Content deleted Content added
→Accidents: removed excessive wikilinks |
Mad Jim Bey (talk | contribs) Reverting edit(s) by 2601:540:CC81:B260:9126:820C:B15B:6534 (talk) to rev. 1300145971 by 2A02:1810:363D:6700:EDEA:156C:34F7:DA25: Vandalism (RW 16.1) |
||
Line 1:
{{Short description|None}}
{{Use American English|date=March 2022}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2022}}
{{Infobox nukes
| country_name = [[United States]]
| image_location = United States (orthographic projection).svg
| program_start = 21 October 1939
| first_test = 16 July 1945
| first_fusion = 1 November 1952
| last_test = 23 September 1992<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctbto.org/specials/testing-times/23-september-1992-last-us-nuclear-test/ |title=23 September 1992 – Last U.S. Nuclear Test |department=Testing Times |website = [[Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization]] |access-date=11 November 2017 }}</ref>
| largest_yield = 15 [[TNT equivalent|Mt]] (63 [[Joule|PJ]]) ([[Castle Bravo|1 March 1954]])
| total_tests = 1,054 detonations
| peak_stockpile = 31,255
warheads (1967)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.defense.gov/npr/docs/10-05-03_Fact_Sheet_US_Nuclear_Transparency__FINAL_w_Date.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100528062643/http://www.defense.gov/npr/docs/10-05-03_Fact_Sheet_US_Nuclear_Transparency__FINAL_w_Date.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=28 May 2010 |title=Increasing Transparency in the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Stockpile |website=[[Nuclear Posture Review]] |type=Fact Sheet |publisher=[[United States Department of Defense]] |date=3 May 2010 }}</ref>
| current_stockpile = *3,700 (2025 estimate)<ref>{{cite web |title=United States nuclear weapons, 2025 |url=https://thebulletin.org/premium/2025-01/united-states-nuclear-weapons-2025/ |date= 13 January 2025 |website=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists}}</ref>
*3,748 (September 2023)<ref>{{cite web |title=United States nuclear weapons, 2025 |url=https://thebulletin.org/premium/2025-01/united-states-nuclear-weapons-2025/ |date= 13 January 2025 |website=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists}}</ref>
| current_usable_stockpile_megatonnage =
| maximum_range = [[ICBM]]: {{Convert|15000|km|0|abbr=on|sigfig=2}}<br /> [[SLBM]]: {{Convert|12000|km|0|abbr=on|sigfig=2}}
| NPT_party = Yes (1968)
}}
{{nuclear weapons}}
The
Between 1940 and 1996, the [[federal government of the United States]] spent at least [[US$]]{{Format price|{{Inflation|US|5821000000000|1996|r=3}}}} in present-day terms{{Inflation-fn|US}} on nuclear weapons, including platforms development (aircraft, rockets and facilities), command and control, maintenance, [[waste]] management and administrative costs.<ref name="brook">{{cite web |website=[[Brookings Institution]] |title=Estimated Minimum Incurred Costs of U.S. Nuclear Weapons Programs, 1940–1996 |url=http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/archive/nucweapons/figure1 |access-date=18 August 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131004220043/http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/archive/nucweapons/figure1 |archive-date=4 October 2013 }}</ref> It is estimated that the United States produced more than 70,000 nuclear warheads since 1945, more than all other nuclear weapon states combined.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://docs.nrdc.org/nuclear/files/nuc_01049601a_160.pdf |title=The Arsenals of the Nuclear Weapons Powers: An Overview |last1=Paine |first1=Christopher E. |last2=Cochran |first2=Thomas B. |last3=Norris |first3=Robert S. |website=[[Natural Resources Defense Council]] |date=4 January 1996 |access-date=22 July 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303230734/http://docs.nrdc.org/nuclear/files/nuc_01049601a_160.pdf |archive-date=3 March 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Until November 1962, the vast majority of U.S. nuclear tests were above ground. After the 1963 [[Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty]], all testing was relegated underground, in order to prevent the dispersion of [[nuclear fallout]].<ref name="An Aging Army">{{cite journal|last1=Gross|first1=Daniel A.|title=An Aging Army|journal=Distillations|date=2016|volume=2|issue=1|pages=26–36|url=https://www.sciencehistory.org/distillations/magazine/an-aging-army|access-date=28 March 2022}}</ref> The United States has maintained a unilateral moratorium on nuclear explosive testing since 1992<ref>[https://sgp.fas.org/crs/nuke/IF11662.pdf U.S. Nuclear Weapons Tests], Congressional Research Service, January 23, 2025</ref> and signed the [[Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty]] in 1996. The [[Stockpile stewardship|Science-Based Stockpile Stewardship]] program shifted focus from continual weapon redesigns to understanding and limiting aging. Research continues via supercomputer simulation and nuclear physics experiments.<ref name="i443">{{cite journal |last=Masco |first=Joseph |date=2004 |title=Nuclear technoaesthetics: Sensory politics from trinity to the virtual bomb in Los Alamos |journal=American Ethnologist |volume=31 |issue=3 |pages=349–373 |doi=10.1525/ae.2004.31.3.349 |issn=1548-1425}}</ref>
By 1998, at least US$759 million had been paid to the [[Marshall Islands|Marshall Islanders]] in compensation for their exposure to U.S. nuclear testing.<ref name="Brookings"/><ref name="usdoj">{{cite web |title=Radiation Exposure Compensation System Claims to Date Summary of Claims Received by 08/15/2013 All Claims |url=http://www.usdoj.gov/civil/omp/omi/Tre_SysClaimsToDateSum.pdf |website=[[United States Department of Justice]] |date=16 August 2013}} – updated regularly</ref> By March 2021, over US$2.5 billion in compensation had been paid to U.S. citizens exposed to nuclear hazards as a result of the U.S. nuclear weapons program.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Montoya Bryan|first=Susan|date=2021-04-20|title=People downwind of atomic blasts renew push for US payout|url=https://apnews.com/article/people-near-atomic-tests-seek-us-payout-89290c43c3af08600f34c8914528b029|access-date=2021-08-17|website=AP NEWS|language=en}}</ref>
In 2019, the U.S. and [[Russia]] possessed a comparable number of nuclear warheads; together, these two nations possess more than 90% of the world's nuclear weapons stockpile.<ref>{{cite news |first=Kelsey |last=Reichmann |title=Here's how many nuclear warheads exist, and which countries own them |url=https://www.defensenews.com/global/2019/06/16/heres-how-many-nuclear-warheads-exist-and-which-countries-own-them/ |work=[[Defense News]] |access-date=16 April 2021 |date=16 June 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Global Nuclear Arsenal Declines, But Future Cuts Uncertain Amid U.S.-Russia Tensions |url=https://www.rferl.org/a/nuclear-weapons-russia-start-inf-warheads/30003088.html |work=Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty |date=17 June 2019}}</ref> In 2025, it was estimated that the United States held 1,770 deployed warheads, 1,930 in reserve, and 1,477 retired and awaiting dismantlement, in total 5,177 nuclear warheads.<ref name="bulletin 2025">{{cite web |title=United States nuclear weapons, 2025 |url= https://thebulletin.org/premium/2025-01/united-states-nuclear-weapons-2025/ |website=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists}}</ref> The projected costs for maintaining U.S. nuclear forces are $60 billion per year during the 2021–2030 period.<ref>{{cite web |title=Projected Costs of U.S. Nuclear Forces, 2021 to 2030 |url=https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57130 |publisher=Congressional Budget Office |language=en |date=24 May 2021}}</ref>
==Development history==
===Manhattan Project===
{{Main|Manhattan Project}}
[[File:Trinity Detonation T&B.jpg|right|thumb|The [[Trinity (nuclear test)|Trinity test]] of the [[Manhattan Project]] was the first detonation of a [[nuclear weapon]].]]
