The debate over whether to stick with the half-century-old Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile or replace it with the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent program just got a whole lot easier. On May 12, Gen. Timothy Ray, commander of U.S.
U.S. Pentagon hypes up the ”China threat”, in its deceptive propaganda to get more $billions from Congress
we can expect to be bombarded with Pentagon and industry propaganda on China’s growing air and naval capabilities requiring, it will be stated, hundreds of billions of dollars in added spending.
Costs for the new intercontinental missile are currently estimated at $100 billion ($10 billion more than a few years ago) and are sure to rise in the years ahead if full-scale production is approved by Congress.
The Pentagon Inflates the Chinese Nuclear Threat in a Push for New Intercontinental Missiles. Every US military service is seeking more money than before, and each one is touting the importance of their weapons in overcoming the Chinese military threat.
Is the U.S. Military Facing a Nuclear Missile Gap?
What happens if the 1960s-era Minuteman III ages out before the 2029 planned arrival of the new Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent? The United States could be faced with the prospect of simply having no land-based ICBMs.
Some senior military leaders have been warning of a dangerous “missile gap,” should the existing, decades-old Minuteman III not remain sufficiently functional until the new Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) arrives.
It is a concern that has been lingering for quite some time: what happens if the 1960s-era Minuteman III ages out before the 2029 planned arrival of the new GBSD? The United States could be faced with the prospect of simply having no land-based ICBMs.
As Presidents Reagan and Gorbachev well understood, smaller nuclear weapons with short flight times make nuclear war more likely. That is why they prioritized such systems for elimination through arms control agreements. Sadly, our current nuclear weapons plan which emphasizes so-called low-yield, stealthy, “limited” nuclear war-fighting weapons delivered on ambiguous platforms such as cruise missiles ignores that wisdom and needlessly risks returning us to the dark, dangerous days of the Cold War.
ADVERTISEMENT
Russia has been modernizing its nuclear forces and is developing some worrisome exotic new systems. China is also improving its modest nuclear force. In today’s uncertain world, we should sustain each leg of our triad of nuclear weapons submarine and land-based ballistic missiles, and bombers. This combination of three delivery systems provides the foundation of our national defense, at least until future arms control agreements can be negotiated. While serving
HILL AIR FORCE BASE, Utah
In an Air Force that often laments the only constant is change, unprecedented encouragement from senior leaders to innovate is dissolving this phrase s negative connotation and driving Airmen at all levels to enact positive change within their organizations.
Innovators from across the Minuteman III enterprise have embraced Chief of Staff of the Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown, Jr.’s strategic imperative to “accelerate change or lose,” adopting a rapid, collaborative approach to implementing innovation.
The Innovation Team aspires to serve as a model for system program offices and warfighter partnerships across the Air Force. In March, the team launched a joint Airmen Powered by Innovation (API) campaign to solicit innovative ideas from weapon system operators, maintainers and defenders, to name a few. The campaign is open to submissions from DoD employees and contractors through Dec. 31, 2021.