The United States needs to increase funding to its nuclear program

I would firstly like to address your statement that all of North Korea's nukes have been duds. That statement is completely false. The Taepodong 2 is a functional North Korean nuclear missile that has the range capability to hit Alaska, and start WW3. North Korea also possesses other functional missiles including the Musudan and the Nodong. Secondly I would like to address your insinuation that the Russian nuclear arsenal is somehow ineffectual. That statement is also completely false. Russia has the nuclear might to literally destroy the world four times over, and Russia has continued to improve and update its nuclear arsenal far after the US stopped. In response to your first contention This argument is very easy to disprove. Many other countries including Russia are revamping and improving their nuclear programs as we speak, and therefore, improving our defense to match those who have threatened the US will not be a power grab, it will simply be ensuring national security. Also, if it were to be considered an act of aggression, wouldn't those nations who you claim will call us out, have already called us out? because our government has actually started an initiative to replace the Minuteman missile. And if that is not renovating our nuclear program, I don't know what is. But just because one action has been taken, doesn't mean the job is done. The Orion missile is still years away, and we still need more budget to replace our launch equipment and modernize our facilities. In response to your statement about employees, Yes I understand that military life isn't easy, but we shouldn't be depriving the people dedicated enough to defend our country, of the simple "luxury" of not having to use an open bucket as a toilet. We also need to be training these brave men and women for the future, not using antiquated training methods the pre-date the Nixon administration, and such improvements can only be done with an increase in funding. In response to the third part of your first contention, As I have said our nuclear arsenal is not the superior force we'd like it to be. Our nuclear engineers have to Fed-Ex the ONE wrench available that can tighten the bolts on our missiles and warheads whenever it is needed at another missile base. Secondly yes I do fear a loss of prestige, but again, I have disproved your argument that renovation will lead to less international prestige, because if it was true, it would have already happened, as we have already began to enact a plan to renovate our weapon capability, and there has been none of the "International bullying" you referenced. In response to your question 1: I point again to the new missile plan, If we were to break a treaty, we would have already done so, and seeing as we haven't broken the treaties, the argument that it would break treaties is totally invalid. Even if you continued to say we were would break a treaty with renovation, I would need some actual quotes from the treaties themselves. In response to your contention 2 This argument is quite refutable. The US started a long term project to replace the only minuteman missile, so therefore your argument that "it doesn't need to be done if nothing has been done so far", may still stand, but something has been done, so therefore by your own logic, this renovation needs to be done. Even if something hadn't been done the US government is known for gridlock and for partisan squabbling, and in this mess, we lose things that need to be done. In a government where our speaker of the house sues our president for doing his job, and where people shut down the government simply deciding how not to go totally bankrupt, Other very important things are drowned out. Simply because something hasn't already been done doesn't mean it shouldn't be. Also even if our government didn't squabble, I mentioned earlier that the American populace is Overconfident in the ability of our nuclear arsenal, and therefore would make the baseless assumption that we were ready for any threat, and do nothing, even if we weren't ready at all. Lastly, the improvements are not necessarily about the deadliness of our missiles, but their reliability after years of sitting and rusting away. Any classic car enthusiast will tell you that having metal sit in damp condition will lead to rot and rust, and we cant place our national safety on the hope that our missiles might work when we need them, and the hope that the dated guidance systems and thrusters are intact enough to protect the nation we love dearly. We need to place our security on certain fact, and when we renovate our facilities and weapons, we can be sure that the newest technology will be able to protect us when the time is dire.