The United States first began developing nuclear weapons during [[World War II]] under the order of [[President of the United States|President]] [[Franklin Roosevelt]] in 1939, motivated by the fear that they were engaged in a race with [[Nazi Germany]] to develop [[German nuclear energy project|such a weapon]]. After a slow start under the direction of the [[National Institute of Standards and Technology|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 was officially transferred under the auspices of the [[United States Army]] and became known as the [[Manhattan Project]], an American, British and Canadian joint venture. Under the direction of [[General (United States)|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 Site|Hanford]] [[plutonium]] production facility in [[Washington (state)|Washington]], and the [[Y-12 National Security Complex]] in [[Tennessee]].
By investing heavily in breeding plutonium in early [[nuclear reactor]]s 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 [[Nuclear weapon design|implosion-design]] weapon tested on 16 July 1945, with around a 20 [[kiloton]] yield.<ref>{{Cite magazine|date=2015-07-16|title=The Light of Trinity, the World's First Nuclear Bomb|url=https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/the-first-light-of-the-trinity-atomic-test|access-date=2021-08-17|magazine=The New Yorker|language=en-US}}</ref>
Faced with a planned [[Operation Olympic|invasion of the Japanese home islands]] scheduled to begin on 1 November 1945 and with [[Empire of Japan|Japan]] not surrendering, President [[Harry S. Truman]] ordered the atomic raids on Japan. On 6 August 1945, the U.S. detonated a uranium-[[Nuclear weapons design|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 [[combatant]]s and 20,000 Korean [[Forced labour|forced laborers]], and destroying nearly 50,000 buildings (including the [[Second General Army (Japan)|2nd General Army]] and [[5th Division (Imperial Japanese Army)|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 forced laborers, and 150 Japanese combatants.<ref>{{cite book |title=Nuke-Rebuke: Writers & Artists Against Nuclear Energy & Weapons (The Contemporary anthology series) |pages=22–29 |date=1 May 1984 |publisher=The Spirit That Moves Us Press}}</ref>
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).<ref>{{cite book |last1=Hewlett |first1=Richard G. |author-link=Richard G. Hewlett |last2=Anderson |first2=Oscar E. |title=The New World, 1939–1946 |___location=University Park |publisher=Pennsylvania State University Press |year=1962
|url=https://www.governmentattic.org/5docs/TheNewWorld1939-1946.pdf |access-date=26 March 2013 |isbn=978-0-520-07186-5 |oclc=637004643 |page=641}}</ref>
On 15 August 1947, the Manhattan Project was abolished.<ref name=":1">{{cite book |last=Jones |first=Vincent |title=Manhattan: The Army and the Atomic Bomb |publisher=United States Army Center of Military History |___location=Washington, D.C. |year=1985 |oclc=10913875 |page=600}}</ref>
===During the Cold War===
[[File:Massale vredesdemonstratie in Bonn tegen de modernisering van kernwapens in West, Bestanddeelnr 253-8611.jpg|thumb|Protest in Bonn against the deployment of [[Pershing II]] missiles in West Germany, 1981]]
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.<ref>Young and Schilling, ''Super Bomb'', pp. 156–157.</ref> 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 [[RDS-1|becoming an atomic power]], and the onset of the [[Korean War]].<ref>Schwartz, "Introduction", in ''Atomic Audit'', pp. 12–13.</ref> And some of the forces were domestic – both the [[Truman administration]] and the [[Eisenhower administration]] wanted to rein in military spending and avoid budget deficits and inflation.<ref>Schwartz, "Introduction", in ''Atomic Audit'', pp. 13–14.</ref> 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.<ref>Schwartz, "Introduction", in ''Atomic Audit'', pp. 18–21.</ref>
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.<ref>Young and Schilling, ''Super Bomb'', pp. 69–70.</ref> 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.<ref>Young and Schilling, ''Super Bomb'', pp. 1–2.</ref> as well as much smaller tactical atomic weapons for battlefield use.<ref>Schwartz, "Introduction", in ''Atomic Audit'', p. 13.</ref>
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 (nuclear device)|Davy Crockett shell]]) to the 25 megaton [[B41 nuclear bomb|B41 bomb]].<ref name="Brookings">{{cite web |website=[[Brookings Institution]] |title=50 Facts About U.S. Nuclear Weapons |url=https://www.brookings.edu/50-facts-about-u-s-nuclear-weapons/ |year=1998 |url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160313163740/http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/archive/nucweapons/50 |archive-date=13 March 2016 }}</ref> Between 1940 and 1996, the U.S. spent at least ${{Format price|{{Inflation|US|5821000000000|1996|r=3}}}} in present-day terms{{Inflation-fn|US}} on nuclear weapons development. Over half was spent on building delivery mechanisms for the weapon. ${{Format price|{{Inflation|US|365000000000|1996|r=3}}}} in present-day terms was spent on [[Radioactive waste|nuclear waste]] management and environmental remediation.<ref name="brook" />
[[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]].<ref name=katebr>{{cite web |url=http://hnn.us/article/153096 |title=Kate Brown: Nuclear "Plutopias" the Largest Welfare Program in American History |author=Robert Lindley |year=2013|work=History News Network }}</ref>
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.<ref>Stone, Oliver and Kuznick, Peter, "The Untold History of the United States," (Gallery Books, 2012), pages 280–281</ref> 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.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Whole earth security : a geopolitics of peace|last=Daniel.|first=Deudney|date=1983|publisher=Worldwatch Institute|isbn=978-0916468545|___location=Washington, D.C., USA|pages=80|oclc=9833320}}</ref> MAD was implemented by deploying nuclear weapons simultaneously on three different types of weapons platforms.<ref name="NW">{{cite magazine |author=John Barry |url=http://www.newsweek.com/id/226494 |title=Do We Still Need a Nuclear 'Triad'? |magazine=[[Newsweek]] |date=12 December 2009 |access-date=8 October 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.acq.osd.mil/ncbdp/nm/USNuclearDeterrence.html |title=Nuclear Stockpile |publisher=US Department of Defense |author=Office for the Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Matters |access-date=8 October 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100510015329/http://www.acq.osd.mil/ncbdp/nm/USNuclearDeterrence.html |archive-date=10 May 2010 }}</ref><ref name="Time">{{cite magazine|url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,959948,00.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080307080808/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,959948,00.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=7 March 2008 |title=Toning Up the Nuclear Triad |magazine=Time |date=23 September 1985 |access-date=8 October 2010}}</ref>
===Post–Cold War===
After the 1989 end of the [[Cold War]] and the 1991 [[History of the Soviet Union (1985–1991)#Yeltsin and the dissolution of the USSR|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 [[Politics of Japan|Japanese government]] following the exposure of its citizens and food supply to [[nuclear fallout]] from the 1954 [[Bravo test|"Bravo" test]].<ref name="Brookings"/><ref name="usdoj" /> In 1998, the country spent an estimated $35.1 billion on its nuclear weapons and weapons-related programs.<ref name="Brookings"/>
[[File:World nuclear weapons.png|thumb|right|250px|Large stockpile with global range (dark blue)]]
