MAHAN ready for a “nuclear free” debate?
January 2nd, 2009 From
>Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 08:45:55 -0700
>From: Mike Potter
>Reply-To: mike.potter@artecon.com
>Organization: Artecon, Inc.
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I)
>To: mahan@microworks.net
>Subject: Re: MAHAN ready for a “nuclear free” debate?
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>Tom, re:
> > >US Navy surface ships no longer (since 1989) carry nuclear weapons and I
> > >think the USN no longer has nuclear bombs/depth charges even in
> > >war-reserve storage.
> >
> > What? Are you telling us that no carriers had tactical nuclear weapons
> > aboard during the Gulf War? Boy, wait til’ Saddam hears about this! He’s
> > gonna be p.o.’d no end.
>
>Well, I do not confirm or deny . . . Pres Bush announced retirement of
>ship- launched tactical nuclear weapons in 1989. Nuclear ASRoc, nuclear
>Terrier, and SubRoc all were scrapped. Nuclear Tomahawks were stored
>ashore but in 1994 the surface ship armored box launchers (ABLs) for
>this weapon were decommissioned. ABLs remain in place but under the QDR
>the ABL ships will be decommissioned during 1998-2003. Nuclear Tomahawk
>is not VLS-compatible.
>
>I don’t know the status of CV nuclear bombs/depth charges in 1990 and it
>might not be permissible to disclose it anyway. Norman Friedman’s new
>=World Naval Weapons Systems 1997-1998= reports that the Navy no longer
>has nuclear bombs/depth charges for aircraft carriers today. As said in
>my previous post, for practical purposes this situation benefits the
>Navy.