1. 0
            April 13 2020 16: 25
            Yes, everything is wonderful!!! Let's shoot rockets left to right, what's there ...
    2. +1
      April 13 2020 23: 48
      They consider. And they count very well. Example: The USSR surrendered without using any weapons.
  3. +3
    April 13 2020 10: 26
    For the modernization of the nuclear arsenal, the Yankees spend an amount commensurate with 40% of the entire military budget of Russia.
  4. kpd
    +10
    April 13 2020 10: 30
    The termination of the INF Treaty was caused by the unwillingness of the United States to comply with the restrictions imposed by this treaty, and suspicions were just an excuse.
  5. +3
    April 13 2020 10: 31
    Whoever, whenever, whatever he says, it’s certainly not us, we won’t use mattress covers, remember Lieutenant Colonel Petrov, but there are other states where their heads may not be friends with their heads
    1. 0
      April 13 2020 10: 51
      Wow!!! They will elect some half-witted Biden with a half-witted Clinton for president, and you can expect anything from some old senile from the "deep state" who will pull the strings.
      1. +2
        April 13 2020 21: 06
        Why do you think Clinton is crazy, you are completely wrong and you shouldn’t treat an elderly woman like that, she is a complete fool.
  6. +2
    April 13 2020 10: 34
    directly accused Russia of non-compliance with the moratorium on nuclear testing.
    Here are the chickens. Okay, they made a stupid herd from the Americans, so they already consider the whole world to be complete idiots. What tests? Here you can’t drop a mobile phone on the ground, so that some seismograph would not register it somewhere in the world, but here nuclear tests. Who is this bullshit for?
    and stressed that Russia is currently producing at least 1000 nuclear warheads a year.
    envy lol Well, declare Russia an enemy even more, impose even more sanctions, and then Russia will produce, not 1000, but 2000 warheads a year. And then you will definitely be happy.
    1. 0
      April 13 2020 10: 55
      Quote: orionvitt
      envy

      Well, in the United States, the technology for manufacturing nuclear weapons has been lost. How were they even going to do it?
      1. +1
        April 13 2020 11: 10
        Quote: Sergey39
        Well, in the United States, the technology for manufacturing nuclear weapons has been lost.

        Shh-sss... Quietly. Be quiet. And then it will come up that they have lost, in addition to everything, the technology of human spaceflight, so the adherents of the western paradise will peck you here. : lol
    2. +3
      April 13 2020 11: 17
      Quote: orionvitt
      Envy Well, even more declare Russia an enemy,

      Don't go to a fortuneteller - that's exactly what will happen. And they do not care about all initiatives / actions, and even I would say to expressions of concern - Americans always solve any of their problems at someone else's expense.
      Quote: orionvitt
      Who is this bullshit for?
      Remember you don’t need a knife for a fool, you’ll lie to him from three boxes and do whatever you want with him. Here a colleague very clearly noted
      Quote: orionvitt
      they made a stupid herd from the Americans, so they already consider the whole world to be complete idiots.
      I would add that they consider the whole world to be slaves, and infuriates them if this is not so
  7. +3
    April 13 2020 10: 35
    Nothing new. Everything described has long been known.
    1. +9
      April 13 2020 11: 54
      American foreign policy is becoming more and more aggressive every year.
    2. +1
      April 13 2020 13: 18
      Quote: arnulla
      Nothing new. Everything described has long been known.

      I will add only - since Soviet times. This was reported almost thirty years ago in the specialized literature.
  8. +1
    April 13 2020 10: 42
    As long as the opposite side has at least a small hope for the effectiveness of a preventive strike with the subsequent complete neutralization of the enemy, there can be no talk of any agreements on a rigid basis and their unconditional implementation. The Americans, I don’t know why, but console themselves with the hope of minimal damage to their country in the event of a nuclear conflict. Obviously, they simply cannot believe on a mental level that they will receive a full paragraph.
  9. +1
    April 13 2020 10: 42
    But the striped ones do not see their death in nuclear weapons as in a kashcheev needle?
    1. +11
      April 13 2020 11: 54
      No, they don't see. For some reason, they believe that there will be no retaliatory strike. Naive. smile
  10. -2
    April 13 2020 11: 10
    So what's new?
    Everyone knows that only Russia and the United States have accumulated a nuclear arsenal capable of destroying the earth several times.
    Everyone knows that nuclear powers will not fight with nuclear weapons, at least from the instinct of self-preservation.
    Everyone knows that nuclear arsenals cannot lie unchanged for decades, they also need to be updated.
    Therefore, all such articles and all sorts of loud statements are just like clowning boxers in front of the press, only boxers are obliged to fight, and nuclear powers do not.
    1. +1
      April 13 2020 15: 17
      Quote: sanik2020
      Everyone knows that only Russia and the United States have accumulated a nuclear arsenal capable of destroying the earth several times.

