Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(153,156 posts)
Wed May 14, 2025, 10:49 AM May 14

U.S. to spend $1 trillion on nuclear weapons over next decade

Source: Axios

5 hours ago


It's going to cost nearly $1 trillion to operate, maintain and upgrade America's nuclear arsenal over the next decade — more per year ($95 billion) than what's spent on many federal agencies.

Why it matters: That eye-popping estimate from the Congressional Budget Office is catnip for critics, who argue Washington is spending blindly or that portions of the triad are vestigial.

Driving the news: The combined 2025-34 nuke plans of the Defense and Energy departments amount to $946 billion.

  • In what have been a few wild days for the nuke-watching world — including India-Pakistan clashes and the U.S. Air Force saying it needs new silos for its already delayed and over-budget Sentinel missiles — the dollar figures jump out.


  • What they're saying: "The huge expenses tallied in this report were not anticipated at the outset of the nuclear modernization program," said Greg Mello, the director of Los Alamos Study Group, which monitors National Nuclear Security Administration sites and activities.

  • "There will be no return to the 'heroic mode of production' for nuclear weapons," he added.
  • "Even if Congress dumped $100 or $200 billion more on nuclear weapons, the system that produces them would not 'jump to the task' for years, if at all."


  • Read more: https://www.axios.com/2025/05/14/nuke-spending-cbo-report-criticism



    Cut a trillion for services that help keep people alive and healthy in order to pay for things that kill people.
    24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
    Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
    U.S. to spend $1 trillion on nuclear weapons over next decade (Original Post) BumRushDaShow May 14 OP
    Who gets rich on an arms build up? Irish_Dem May 14 #1
    correct me if wrong but the USA is the largest producer of weapons! NOT good IMHO. ;; riversedge May 14 #3
    George Carlin said it best: Initech May 14 #7
    A national treasure gone far too soon. MarineCombatEngineer May 14 #12
    Yes the US military industrial complex. Irish_Dem May 14 #17
    People/Corporations who give loads of "free speech" to all two parties. (n/t) DJ Synikus Makisimus May 14 #18
    No thank you. I prefer my Medicare and Social Security. no_hypocrisy May 14 #2
    I'm surprised it's only $100 Billion a year, unfortunately. Silent Type May 14 #4
    Considering how old much of our nuclear weapons and delivery systems are, I'm surprised its not higher DetroitLegalBeagle May 14 #5
    We got no money to keep the government open, but plenty to blow shit up! Initech May 14 #6
    Two questions: where will this money come from... ananda May 14 #8
    Looks like the national lab in Los Alamos womanofthehills May 15 #21
    How come nobody mentioned that Eloon is in nuclear weapons business? Wonder Why May 14 #9
    How exactly? EX500rider May 14 #15
    Some people just positively, absolutely need this: Wonder Why May 15 #19
    Don't really read sig lines....and: EX500rider May 15 #22
    Probably not the warheads themselves but highly likely involved in the delivery systems. harun May 16 #23
    I doubt they care about the landing ability of the Starship as icbms are on a one-way trip EX500rider May 16 #24
    and they don't make me feel, well, safer. twodogsbarking May 14 #10
    I went to grade school in the old "duck and cover" days but in Junior High School elocs May 14 #11
    Well... as long as we're spending it on something really, REALLY useful for once... Montauk6 May 14 #13
    Primarily maintenance - minimal upgrades. NoMoreRepugs May 14 #14
    We already have enough to end humanity 300 times over or some shit. What, are extraterrestrials invading? Karasu May 14 #16
    The older the ICBM's get, the less reliable they get, and maintenance gets harder & more expensive with obsolete parts EX500rider May 15 #20

    riversedge

    (75,692 posts)
    3. correct me if wrong but the USA is the largest producer of weapons! NOT good IMHO. ;;
    Wed May 14, 2025, 10:58 AM
    May 14

    but only the well off--in the USA will get most of any money IF and when we sell them

    NOTHING good about any of that.

    Initech

    (104,940 posts)
    7. George Carlin said it best:
    Wed May 14, 2025, 12:02 PM
    May 14

    "America is the only country in the entire world that mentions rockets and bombs in its' national anthem."

    DetroitLegalBeagle

    (2,360 posts)
    5. Considering how old much of our nuclear weapons and delivery systems are, I'm surprised its not higher
    Wed May 14, 2025, 11:49 AM
    May 14

    Much of our stuff was designed back in the 60s and 70s. I don't think we've built a brand new warhead since the 80s or early 90s. Everything we have has been rebuilt from old parts and reused cores.

    I'm also kinda surprised we are still sticking with land based icbms. I know they are the fastest reacting leg of the triad, but they are also going to be the first to get wiped out.