In the 2013 book ''[[Plutopia: Nuclear Families, Atomic Cities, and the Great Soviet and American Plutonium Disasters]]'' (Oxford), [[Kate Brown (professor)|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.<ref name=katebr/> 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.<ref name=katebr/>
During the presidency of [[George W. Bush]], and especially after the 11 September [[Terrorism|terrorist]] [[September 11, 2001 attacks|attacks]] of 2001, rumors circulated in major news sources that the U.S. was considering designing new nuclear weapons ([[Nuclear bunker buster|"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.<ref>{{Cite news|title=Bush move will spark arms race, say Democrats|url=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/bush-move-will-spark-arms-race-say-democrats-1.478292|access-date=2021-08-17|newspaper=The Irish Times|language=en}}</ref> In 2003, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted to repeal the 1993 [[John Spratt|Spratt]]-[[Elizabeth Furse|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.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/10/world/senate-panel-votes-to-lift-ban-on-small-nuclear-arms.html|title=Senate Panel Votes to Lift Ban on Small Nuclear Arms|last=Dao|first=James C.|date=2003-05-10|work=The New York Times|access-date=2019-10-27|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}}</ref> 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”.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Broad |first=William J. |date=2022-03-21 |title=The Smaller Bombs That Could Turn Ukraine Into a Nuclear War Zone |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/21/science/russia-nuclear-ukraine.html |access-date=2022-12-22 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref>
Statements by the U.S. government in 2004 indicated that they planned to decrease the arsenal to around 5,500 total warheads by 2012.<ref>{{cite journal |first1=Robert S. |last1=Norris |first2=Hans M. |last2=Kristensen |author-link2=Hans M. Kristensen |date=September–October 2007 |title=The U.S. stockpile, today and tomorrow |url=http://bos.sagepub.com/content/63/5/60.full.pdf#page=2|journal=[[Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists]] |department=Nuclear Notebook |volume=63 |issue=5 |pages=60–63 |doi=10.2968/063005013}}</ref> Much of that reduction was already accomplished by January 2008.<ref name="USforces2008">{{cite journal |first1=Robert S. |last1=Norris |first2=Hans M. |last2=Kristensen |author-link2=Hans M. Kristensen |date=March–April 2008 |title=U.S. nuclear forces, 2008 |url=http://bos.sagepub.com/content/64/1/50.full.pdf#page=2|journal=[[Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists]] |department=Nuclear Notebook |volume=64 |issue=1 |pages=50–53, 58 |doi=10.2968/064001012|bibcode=2008BuAtS..64a..50N |s2cid=150943840 }}</ref>
According to the Pentagon's June 2019 [[Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations]],<ref>{{cite news |title=Nuclear weapons: experts alarmed by new Pentagon 'war-fighting' doctrine |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/19/nuclear-weapons-pentagon-us-military-doctrine |work=The Guardian |date=19 June 2019}}</ref> "Integration of nuclear weapons employment with conventional and special operations forces is essential to the success of any mission or operation."<ref>{{cite news |title=The Pentagon Revealed Its Nuclear War Strategy and It's Terrifying |url=https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-pentagon-revealed-its-nuclear-war-strategy-and-its-terrifying/ |work=[[Vice (magazine)|Vice]] |date=21 June 2019}}</ref>
In 2024 it was estimated that the United States possessed 1,770 deployed nuclear warheads, 1,938 in reserve, and 1,336 retired and awaiting dismantlement (a total of 5,044). 1,370 strategic warheads were deployed on [[Ballistic missile|ballistic missiles]], 300 at [[strategic bomber]] bases in the United States, and 100 [[Tactical nuclear weapon|tactical bombs]] at air bases in Europe.<ref name="bulletin 2024">{{cite web |title=United States nuclear weapons, 2024 |url=https://thebulletin.org/premium/2024-05/united-states-nuclear-weapons-2024/ |website=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists}}</ref>
==Nuclear weapons testing==
{{Main|Nuclear weapons testing}}
{{See also|List of nuclear weapons tests of the United States}}
[[File:Exercise Desert Rock I (Buster-Jangle Dog) 002.jpg|right|thumb|The U.S. conducted hundreds of [[Nuclear testing|nuclear tests]] at the [[Nevada Test Site]].]]
[[File:Anti-nuclear protest at the NTS 3.jpg|thumb|Members of [[Nevada Desert Experience]] hold a prayer vigil during the Easter period of 1982 at the entrance to the Nevada Test Site.]]
[[File:Crossroads baker explosion.jpg|right|thumb|Shot "Baker" of [[Operation Crossroads]] (1946) was the first underwater nuclear explosion.]]
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]]).<ref name="nucleararchive" /> Until November 1962, the vast majority of the U.S. tests were atmospheric (that is, above-ground); after the acceptance of the Partial Test Ban Treaty all testing was relegated underground, in order to prevent the dispersion of [[nuclear fallout]].<ref>{{Cite magazine|last=Oberhaus|first=Daniel|date=16 July 2020|title=Nuclear Tests Have Changed, but They Never Really Stopped|language=en-US|magazine=Wired|url=https://www.wired.com/story/nuclear-tests-have-changed-but-they-never-really-stopped/|access-date=2021-08-17|issn=}}</ref> In 1992 a new testing moratorium was initiated, which has been maintained through 2024.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Kimball |first1=Daryl |title=Nuclear Testing and Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Timeline |url=https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/nuclear-testing-and-comprehensive-test-ban-treaty-ctbt-timeline |website=Arms Control Association |publisher=Arms Control Association |access-date=18 October 2024}}</ref>
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|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]]".<ref name="usdoj" />
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).
*
*
* [[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 [[Rongelap Atoll|Rongelap]] and [[Rongerik Atoll|Rongerik]] atolls, which were soon evacuated. Many of the Marshall Islanders have since suffered from [[Congenital disorder|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 {{convert|200|km}} during a series of [[high altitude nuclear explosion]]s.
* Shot Frigate Bird of [[Operation Dominic I and II|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 [[Kiritimati|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 [[Submarine-launched ballistic missile|SLBM]] (and not an [[Intercontinental ballistic missile|ICBM]]), so by itself it did not satisfy all concerns.<ref>{{cite book |first=Donald A. |last=MacKenzie |author-link=Donald Angus MacKenzie |year=1993 |title=Inventing Accuracy: A Historical Sociology of Nuclear Missile Guidance |url=https://archive.org/details/inventingaccurac00dona |url-access=registration |___location=Cambridge, Massachusetts |publisher=[[MIT Press]] |isbn=978-0-262-63147-1 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/inventingaccurac00dona/page/343 343]–344}}</ref>
* Shot [[Sedan (nuclear test)|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 purposes as part of [[Operation Plowshare]]. In this instance, a {{convert|1280|ft|adj=on}} diameter {{convert|320|ft|adj=on}} deep [[Subsidence crater|crater]] was created at the Nevada Test Site. The radioactive fallout from this test contaminated more US residents than any other nuclear test; over 13 million people were exposed.{{cn|date=June 2025}}
A summary table of each of the American operational series may be found at [[United States' nuclear test series]].