      You see .. the Americans bombed Japanese cities, conducted full-scale tests in their desert, ours conducted a product exercise ..
      The disadvantage at that time was the lack of delivery vehicles with a small kVo, which was compensated by the power of the charge.
      Now the situation has changed, the accuracy of the missiles has become meter-long, there are several charges in me that fit in such missiles .. and here a sea of ​​\u5b\uXNUMXbopportunities opens up for the military .. To destroy Dresden, the allies dropped almost XNUMXkt of ammunition on it .. now this can be done with one rocket ..
      And two .. the earth was not destroyed by meteorites, the energy of which is orders of magnitude greater than the current one. But to destroy the habitat and destroy social foundations, returning the population to primitive ways of solving problems ... where the one who is stronger is right.
  11. +1
    April 13 2020 11: 21
    in amers, and so the warheads are not destroyed, but stupidly stored. so they've been breaking everything for a long time.
    1. +10
      April 13 2020 11: 55
      They always break all the agreements they have signed.
      1. +8
        April 13 2020 14: 46
        Quote: Pardus
        They always break all the agreements they have signed.

        It has long been known that the United States is not a negotiable country.
  12. -2
    April 13 2020 12: 37
    The publication of the US JCS document on the use of nuclear weapons, first of all, demonstrates the failure of all, without exception, the development programs of the US armed forces based on the use of non-nuclear weapons.

    From the series - how to flush a few tens of trillions of dollars of the 2020 sample down the toilet and stay with a bare bottom after the coronavirus bully
  13. +5
    April 13 2020 12: 37
    Although both Russia and the United States already suspect each other of systematic violation of mutual agreements.

    This has always been the case, starting in principle with the first SALT treaties. But to resolve disputes, there has always existed and exists a bilateral commission. earlier "dirty linen was not taken out of the hut." And the violations of each of the parties became public knowledge after years, or even decades. Now the "ram" is the media. Disputable issues are resolved not in silence (and politics requires silence), but on the pages of newspapers and magazines. Moreover, each side tries to accuse the other of real or imaginary violations...

    .
    Quote: Alex2048
    The stakes are rising. I think that START-3 will order a long life. And for a while, everything will be fine. I think objectively the countries are not yet ready to agree. But it seems to me that everything will change after an exchange of strikes with tactical nuclear weapons somewhere in the Middle East... Syria? Afghanistan? India or Pakistan maybe Iran? And again, everyone will pretend for a while that everything is fine.

    I think, Alexei, that the contract will still be extended. The Americans are now in no position to tear up this treaty. The problems of the US nuclear weapons complex are being solved, but this, in addition to money, takes time. Therefore, they will not break the treaty, which somehow now "restrains Russia". Otherwise, they will find themselves in a position where Russia will increase (if necessary) the number of charges (with an increase in carriers for the time being), and the United States simply will not physically be able to seriously increase the number of charges (they will be able to use only charges that are in operational storage). You will get a mirror-inverted situation. We will be able to increase the number of BGs, but there will be a problem with increasing the media, they will be able to increase the media, but the problem with the BG

    Quote: Doccor18
    With this level of precision-guided missile weapons, nuclear weapons are more like a scarecrow.

    Precision weapons usually have a tactical or operational tactical range. Corrected ammunition launched from a distance of 50-80 km can have a CVO equal to 2-3 meters. Intercontinental missile with the best guidance performance - 90-100 meters. And with such a "scatter" of accuracy, only nuclear weapons, which now play the role of deterrence, will be effective

    Quote: abrakadabre
    There is a fundamental mistake in your words. The capitalist countries are in principle not prepared to agree on a voluntary reduction of their military strength.

    And you contradict reality. A capitalist country called the United States negotiated with a socialist country (USSR) on the limitation and reduction of strategic offensive weapons. Moreover, it began to negotiate when it had an advantage both in carriers and in warheads. And what is characteristic, despite minor violations on each side, continues to adhere to these agreements.