    EX500rider

    (11,839 posts)
    15. How exactly?
    Wed May 14, 2025, 02:47 PM
    May 14
    The development and maintenance of nuclear weapons is a complex process involving various entities, primarily governmental organizations and private companies under contract, within the Nuclear Security Enterprise (NSE).

    Here's a breakdown of who is involved:

    1. Governmental Oversight & Direction:
    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE): The DOE, through the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), is the primary agency responsible for the nuclear weapons program.
    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA): This semi-autonomous agency within the DOE is specifically tasked with maintaining and modernizing the U.S. nuclear stockpile.
    Department of Defense (DoD): The DoD is responsible for the delivery systems (missiles, bombers, submarines) and integrating the nuclear warheads with these systems.

    2. Research & Design Laboratories:
    Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL): LANL is a design laboratory involved in the research, design, and development of nuclear weapons.
    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL): LLNL is another design laboratory focused on the safety and reliability of the nuclear explosive package.
    Sandia National Laboratories (SNL): SNL focuses on the non-nuclear components of nuclear weapons and overall systems engineering.

    3. Production Facilities:
    Pantex Plant: This plant is responsible for the assembly, disassembly, and maintenance of nuclear weapons.
    Y-12 National Security Complex: Y-12 produces enriched uranium components and is a key facility in the nuclear weapons complex.
    Kansas City National Security Campus: This facility manufactures non-nuclear components for nuclear weapons.
    Savannah River Site: This site plays a role in tritium production, a key component in nuclear weapons.

    4. Private Companies:
    Management & Operating (M&O) Contractors: Private companies are contracted to manage and operate the various national laboratories and production facilities.
    Defense Contractors: Companies like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing are involved in building and maintaining delivery systems and some weapon components.

    In Summary:
    While the U.S. government, through the DOE/NNSA, has overall control and responsibility for nuclear weapons, the actual work is carried out by a network of national laboratories, production facilities, and private companies under contract, forming the Nuclear Security Enterprise.

    Wonder Why

    (5,773 posts)
    19. Some people just positively, absolutely need this:
    Thu May 15, 2025, 03:30 PM
    May 15


    Even with this as my signature line:
    If you think my comments sound crazy, likely they are sarcasm but sometimes they may just be crazy.



    EX500rider

    (11,839 posts)
    22. Don't really read sig lines....and:
    Thu May 15, 2025, 07:24 PM
    May 15

    ....and I've seen people here who were serious that we might blow up the moon and another who thought North Korea must be a workers paradise because "They look so happy in the pictures!" (started reading DU daily in 2005, didn't sign up till years later)

    So yes, you might need the sarcasm emoji.

    harun

    (11,374 posts)
    23. Probably not the warheads themselves but highly likely involved in the delivery systems.
    Fri May 16, 2025, 09:07 AM
    May 16

    Look at the size of Starship and how it comes back in to the atmosphere and gets caught by their tower "chopsticks".

    First thought that came to mind was that certain parts of the "Defense" establishment would be salivating at the precision and amount of payload that facilitates. Also that they can be produced cheaply and quickly.

    EX500rider

    (11,839 posts)
    24. I doubt they care about the landing ability of the Starship as icbms are on a one-way trip
    Fri May 16, 2025, 11:06 AM
    May 16

    elocs

    (24,374 posts)
    11. I went to grade school in the old "duck and cover" days but in Junior High School
    Wed May 14, 2025, 02:00 PM
    May 14

    I remember asking my science teacher what they would do if the bomb were dropped when we were in school. He gave me perhaps the most honest answer I ever got from a teacher:
    "We' probably send you home and let you die there."

    Montauk6

    (9,113 posts)
    13. Well... as long as we're spending it on something really, REALLY useful for once...
    Wed May 14, 2025, 02:26 PM
    May 14

    Hey, people come and go; nothing says "committed" like an ICBM, and we're practically a month away from Father's Day.

    Karasu

    (1,219 posts)
    16. We already have enough to end humanity 300 times over or some shit. What, are extraterrestrials invading?
    Wed May 14, 2025, 05:12 PM
    May 14

    EX500rider

    (11,839 posts)
    20. The older the ICBM's get, the less reliable they get, and maintenance gets harder & more expensive with obsolete parts
    Thu May 15, 2025, 03:59 PM
    May 15

    They will also lack features more modern weapons will have like stealth & maneuverability, making more likely to not reach targets, thus lessening their deterrence effect.

    The US Air Force's Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) force, specifically the Minuteman III has a average age of 34.05 years old, with some individual missiles having been in service for over 40 years.

    Most of us don't even trust cars that old.

    Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»U.S. to spend $1 trillion...