5
5
0
WASHINGTON — Since the 1950s, the United States has built its existential security framework around a simple idea: Nuclear superiority ensures the nation’s safety.
It’s a strategy that represents the pinnacle of the proverbial “peace through strength,” but that began to change as the Soviet Union fell. The US delayed major modernization of the naval, air and Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) components that make up the “nuclear triad” at the core of the US global strategy. And as the US emerged as the sole super power in the world, calls began to emerge to eliminate one or more of the triad’s legs.
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq – and the rise of special forces-dominated counterinsurgency operations as the norm – only added to the feeling that the nuclear arsenal was a Cold War relic.
As time passed, the technologies that comprised the US nuclear enterprise began to near their expiration dates. Now, with a rising China and a resurgent Russia, as well as six other nations armed with nuclear weapons, the Pentagon is sounding an alarm that the tab for nuclear recapitalization is due.
It’s a strategy that represents the pinnacle of the proverbial “peace through strength,” but that began to change as the Soviet Union fell. The US delayed major modernization of the naval, air and Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) components that make up the “nuclear triad” at the core of the US global strategy. And as the US emerged as the sole super power in the world, calls began to emerge to eliminate one or more of the triad’s legs.
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq – and the rise of special forces-dominated counterinsurgency operations as the norm – only added to the feeling that the nuclear arsenal was a Cold War relic.
As time passed, the technologies that comprised the US nuclear enterprise began to near their expiration dates. Now, with a rising China and a resurgent Russia, as well as six other nations armed with nuclear weapons, the Pentagon is sounding an alarm that the tab for nuclear recapitalization is due.
Posted from armytimes.com
Nuclear
Budget
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 2
0
0
0
With USSR going broke, we thought there would be hope in the elimination of the need. When the reemerging Russia needing out help in disposing of their Nuclear Waste there was some progress. Unfortunately things have returned to the old ways and Russia is once again Flexing it's Submarine Muscle and I strongly suspect these are Nuclear Subs since that is the Best Way. Yeah Nuclear Armament is not going away. MAD Mutual Assured Destruction seems to be a Permanent Thing. Kind hoped that I would be part of a Dying Breed of folks that Handled the Nuclear Launch Codes but that is not to be.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I totally agree. I think the days are long gone for conventional warfare where you have opposing armies with clearly defined lines and the foot Solder or Marine goes in with a rifle and clears it out. I believe most land engagements in the future will be in the realm of Guerilla Warfare, where the enemy is hard to detect amongst the local population. The other side of that coin is we must be ready at all times for a Nuclear exchange. It may not come from Russia or China. I would be more suspect of lunatics like South Korea and Iran using these types of weapons as a show of strength. However, it will only lead to their total destruction with nuclear radiation rendering those areas uninhabitable for many years. The only sane and safe way to protect our country externally is to revitalize the Triad. I'm a Marine, and like most Marines we like the notion that we area a fierce fighting force. However, in all honesty, it's the Air Force with it's Nuclear Bombers and Missiles and the Navy with it's Nuclear Submarines that has kept other countries at bay. Yes, the Marine Corps and the Army play a part, but it is the fear of Nuclear Annihilation that has kept the peace for many decades with the other super powers.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google