    Quote: kpd
    The termination of the INF Treaty was caused by the unwillingness of the United States to comply with the restrictions imposed by this treaty, and suspicions were just an excuse.

    They considered that further compliance with the treaty was not beneficial to the United States. By the way, this treaty is not beneficial to us either, because when this treaty was concluded, very few countries possessed medium-range missiles. Now many of the countries surrounding Russia, especially in the Asian region, have such missiles. And we, in which case, have nothing to answer ...

    Quote: orionvitt
    directly accused Russia of non-compliance with the moratorium on nuclear testing.
    Here are the chickens. Okay, they made a stupid herd from the Americans, so they already consider the whole world to be complete idiots. What tests? Here you can’t drop a mobile phone on the ground, so that some seismograph would not register it somewhere in the world, but here nuclear tests. Who is this bullshit for?
    and stressed that Russia is currently producing at least 1000 nuclear warheads a year.
    envy lol Well, declare Russia an enemy even more, impose even more sanctions, and then Russia will produce, not 1000, but 2000 warheads a year. And then you will definitely be happy.

    Well, the general, it seems, is not at all friendly with his head, and even more so with numbers. No one detected nuclear tests, but you see, his department did.
    Yes, we have done such tests (allowed. by the way). They are also called subcritical or hydronuclear tests. From 1995 to 2000, we conducted 18 of them. From 1997 to 2005, the Americans also conducted such tests. Moreover, in the amount of 21. So he sees a speck in someone else's eye, but he does not see a log in his own. uh, Ashley Jr., Ashley Jr. There is no need to make such statements and then you will not correspond to the well-known phrase from the Russian fairy tale about three sons. And so it turns out that you correspond.

    Quote: Sergey39
    Quote: orionvitt
    envy

    Well, in the United States, the technology for manufacturing nuclear weapons has been lost. How were they even going to do it?

    There is no need to repeat the stupid things that are replicated, incl. and our media. Technology in the US is not lost. It's just that the euphoria from the collapse of the Union led to the fact that they did not modernize their production and are now forced to spend much more money and, most importantly, time to compensate for this collapse. Now their nuclear weapons production is only capable of modernizing and disposing of nuclear weapons. Approximately in the amount of 300-350 for each of the subparagraphs. They can't mass-produce new ones now. Serial production after a fairly serious modernization of their nuclear nuclear facilities, they will be able to start around 2030 (possibly a little later) in the amount of approximately 70-80 BG per year at the first stage.

    Quote: rotmistr60
    As long as the opposite side has at least a small hope for the effectiveness of a preventive strike with the subsequent complete neutralization of the enemy, there can be no talk of any agreements on a rigid basis and their unconditional implementation. The Americans, I don’t know why, but console themselves with the hope of minimal damage to their country in the event of a nuclear conflict. Obviously, they simply cannot believe on a mental level that they will receive a full paragraph.

    Alas, Gennady, but the Americans comply with the agreements on strategic offensive arms, and on a strict basis. At least 19 inspections a year on our part did not reveal any violations. But they amuse themselves with the hope of minimal damage. That's for sure.
  14. +2
    April 13 2020 12: 47
    How many American military bases are there in the world and how are they located?
    How many Russian military bases are located outside the Russian Federation?
    I think all questions will disappear on their own ..
  15. 0
    April 13 2020 13: 53
    Reminds me of a show on NTV of what cannot be. No one saw Poseidons either. And they are.
  16. +3
    April 13 2020 14: 38
    Quote: T.Henks
    Reminds me of a show on NTV of what cannot be. No one saw Poseidons either. And they are.

    Oh well, last year they just started testing, IMHO not even running ones, but do you already have them ???
  17. +1
    April 13 2020 17: 56
    Quote: 501Legion
    in amers, and so the warheads are not destroyed, but stupidly stored. so they've been breaking everything for a long time.

    Are we being destroyed? In fact, the Americans do not make a secret of this and there are tables on the network, how many nuclear charges they destroyed in what year

    Quote: Pardus
    They always break all the agreements they have signed.

    Brave claim. Are you ready to give examples? so that it does not look like ordinary chatter?
  18. 0
    April 14 2020 10: 20
    Although both Russia and the United States already suspect each other of systematic violation of mutual agreements. Recall that it was precisely such suspicions that led to the termination of the INF Treaty, and now they threaten the prospects for extending START-3.

    Russia does not suspect, it knows that the States are violating all agreements.