==Delivery systems==
{{Main|Nuclear weapons delivery}}{{More citations needed section|date=January 2023}}[[
[[File:Missile display at F.E. Warren AFB 120407-F-JW079-036.jpg|thumb|From left are the Peacekeeper, the Minuteman III and the Minuteman I]]
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 {{convert|5|ft}}) and heavy (around 5 tons each) and required specially modified bomber planes<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Magazine |first1=Smithsonian |last2=Kindy |first2=David |title=Why the Aircraft That Dropped the First Atomic Bomb Will Always Inspire Debate |url=https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/why-aircraft-dropped-first-atomic-bomb-will-always-inspire-debate-180975421/ |access-date=2022-06-13 |website=Smithsonian Magazine |language=en}}</ref> 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 nuclear warheads so that they did not require highly specialized experts to assemble them before use, as in the case with the [[Idiosyncrasy|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 [[rocket]]ry. 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 {{convert|15|mi|adj=on}} maximum range. Because of their limited range, their potential use was heavily constrained (they could not, for example, threaten [[Moscow]] with an immediate strike).
[[File:MGR-1 Honest John rocket.jpg|right|thumb|The [[MGR-1 Honest John]] was the first nuclear-armed [[rocket]] developed by the U.S.]]
[[File:Convair B-36 Peacemaker.jpg|right|thumb|The B-36 Peacemaker in flight]]
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 the USAF until 1959. The [[Boeing B-52 Stratofortress]] was able 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 developed to detect incoming Soviet attacks and to coordinate response strategies. During this same period, [[intercontinental 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 [[Midwestern United States|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 [[Pre-emptive nuclear strike|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 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). [[Multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle|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.
[[File:Nuclear weapon size chart.jpg|center|Comparing the size of U.S. nuclear weapons over time.]]
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 {{convert|10000|km}} (less than worldwide), its submarine-based forces extend its reach from a coastline {{convert|12000|km}} inland. Additionally, [[Aerial refueling|in-flight refueling]] of long-range bombers and the use of [[aircraft carrier]]s 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 [[Pre-emptive nuclear strike|first strike]] or [[second strike|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 [[United States presidential line of succession|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]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.npr.org/2017/10/03/555266383/why-president-trump-has-exclusive-authority-to-order-a-nuclear-strike|title=Why President Trump Has Exclusive Authority To Order A Nuclear Strike|website=NPR.org}}</ref><ref name=Rosenbaum>{{cite journal|author1=Ron Rosenbaum|title=An Unsung Hero of the Nuclear Age – Maj. Harold Hering and the forbidden question that cost him his career|journal=[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]]|date=28 February 2011|url=http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_spectator/2011/02/an_unsung_hero_of_the_nuclear_age.single.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111014232809/http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_spectator/2011/02/an_unsung_hero_of_the_nuclear_age.single.html|archive-date=14 October 2011|url-status=live}}</ref>
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 [[United States Secretary of Defense|Secretary of Defense]] form the [[National Command Authority (United States)|National Command Authority]], but the Secretary of Defense has no authority to refuse or disobey such an order.<ref>{{cite web |first=William J. |last=Broad |title=Debate Over Trump's Fitness Raises Issue of Checks on Nuclear Power |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/science/donald-trump-nuclear-codes.html |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=August 4, 2016 |access-date=November 9, 2020}}</ref> The President's decision must be transmitted to the [[National Military Command Center]], which will then issue the coded orders to nuclear-capable forces.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Merrill |first1=Dave |last2=Syeed |first2=Nafeesa |last3=Harris |first3=Brittany |title=To Launch a Nuclear Strike, President Trump Would Take These Steps |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-nuclear-weapon-launch/ |access-date=November 9, 2020 |work=Bloomberg |date=September 7, 2016}}</ref>
The President can give a nuclear launch order using their [[nuclear briefcase]] (nicknamed the [[nuclear football]]), or can use [[command center]]s 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).{{citation needed|date=March 2019}}
When [[Attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan|President Reagan was shot]] in 1981, there was confusion about where the "nuclear football" was, and who was in charge.<ref>{{citation|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1251601.stm|title=Nuclear button chaos behind Reagan|publisher=BBC|date=30 March 2001}}</ref>
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.<ref name=Rosenbaum /> In response to this situation, [[Ron Rosenbaum]] wrote that no command and control system is foolproof, and that the sanity of senior nuclear decision makers would always be a weak point in any conceivable command and control protocol.<ref name=Rosenbaum/>
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.<ref name="Stone 2012 pages 286-87">Stone, Oliver and Kuznick, Peter "The Untold History of the United States" (Gallery Books, 2012), pages 286–87</ref> 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.<ref>Stone, Oliver and Kuznick, Peter "The Untold History of the United States" (Gallery Books, 2012), page 309</ref> 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 link]]s) until decades later, and so pilots or individual submarine commanders had the power to launch nuclear weapons entirely on their own, without higher authority.<ref name="Stone 2012 pages 286-87"/>
==Accidents==
{{Main|Nuclear and radiation accidents|List of military nuclear accidents}}
[[File:Bravo fallout2.png|right|thumb|The [[Castle Bravo]] [[Nuclear fallout|fallout]] plume spread dangerous levels of radioactive material over an area over {{convert|100|mi|km}} long, including inhabited islands, in the largest single U.S. nuclear accident.]]
The United States nuclear program
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)
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 {{convert|100|sqmi}}, including a number of populated islands.<ref name="PBSBravo">{{citation |mode=cs1 |section-url=https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/peopleevents/pandeAMEX51.html |url=https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/bomb-us-tests/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20000819120112/https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/peopleevents/pandeAMEX51.html |url-status=live |archive-date=19 August 2000 |series=[[American Experience]] |section=People and Events: The "Bravo" Test |title=Race for the Superbomb |publisher=[[Public Broadcasting Service]] |year=1999}}</ref> The populations of the islands were evacuated but not before suffering radiation burns.<ref name="PBSBravo"/> They would later suffer [[Effects of nuclear explosions on human health|long-term effects]], such as [[birth defect]]s and increased cancer risk. There are ongoing concerns around deterioration of the nuclear waste site on [[Runit Island]] and a potential [[radioactive contamination|radioactive spill]].<ref>{{cite news |title=How the U.S. betrayed the Marshall Islands, kindling the next nuclear disaster |url=https://www.latimes.com/projects/marshall-islands-nuclear-testing-sea-level-rise/ |last=Rust |first=Susanne |work=Los Angeles Times |date=November 10, 2019}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Rampton|first=James|date=2021-06-23|title=The 'Atomic Marines' of America's botched Bikini Atoll nuclear test demand justice|url=https://inews.co.uk/news/long-reads/the-atomic-marines-of-americas-botched-bikini-atoll-nuclear-test-demand-justice-1066321|access-date=2021-08-17|website=inews.co.uk|language=en}}</ref>
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 Site|Hanford]] is currently the most [[Radioactive contamination|contaminated]] nuclear site in the United States<ref>{{cite news |title=Welcome to 'the Most Toxic Place in America' |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/welcome-most-toxic-place-america-n689141 |work=NBC News |date=November 29, 2016}}</ref> and is the focus of the nation's largest [[Environmental remediation|environmental cleanup]].<ref>{{cite news |title=Nation's most ambitious project to clean up nuclear weapons waste has stalled at Hanford |url=https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hanford-nuclear-cleanup-20190604-story.html |work=Los Angeles Times |date=June 4, 2019}}</ref> Radioactive materials are known to be leaking from Hanford into the environment.<ref>{{cite news |title=Inside America's most toxic nuclear waste dump, where 56 million gallons of buried radioactive sludge are leaking into the earth |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/hanford-nuclear-site-photos-toxic-waste-2019-9 |work=Business Insider |date=September 23, 2019}}</ref> 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==
{{Main|Vulnerability of nuclear plants to attack}}
In 1972, three hijackers [[Southern Airways Flight 49|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.<ref>[http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/thisweek/2003_6_13_terr.html Threat Assessment: U.S. Nuclear Plants Near Airports May Be at Risk of Airplane Attack] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101110110238/http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/thisweek/2003_6_13_terr.html |date=10 November 2010 }}, ''Global Security Newswire'', 11 June 2003.</ref><ref>Newtan, Samuel Upton (2007). ''Nuclear War 1 and Other Major Nuclear Disasters of the 20th Century'', AuthorHouse, p. 146.</ref>
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".<ref name=bas12>{{cite web |url=http://thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/kennette-benedict/civil-disobedience |title=Civil disobedience |author=Kennette Benedict |date=9 August 2012 |work=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists }}</ref> [[Nuclear weapon]]s materials on the [[black market]] are a global concern,<ref name=wash>Jay Davis. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/24/AR2008032402291_pf.html After A Nuclear 9/11] ''The Washington Post'', 25 March 2008.</ref><ref>Brian Michael Jenkins. [https://www.rand.org/commentary/2008/09/11/CNN.html A Nuclear 9/11?] ''CNN.com'', 11 September 2008.</ref> and there is concern about the possible detonation of a small, crude nuclear weapon by a [[terrorist group|militant group]] in a major city, with significant loss of life and property.<ref name=kittrie>[[Orde Kittrie]]. [http://students.law.umich.edu/mjil/article-pdfs/v28n2-kittrie.pdf Averting Catastrophe: Why the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty is Losing its Deterrence Capacity and How to Restore It] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100607150719/http://students.law.umich.edu/mjil/article-pdfs/v28n2-kittrie.pdf |date=7 June 2010 }} 22 May 2007, p. 338.</ref><ref name=nyt>Nicholas D. Kristof. [https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE0D7143EF933A25750C0A9629C8B63 A Nuclear 9/11] ''The New York Times'', 10 March 2004.</ref>
[[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.<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/03/stuxnet-act-of-force/|title=Legal Experts: Stuxnet Attack on Iran Was Illegal 'Act of Force'|magazine=Wired | date=25 March 2013}}</ref>
==Development agencies==
[[File:US Atomic Energy Commission logo.jpg|thumb|right|The [[United States Atomic Energy Commission]] (1946–1974) managed the U.S. nuclear program after the [[Manhattan Project]].]]
