Example collocations logo

Warheads in sentence

102 examples of Warheads in a sentence

During the Cold War, the concept of MAD helped, counter-intuitively, to maintain peace, as both the Soviet Union and the US knew that, if they deployed any of their 30,000-plus nuclear warheads, the other would mount a devastating retaliation.
Likewise, the lack of defenses against short-range rockets with small warheads is simply common sense.
After all, Russia is the one country with enough missiles and nuclear warheads to destroy the US.
The most obvious is that Iran’s nuclear program did not take off, whereas North Korea – which, unlike Iran, withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty – already has an estimated 60 nuclear warheads, and seems to be making progress toward a nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the US mainland.
Rather than a potent arsenal with credible long-range capabilities, it would have an unreliable arsenal with potentially no miniaturized nuclear warheads.
Besides missile defense, topics could include non-strategic (tactical) nuclear weapons; reserve nuclear warheads that have been removed from operational arsenals, but have yet to be destroyed; and the placement of conventional munitions on strategic delivery vehicles, such as long-range ballistic missiles, that are normally used to carry nuclear warheads.
Ten Lessons from North Korea’s Nuclear ProgramSEOUL – North Korea has produced a number of nuclear warheads and is developing ballistic missiles capable of delivering them around the world.
More ominous, according to a confidential US intelligence report, North Korea has achieved the capability to miniaturize nuclear warheads, and may have as many as 60 bombs.
Yet there are still 23,000 nuclear warheads on our planet, with the explosive power of 150,000 Hiroshima bombs.
That Iran – a country whose president never tires of calling for Israel’s annihilation and that threatens Israel’s northern and southern borders through its massive support of proxy wars waged by Hezbollah and Hamas – might one day have missiles with nuclear warheads is Israel’s worst security nightmare.
Critics also claim that missile defense will not work against incoming warheads surrounded by decoys, that it will be terribly expensive and that rogue-state proliferation can be better addressed through prevention (using diplomacy and export controls) and deterrence.
Instead, the US should undertake three things: aggressive testing of various architectures for a missile defense system, including sea-based systems that could intercept missiles in the immediate post-launch, boost phase before warheads and decoys can be released; careful study of the consequences of moving to various mixes of offensive and defensive systems; and intense consultations with Russia, China and America's allies in Europe and Asia about how to maintain strategic stability in the post-Cold War era.
Of course, the West's ingratitude has been marked: America withdrew from the 1972 ABM Treaty and has now rammed a vague disarmament agreement - to be signed during the summit and which will allow the US not to destroy surplus missiles and warheads but rather to put them in cold storage - down Putin's throat.
Where once their leaders talked about mutually agreed arms reduction and verified disarmament, now they are more interested in miniaturized nuclear warheads that can be used as bunker busters.
Since then, we have learnt all too unambiguously that Saddam is obsessed with procuring weapons of mass destruction - chemical and biological warheads as well as atomic bombs and the missiles to deliver them.
After that war, UN inspectors found and destroyed huge amounts of chemical and biological warheads as well as facilities to produce nuclear weapons.
Today, Pakistan, a near-failed state on the verge of disintegration, possesses more nuclear warheads than India.
They disagree about how many, with estimates ranging broadly, from 40 to more than 400 warheads.
The supply from these sources will drop by roughly 10,000 tons at the end of 2013, when the Megatons to Megawatt Program between Russia and the United States – which recycles highly-enriched uranium from Russian nuclear warheads into low-enriched uranium for nuclear power plants – comes to an end.
There are an estimated 15,000 nuclear warheads scattered around the world, and eliminating them means speaking truth – and often hard truths – to power.
And, according to Siegfried Hecker, the former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in the US, North Korea will have 20 warheads in its nuclear arsenal by 2016; it also plans to move rapidly to develop its capacity to miniaturize nuclear weapons.
The number of permissible deployed warheads, 1,550, is 74% lower than the limit of the 1991 START Treaty and 30% below the cap set by the 2002 Moscow Treaty.
American START negotiators argued with their Russian colleagues for months to exclude legally binding language that might constrain missile defenses or the use of non-nuclear warheads on long-range ballistic missiles.
Global stockpiles have dropped from 68,000 warheads at the height of the Cold War to 20,000 today.
John F. Kennedy misled the public about the withdrawal of US nuclear warheads from Turkey in the deal that peacefully ended the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.
Although US and Russian stockpiles still account for more than 90% of the world’s nuclear warheads, US President Barack Obama’s disarmament goal, Global Zero, is proving far harder to accomplish now, given how much the world has changed since the Cold War’s end.
The International Atomic Energy Agency also reports that Iran is carrying out research to develop designs for nuclear warheads.
In today’s interdependent world, however, it is no longer the number of nuclear warheads that bestows influence, but a country’s ability to get others to go along with policies that it regards as serving its major interests.
A better arms control system would undoubtedly make it more difficult for non-nuclear weapons states to acquire nuclear capability; but it is hard to see why reductions alone, however dramatic, in the huge number of American and Russian warheads should induce aspiring nuclear powers to give up their nuclear ambitions.
Even if America and Russia agreed to reduce their stockpiles of nuclear warheads from 5,000-6,000 each to 1,000 each, why should that stop Iran from wanting to build 50-100 nuclear warheads and short-range delivery systems if it perceives this to be in its national interest?
BackNext