| Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| America's Nuclear Arsenal Can Stand on Just Two Legs | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 4 2016, 04:37 PM (217 Views) | |
| Deleted User | Aug 4 2016, 04:37 PM Post #1 |
|
Deleted User
|
Aug 4, 2016 12:32 PM EDT By Tobin Harshaw It's one of the delicious ironies of the Barack Obama presidency that a man who came into office with lofty talk on nuclear nonproliferation would oversee the biggest modernization of the U.S. arsenal since the Cold War. His administration kick-started a $1 trillion nuclear upgrade initiative that, among other things, will refurbish eight major weapons labs and prolong the lives of the Pentagon's most important tactical nuclear bomb and submarine-based warhead. For those of us who think there are more pressing issues than who gets to use what bathroom in North Carolina, this update is a legacy worth championing. However, it is possible to have too much of a necessary thing. Case in point is a new plan by the Air Force to spend $62 billion for research and development of new nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles to replace the aging Minuteman IIIs now in silos in the northern Great Plains. http://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-08-04/america-s-nuclear-arsenal-can-stand-on-just-two-legs |
|
|
| George Aligator | Aug 4 2016, 04:58 PM Post #2 |
|
The motto of the nuclear triad arsenal is "Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it." The entire multi-billion dollar structure of our nuclear deterrent is based on unique theories which, thank God, have never been actually put to the test. Our ideas about deterrence, first-strike, reciprocal exchanges and survivability are all imaginatively derived by analogy from strategic defense thinking that goes back to 1940 and didn't work well then. One thing does seem clear: the ultimate outcome of nuclear confrontation will depend heavily on the structure, goals and values of our adversary. Russia is still a riddle wrapped inside an enigma. China has no modern history. Proliferation states such as India, Pakistan and Israel present strategic challenges without nuclear precedent. In sum: we are groping our way down a very dark nuclear tunnel at the end of which may lie the end of human civilization. In this unique circumstance, attempts at penny-pinching, however well-intentioned are risky indeed. |
| Conservatism is a social disease | |
![]() |
|
| Robert Stout | Aug 5 2016, 02:40 AM Post #3 |
|
We could have quad nuclear arsenal by enlisting Muslim-Americans into our military to wear nuclear suicide vests...We should have never eliminated the Davy Crocket mortar............
|
| Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid | |
![]() |
|
| BuckFan | Aug 5 2016, 08:38 AM Post #4 |
|
Think of it as a $2 Billion jobs program. It is work that can't be outsourced since it is top-secret and has to be done by US citizens or permanent residents. It will keep a lot of people employed for a few years. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · UnitedStates.com FOREIGN* & DEFENSE · Next Topic » |







8:53 PM Jul 10