The initial U.S. nuclear program was run by the [[National Institute of Standards and Technology|National Bureau of Standards]] starting in 1939 under the edict of [[President of the United States|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 [[S-1 Uranium Committee|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 [[United States Army Corps of Engineers|U.S. Army Corps of Engineers]] took over the project to develop atomic weapons, while the OSRD retained responsibility for scientific research.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.amphilsoc.org/library/mole/s/smythoverview.htm |title=Henry DeWolf Smyth Papers Collection Overview 1885–1987 |website=[[American Philosophical Society]] |access-date=21 June 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080511094050/http://www.amphilsoc.org/library/mole/s/smythoverview.htm |archive-date=11 May 2008}}</ref>
This was the beginning of the [[Manhattan Project]], run as the Manhattan Engineering District (MED), an agency under military control that was in charge of developing the first 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 [[United States Atomic Energy Commission|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 [[United States Congressional Joint Committee on Atomic Energy|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.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ch.doe.gov/html/site_info/atomic_energy.htm |title=The Atomic Energy Commissions (AEC), 1947 |website=[[Office of Science]] – Chicago Office |publisher=[[United States Department of Energy]] |access-date=21 June 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090514232044/http://www.ch.doe.gov/html/site_info/atomic_energy.htm |archive-date=14 May 2009 }}</ref>
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.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ch.doe.gov/html/site_info/energy_research.htm |title=The Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) |website=[[Office of Science]] – Chicago Office |publisher=[[United States Department of Energy]] |access-date=21 June 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090514232021/http://www.ch.doe.gov/html/site_info/energy_research.htm |archive-date=14 May 2009 }}</ref>
ERDA was short-lived, however, and in 1977 the U.S. nuclear weapons activities were reorganized under the [[United States Department of Energy|Department of Energy]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ch.doe.gov/html/site_info/department_energy.htm |title=The Department of Energy (DOE) |website=[[Office of Science]] – Chicago Office |publisher=[[United States Department of Energy]] |access-date=21 June 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090514232035/http://www.ch.doe.gov/html/site_info/department_energy.htm |archive-date=14 May 2009 }}</ref> which maintains such responsibilities through the semi-autonomous [[National Nuclear Security Administration]]. Some functions were taken over or shared by the [[United States Department of Homeland Security|Department of Homeland Security]] in 2002. The already-built weapons themselves are in the control of the [[United States Strategic Command|Strategic Command]], which is part of the [[United States Department of Defense|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 National Laboratory|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 Prefecture|Okinawa]] (which was [[United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands|US-controlled until 1971]]), Japan (during the occupation immediately following World War II), [[Greenland]], Germany, [[Taiwan]], and [[French Morocco]] then [[Morocco|independent Morocco]].<ref>{{cite press release |publisher=[[Natural Resources Defense Council]] |website=National Security Archive |date=20 October 1999 |title=United States Secretly Deployed Nuclear Bombs in 27 Countries and Territories During Cold War |url=http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/19991020/index.html |access-date=6 August 2006}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable" style="background:white;"
|- style="background:#efefef;"
! Site name
! Location
Line 133 ⟶ 174:
||[[Los Alamos National Laboratory]]
||[[Los Alamos, New Mexico]]
||Research and design, pit production, stockpile stewardship
|{{active|Active}}
|-
||[[Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory]]
||[[Livermore, California]]
||Research and design, stockpile stewardship
|{{active|Active}}
|-
||[[Sandia National Laboratories]]
||
||Research and design, stockpile stewardship, validation
|{{active|Active}}
|-
||[[Hanford Site]]
||[[Richland, Washington]]
||
|{{site inactive|Not active, in [[environmental remediation|remediation]]}}
|-
|[[Savannah River Site]]
|Near [[Aiken, South Carolina]]
|Nuclear material production (plutonium, tritium)
|{{active|Active (limited operation), in remediation}}
|-
|[[Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant|Paducah Plant]]
|[[Paducah, Kentucky]]
|Nuclear material production (uranium-235)
|{{partial|Active (commercial use)}}
|-
||[[Oak Ridge National Laboratory]]
||[[Oak Ridge, Tennessee]]
||
|{{partial|Active to some extent}}
|-
||[[
||Oak Ridge, Tennessee
||Component fabrication, [[stockpile stewardship]], [[uranium]] storage
|{{active|Active}}
|-
|Near [[Denver, Colorado]]
|Components fabrication
|{{site inactive|Not active, in remediation}}
|-
|Component production
|
|-
|[[Fernald Feed Materials Production Center|Fernald Site]]
|Near [[Cincinnati, Ohio]]
|Feed material fabrication (uranium-238)
|{{site inactive|Not active, in remediation}}
|-
||[[Mound Laboratories|Mound Plant]]
||[[Miamisburg, Ohio]]
||Research, component production, [[tritium]] purification
|{{site inactive|Not active, in remediation}}
|-
|
|Manufacture of electrical components
|{{partial|Active, but not for weapons production}}
|-
||[[Pantex]]
||[[Amarillo, Texas]]
||Weapons assembly, disassembly, pit storage
|{{active|Active,
|-
||[[
||Near [[
||[[Nuclear testing]], [[nuclear waste]] disposal
|{{active|Active; two sites for [[Stockpile stewardship|SBSS]], waste disposal}}
|-
||[[
||
||Nuclear testing
|{{site inactive|Not active,
|-
||[[
||East of [[
||Nuclear waste disposal
|{{active|Active}}
|-
| colspan="4" style="text-align:center;"|[[File:US nuclear sites map.svg|550px|Map of major nuclear sites in the [[Continental United States|contiguous U.S.]] Grayed-out sites are not currently active.]]
|}
==Proliferation==
{{Main|Nuclear proliferation}}
[[File:Fallout shelter.jpg|thumb|A sign pointing to an old fallout shelter in [[New York City]].]]
[[File:Atoms for Peace stamp.jpg|right|thumb|The [[Atoms for Peace]] program distributed nuclear technology, materials, and know-how to many less technologically advanced countries.]]
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 [[Nuclear proliferation|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 Union]]), or submit control of its weapons to some sort of 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).
Since this path was chosen, the United States was, in its early days, essentially an advocate for the prevention of [[nuclear proliferation]], though primarily for the reason
The [[Nunn–Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction|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.<ref>{{cite book|author1=Larsen, Jeffrey Arthur|author2=Smith, Dr. James M.|title=Historical Dictionary of Arms Control and Disarmament|date=2005|publisher=Scarecrow Press|isbn=9780810850606|page=[https://archive.org/details/historicaldictio0000lars/page/65 65]|url=https://archive.org/details/historicaldictio0000lars|url-access=registration}}</ref>
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 [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|operations in Afghanistan]].<ref>{{Cite web|date=30 October 2001|title=U.S. lifts final sanctions on Pakistan|url=https://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/10/29/gen.us.pak.sanctions/index.html|access-date=2021-08-17|website=CNN.com}}</ref>
The U.S. government has been vocal against the proliferation of such weapons in the countries of [[Iran]] and [[North Korea]]. The [[2003 invasion of Iraq|2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq]] was carried out under the pretext of disarming Iraq from possessing [[Iraq and weapons of mass destruction|weapons of mass destruction]]; however, no such weapons were discovered.<ref name=cia>{{cite web |url=https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_2004/Comp_Report_Key_Findings.pdf |title= Iraq Survey Group Final Report: Regime Strategic Intent – Key Findings|access-date= 2017-04-07|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170324220357/https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_2004/Comp_Report_Key_Findings.pdf|archive-date= 2017-03-24|url-status= dead}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/22/iraq-war-wmds-an-intelligence-failure-or-white-house-spin/|title=The Iraq War and WMDs: An intelligence failure or White House spin?|date=2019|newspaper=The Washington Post}}</ref>
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 [[September 2018 inter-Korean summit|joint declaration]] consisting of conditions on nuclear non-proliferation was signed. The [[DPRK]] agreed to dismantle its [[Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center|nuclear complex]] in the presence of international experts if the U.S. takes correlative action.<ref name="abc.net.au">{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-19/north-korea-agrees-to-dismanlte-nuclear-test-site/10282040|title=South Korea says North agrees to dismantle nuclear site — if US takes reciprocal action|date=19 September 2018|website=abc.net.au}}</ref>
==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."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc140.pdf |title=Information Circulars |work=iaea.org |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070807060917/http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc140.pdf |archive-date=7 August 2007 }}</ref> The [[International Court of Justice]] (ICJ), the preeminent judicial tribunal of international law, in its [[International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons|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:
<blockquote>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.<ref name="ICJ">{{cite web|url=http://www.lcnp.org/wcourt/opinion.htm |title=Legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons |date=8 July 1996 |author=The [[International Court of Justice|ICJ]] |access-date=6 July 2011}}</ref> </blockquote>
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.{{citation needed|date=November 2023}}{{dubious|could not find any such IAEA proposal|date=November 2023}} 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.<ref name=UNTextAndVote>{{Cite web|url=https://www.un.org/disarmament/ptnw/index.html|title=United Nations Conference to Negotiate a Legally Binding Instrument to Prohibit Nuclear Weapons, Leading Towards their Total Elimination, 27 April to 22 May 2015 |website=www.un.org|language=EN|access-date=7 July 2017}}</ref>
==International relations and nuclear weapons==
[[File:Reagan and Gorbachev signing.jpg|thumb|right|Soviet General Secretary [[Mikhail Gorbachev|Gorbachev]] and U.S. President [[Ronald Reagan|Reagan]] signing the [[Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty|INF Treaty]] in 1987]]
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 (United States)|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.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb249/index.htm | title=Air Force Histories Released through Archive Lawsuit Show Cautious Presidents Overruling Air Force Plans for Early Use of Nuclear Weapons |___location=Washington, D.C.|date=30 April 2008 |access-date=15 March 2016 | publisher=[[National Security Archive]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|date=30 April 2008 |url=http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jujIhYgbkZqmcHmmcXzVQiivkwVA |title=US Air Force planned nuclear strike on China over Taiwan: report |work=[[Agence France-Presse]] |access-date=21 June 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080621075459/http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jujIhYgbkZqmcHmmcXzVQiivkwVA |archive-date=21 June 2008 }}</ref>
==Occupational illness==
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.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.dol.gov/agencies/owcp/energy |title=Division of Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation (DEEOIC) |website=[[United States Department of Labor]]}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.dol.gov/owcp/energy/regs/compliance/weeklystats.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100108182500/http://www.dol.gov/owcp/energy/regs/compliance/weeklystats.htm |url-status=dead |archive-date=8 January 2010 |title=Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP) EEOICP Program Statistics |website=[[United States Department of Labor]]}} – Updated weekly</ref>
==Current status==<!-- This section is linked from [[Minuteman (missile)]] -->
{{further|Nuclear triad#United States}}
[[File:US nuclear warheads 1945-2002 graph.png|right|thumb|U.S. nuclear warhead stockpile, 1945–2002.]]
[[File:US and USSR nuclear stockpiles.svg|right|thumb|A graph showing the amount of nuclear weapons stockpiled by either country during the nuclear race.]]
[[File:Active LGM-30 Minuteman Sites.png|thumb|U.S. ground-based nuclear weapons (all [[LGM-30 Minuteman]] missiles) are deployed in three areas, spanning five states. These locations were chosen to be far away from the coasts, to maximize warning of an incoming attack from submarines; far away from populated areas, since the silos would likely be targeted in a nuclear war; and relatively close to the [[Soviet Union]] via the polar route.<ref>[https://www.fastcompany.com/90732588/5-states-nuclear-sponge-missile-silos These 5 states were designed to act as America’s ‘nuclear sponge’]</ref><ref>[https://www.nps.gov/articles/minuteman-missiles-on-the-great-plains.htm Minuteman Missiles on the Great Plains]</ref><ref>[https://www.nps.gov/articles/mimiarmsrace-09.htm Minuteman Missile Deployment and Site Selection]</ref>]]
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) and one of the [[List of nuclear triads|four countries wielding a nuclear triad]]. As of 2017, the US has an estimated 4,018 nuclear weapons in either deployment or storage.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/|title=Status of World Nuclear Forces}}</ref> 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 aging nuclear arsenal can be refurbished or dismantled.<ref name="An Aging Army"/>
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 [[Barack Obama speech in Prague, 2009|2009 speech]], U.S. President [[Barack Obama]] outlined a goal of "a world without nuclear weapons".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/obama-sets-goal-of-world-without-nuclear-weapons-1661727.html |agency=Associated Press |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090405104959/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/obama-sets-goal-of-world-without-nuclear-weapons-1661727.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=5 April 2009 |title=Obama sets goal of world without nuclear weapons |work=The Independent |date=3 April 2009|access-date=21 June 2009 |___location=London}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106292556|title=U.S., Russia Agree To Pursue Nuclear Reduction|website=NPR.org|date=6 July 2009 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Obama, Medvedev sign treaty to reduce nuclear weapons |author=Michael D. Shear |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/08/AR2010040801677.html |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=8 April 2010 |access-date=9 April 2010}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite news |title=Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms |author=David E. Sanger |author2=Peter Baker |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/06arms.html |newspaper=New York Times |date=5 April 2010 |access-date=8 April 2010}}</ref> However, within the same Nuclear Posture Review of April 2010, there was a stated need to develop new “low yield” nuclear weapons. This resulted in the development of the B61 Mod 12.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Broad |first=William J. |date=2022-03-21 |title=The Smaller Bombs That Could Turn Ukraine Into a Nuclear War Zone |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/21/science/russia-nuclear-ukraine.html |access-date=2022-12-21 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> 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 than any previous post-Cold War presidency.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Obama Administration Announces Unilateral Nuclear Weapon Cuts |url=https://fas.org/blogs/security/2017/01/obama-cuts/ |access-date=2022-12-21 |website=Federation Of American Scientists |language=en-US}}</ref>
Following a renewal of tension after the [[Russo-Ukrainian War]] started in 2014, the Obama administration announced plans to continue to [[renovation of the nuclear weapon arsenal of the United States|renovate the US nuclear weapons facilities and platforms]] with a budgeted spend of about a trillion dollars over 30 years.<ref name=NYT>{{citation |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/22/us/us-ramping-up-major-renewal-in-nuclear-arms.html?_r=0 |title=U.S. Ramping Up Major Renewal in Nuclear Arms |author1=William Broad |author2=David Sanger |date= 21 September 2014 |newspaper=New York Times}}</ref> Under these new plans, the US government would fund research and development of new nuclear cruise missiles.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Thompson |first=Loren |title=Obama Backs Biggest Nuclear Arms Buildup Since Cold War |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2015/12/15/obama-backs-biggest-nuclear-arms-buildup-since-cold-war/ |access-date=2022-12-21 |website=Forbes |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Mehta |first=Aaron |date=2016-07-21 |title=Senators Urge Obama To Cancel Nuclear Cruise Missile |url=https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2016/07/21/senators-urge-obama-to-cancel-nuclear-cruise-missile/ |access-date=2022-12-21 |website=Defense News |language=en}}</ref> The [[First presidency of Donald Trump|Trump]] and [[Biden administration]]s continued with these plans.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/USNuclearModernization|title=U.S. Nuclear Modernization Programs|publisher=Arms Control Association|year=2022|access-date=28 March 2022}}</ref>
As of 2021, American nuclear forces on land consist of 400 [[Minuteman III]] [[ICBMs]] spread among 450 [[Missile launch facility|operational launchers]], staffed by [[Air Force Global Strike Command]]. [[Ballistic missile submarine|Those in the seas]] consist of 14 nuclear-capable [[Ohio-class submarine|''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 [[Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit|B-2 bombers]] and 40 [[Boeing B-52 Stratofortress|B-52s]].<ref name=CRS1>{{cite report |author=Woolf |first=Amy F. |date=July 13, 2021 |title=U.S. Strategic Nuclear Forces: Background, Developments, and Issues |url=https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL33640.pdf |publisher=[[Congressional Research Service]] |access-date=July 23, 2021}}</ref>
The [[United States Air Force|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.<ref>{{cite news |author=<!--Staff writer(s)/no by-line.--> |title=Department of the Air Force awards contract for new ICBM system that enhances, strengthens US triad |url=https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2340139/department-of-the-air-force-awards-contract-for-new-icbm-system-that-enhances-s/ |work=Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs |agency=[[United States Air Force]] |date=September 8, 2020 |access-date=July 23, 2021}}</ref> The [[United States Navy|Navy]] has undertaken efforts to extend the operational lives of its missiles in warheads past 2020; it is also producing new [[Columbia-class submarine|''Columbia''-class submarines]] to replace the ''Ohio'' fleet beginning 2031.<ref>{{cite news |last=Larter |first=David B. |date=November 5, 2020 |title=US Navy inks $9.4B contract for two Columbia-class nuclear missile submarines |url=https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/11/05/navy-inks-contract-for-two-columbia-class-nuclear-missile-submarines/ |work=[[Defense News]] |access-date=July 23, 2021}}</ref> The Air Force is also retiring the [[AGM-86 ALCM|nuclear cruise missiles of its B-52s]], leaving only half nuclear-capable. It intends to procure a new [[Strategic bomber|long-range bomber]], the [[Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider|B-21]], and [[Long Range Stand Off Weapon|a new long-range standoff (LRSO) cruise missile]] in the 2020s.<ref name=CRS1/><ref>{{cite news |last=Insinna |first=Valerie |date=July 6, 2021 |title=Raytheon wins $2B contract for new nuclear cruise missile |url=https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/07/06/raytheon-wins-2b-for-new-nuclear-cruise-missile/ |work=[[Defense News]] |access-date=July 23, 2021}}</ref>
==Nuclear disarmament movement==
[[File:Orepa-2011-y12-rally-tn3.jpg|right|thumb|April 2011 OREPA rally at the [[Y-12 National Security Complex|Y-12 nuclear weapons plant]] entrance]]
{{See also|Nuclear disarmament|Anti-nuclear movement in the United States}}
In the early 1980s, the revival of the [[nuclear arms race]] triggered large [[Demonstration (people)|protests]] about [[nuclear weapons]].<ref name=thebulletin>Lawrence S. Wittner. {{cite web|url=http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/op-eds/disarmament-movement-lessons-yesteryear|title=Disarmament movement lessons from yesteryear|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160117043945/http://thebulletin.org/disarmament-movement-lessons-yesteryear|archive-date=17 January 2016|date=27 July 2009}} ''Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists'', 27 July 2009.</ref> On 12 June 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 [[Demonstration (people)|protest]] and the largest political demonstration in American history.<ref name="The Spirit of 12 June">Jonathan Schell. [http://www.thenation.com/article/spirit-june-12 The Spirit of June 12] ''The Nation'', 2 July 2007.</ref><ref name="icanw.org">{{Cite web|url=http://www.icanw.org/1982|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080516080117/http://www.icanw.org/1982|url-status=dead|title=1982 – a million people march in New York City|archivedate=16 May 2008}}</ref> International Day of Nuclear Disarmament protests were held on 20 June 1983 at 50 sites across the United States.<ref name="8YSmiFins9sC">{{cite book|author=Harvey Klehr|title=Far Left of Center: The American Radical Left Today|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8YSmiFins9sC&pg=PA150|year=1988|publisher=Transaction Publishers|isbn=978-1-4128-2343-2|page=150}}</ref><ref name="nl.newsbank.com">[http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=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 1,400 Anti-nuclear protesters arrested] ''Miami Herald'', 21 June 1983.</ref> There were many [[Nevada Desert Experience]] protests and peace camps at the [[Nevada Test Site]] during the 1980s and 1990s.<ref name="query.nytimes.com">Robert Lindsey. [https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE5DE113EF935A35751C0A961948260 438 Protesters are Arrested at Nevada Nuclear Test Site] ''New York Times'', 6 February 1987.</ref><ref name="New York Times 1992">[https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE0D7153AF933A15757C0A964958260 493 Arrested at Nevada Nuclear Test Site] ''New York Times'', 20 April 1992.</ref>
There have also been protests by anti-nuclear groups at the [[Y-12 National Security Complex#Current status|Y-12 Nuclear Weapons Plant]],<ref name=y-12>[http://www.stopthebombs.org/news/join-us-at-the-april-2010-action-event-to-stop-the-bombs Stop the Bombs! April 2010 Action Event at Y-12 Nuclear Weapons Complex],</ref> the [[Idaho National Laboratory]],<ref name=yellow>Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free (2003). [http://www.yellowstonenuclearfree.com/about_us/ Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091122092038/http://www.yellowstonenuclearfree.com/about_us/ |date=22 November 2009 }}</ref> Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository proposal,<ref name=yucca>Sierra Club. (undated). [http://www.sierraclub.org/nuclearwaste/yucca_factsheet.asp Deadly Nuclear Waste Transport]</ref> the [[Hanford Site]], the [[Nevada Test Site]],<ref name=nev>[https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE7DD153DF933A2575BC0A96F948260 22 Arrested in Nuclear Protest] ''New York Times'', 10 August 1989.</ref> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,<ref name=law>[http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/Livermore-Lab-Protest11aug03.htm Hundreds Protest at Livermore Lab] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130117040235/http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/Livermore-Lab-Protest11aug03.htm |date=17 January 2013 }} ''The TriValley Herald'', 11 August 2003.</ref> and transportation of nuclear waste from the Los Alamos National Laboratory.<ref name=LANL>Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety (undated). [http://www.nuclearactive.org/CCNS/ccnsindex.html About CCNS]</ref>
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]].<ref name="indymedia2005">Lance Murdoch. [http://indymedia.us/en/2005/05/6861.shtml Pictures: New York MayDay anti-nuke/war march] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110728132228/http://indymedia.us/en/2005/05/6861.shtml |date=28 July 2011 }}, [[IndyMedia]], 2 May 2005.</ref><ref name="foxnews2005">[https://www.foxnews.com/story/anti-nuke-protests-in-new-york "Anti-Nuke Protests in New York"], Fox News, 2 May 2005.</ref> This was the largest anti-nuclear rally in the U.S. for several decades.<ref name=thebulletin/> 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.<ref name=jpnews>[http://www.ananuclear.org/Issues/GlobalNuclearEnergyPartnership/Library/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/314/Default.aspx A-bomb survivors join 25,000-strong anti-nuclear march through New York] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130512133429/http://www.ananuclear.org/Issues/GlobalNuclearEnergyPartnership/Library/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/314/Default.aspx |date=12 May 2013 }} ''Mainichi Daily News'', 4 May 2010.</ref>
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 J. Perry|William Perry]], [[Henry Kissinger]], and [[George Shultz]]—have called upon governments to embrace the vision of a world free of nuclear weapons, and in various op-ed columns have proposed an 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 (campaign)|Global Zero]], an international non-partisan group of 300 world leaders dedicated to achieving nuclear disarmament, have also been established.
== United States nuclear weapons arsenal ==
<!-- Please do not change this section heading—it is linked to from other articles. -->
'''New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms, 14 June 2023'''<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.state.gov/new-start-treaty-aggregate-numbers-of-strategic-offensive-arms/|title=New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms|website=United States Department of State|language=en-US|access-date=5 August 2019}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
! Data category
! United States of America
|-
| Deployed:<br/>ICBMs, SLBMs, and heavy bombers
| 665
|-
| Nuclear warheads on deployed:<br/>ICBMs, SLBMs, and those counted for heavy bombers
| 1,389
|-
| Deployed and non-deployed:<br/>Launchers of: ICBMs, SLBMs<br/>Heavy bombers
| 800
|-
! Total || 2,854
|}
Notes:
* Each heavy bomber is counted as one warhead (The [[New START]] Treaty)<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://2009-2017.state.gov/t/avc/newstart/index.htm|title=New START|website=2009-2017.state.gov}}</ref>
* The nuclear weapon delivery ability has been removed from [[Rockwell B-1 Lancer|B-1]] [[heavy bomber]]s.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Pawlyk |first1=Oriana |title=START Lanced the B-1's Nukes, But the Bomber Will Still Get New Bombs |url=http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/07/12/start-lanced-the-b-1s-nukes-but-bomber-will-still-get-new-bombs.html |website=Military.com |publisher=Military Advantage |access-date=25 September 2017|quote=[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}}</ref>
'''Nuclear Notebook from the [[Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists]], 3 May 2024'''<ref>{{cite web |last1=Kristensen |first1=Hans M. |last2=Korda |first2=Matt |last3=Johns |first3=Eliana |last4=Knight |first4=Mackenzie |title=United States nuclear weapons, 2024 |url=https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2024.2339170 |website=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists |pages=182–208 |doi=10.1080/00963402.2024.2339170 |date=3 May 2024}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
! Category
! Quantity
|-
| Deployed
| 1,770
|-
| Reserve
| 1,938
|-
| '''Subtotal'''
| '''3,708 (stockpile)'''
|-
| Retired
| 1,336
|-
! Grand total || 5,044 (inventory)
|}
Notes: While the New START counting rules attribute a warhead to each deployed bomber, American bombers normally do not carry nuclear weapons. Their number therefore is not added to the warhead count. The Nuclear Notebook also counts as deployed all weapons that can be quickly loaded onto an aircraft, as well as nonstrategic nuclear weapons at European air bases.
==See also==
* [[Anti-nuclear movement in the United States]]
* [[Global Security Institute]]
* ''[[Hibakusha]]''
* [[
* [[International Day against Nuclear Tests]]
* [[International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons]]
* [[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]]
* '''''<small>{{portal-inline|Nuclear technology}}</small>'''''
==Notes==
{{Reflist|group=Note}}
==References==
{{reflist|30em}}
== Notes 2 ==
{{notelist}}
'''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. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160313163740/http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/archive/nucweapons/50 50 Facts About U.S. Nuclear Weapons | Brookings Institution] {{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. [https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL33640.pdf U.S. ''Strategic Nuclear Forces: Background, Developments, and Issues.''] 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 ==
* [http://www.jfklibrary.org/Events-and-Awards/Forums.aspx?f=2009 "Presidency in the Nuclear Age"], conference and forum at the [[John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum|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==
[[File:Nuclear symbol.svg|right|55px]]
{{wikinews|US to reduce nuclear weapons arsenal}}
* Video archive of [http://sonicbomb.com US Nuclear Testing] at [http://www.sonicbomb.com sonicbomb.com]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20111115025921/http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/USA/index.html Nuclear Threat Initiative: United States]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20160303234733/http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/nudb/dafig9.asp NDRC's data on the US Nuclear Stockpile, 1945–2002]
* [http://www.lasg.org/sites/siteoverview.htm Snapshot of the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Complex, April 2004] by the [[Los Alamos Study Group]]
* [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6414197.stm New nuclear warhead design for US]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20160805025731/http://alsos.wlu.edu/qsearch.aspx?browse=warfare%2FU.S.%20Nuclear%20Weapons%20Programs Annotated bibliography of U. S. nuclear weapons programs from the Alsos Digital Library for Nuclear Issues]
* [https://www.labrats.international/usavideos US Test footage and veteran testimony]
{{Manhattan Project}}
{{United States nuclear devices}}
{{US military navbox}}
{{U.S. anti-nuclear}}
[[Category:Nuclear weapons of the United States|
[[Category:Nuclear weapons
[[Category:Cold War history of the United States]]
[[Category:United States Atomic Energy Commission]]
[[Category:United States Department of Energy]]
| |||