| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| USAF Creates Global Strike Command |
| 2008-10-28 |
| The U.S. Air Force will stand up a new major command called Global Strike Command devoted strictly to the nuclear enterprise, the service announced Oct. 24 at the Pentagon. "We've taken many corrective actions in response to painful lessons learned," Air Force Secretary Michael Donley told reporters, but "more work remains to be done." Air Force leaders released a so-called roadmap, titled "Reinvigorating the Air Force Nuclear Enterprise," that details major actions the service will take, including: * Establish the new command, led by a three-star, lieutenant general, and a Headquarters Air Force staff office, both devoted to nuclear enterprise matters;bombers, dual-capable aircraft and intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). Nuclear-coded B-52 and B-2 bombers from the 8th Air Force and nuclear-tipped ICBMs under the 20th Air Force will fall under Global Strike Command instead. Yet the move splits the bomber force, with B-1s staying in Air Combat Command, according to the secretary. The so-called Schlesinger Report - from the Secretary of Defense Task Force on Nuclear Weapons Management chaired by James Schlesinger, who has been both an energy and defense secretary - had recommended all bombers fall under a new command. But, Donley said, "We thought we should preserve the gains made in the last 15 years in making the bomber force more effective for support of theater [operations]." Initial operating capability for the new command is expected in September 2009, officials said. The decision to stand up a new major, nuclear command was made early this month at a conference of the air services' four-star generals (Aerospace DAILY, Oct. 9). The move follows the firing of the last Air Force secretary and chief of staff in June, as well as a series of disciplinary actions taken after nuclear management mishaps. A definitive, high-level report last month detailed 180 corrective actions, costing up to $1.5 billion. |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #10 Backdoor Barney Frank plans to cut the military 25%. This will all be cut. |
| Posted by: Carbon Monoxide 2008-10-28 11:06 |
| #9 Was it Lemay who said, "The Soviets are the antagonist, the Navy is the enemy."? |
| Posted by: Classical_Liberal 2008-10-28 10:24 |
| #8 My Late FIL (father-in-law) flew B-36's under SAC during troubled times. He told of fond memories about commanders Lemay and others. I had the opportunity to take in one of their convention/reunions down in Fort Worth a few years back and found myself sitting with a great deal of history. Th number 2 guy with the Flying Tigers, the pilot who flew over Hiroshima the day after taking the photos of the devastastion and many others who still lived and breathed country first. It was probably one of the finest weekends of my life. |
| Posted by: Everyday a Wildcat(KSU) 2008-10-28 08:54 |
| #7 "Reinvigorating the Air Force Nuclear $1.5 billion Corrective Action Money Machine There, fully reinvigorated in language the tax payer can understand. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2008-10-28 08:38 |
| #6 I was SAC and this is not SAC not even a mere image of it. First, SAC ruled the Air Force back then even when they were tenants the base CO knew who the real boss was and it wasn't ADC or TAC. Of course, SAC controlled a big budget and had the nukes but most importantly it was the counter weight to the Soviet Union - that and the Navy sub corps. Think LeMay and Rickover. Who else was out there that was going to take them on. McPeak is a wuss and he will not be a reliable SecDef. |
| Posted by: Jack is Back! 2008-10-28 07:25 |
| #5 This is an attempt to recreate SAC. But Merrill McPeak will probably be SecDef before they can find a new Curt. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-10-28 04:15 |
| #4 SAC was a different beast - dead serious about standards, and soldi pros compared to the flightsuit mafia that runs things so lax now. The old SAC would beat the everliving crap out of the current bunch over their lack of old-school Professionalism. Ask any old-timer here about SAC and The General. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2008-10-28 02:10 |
| #3 Didn't they use to call this SAC? |
| Posted by: Goober Ebbeash1461 2008-10-28 01:47 |
| #2 Really, this part of the military needs to get up to speed. Consider deteriorating conditions in Pakistan. Many have posted that SF could do a smash and grab of their nuclear weapons if required. That might not be possible or may not work. If we require a preemptive counter-force strike, we can't screw that up. It must be 100% with the fewest weapons possible. |
| Posted by: Dogsbody 2008-10-28 00:45 |
| #1 Methinks the USAF Academy's days at Colorado Springs, as known in the 20th Century, are ostensibly NUMBERED, TO WAIT FOR A FUTURE DAY VEE SERVICE MERGER WID NASA-JPL, ETC. INTO A NEW "STARFLEET/SPACE ACADEMY". ALa STAR TREK, the only RUSH LIMBAUGH-QEEESTIONNE TO ANSWER IS WHETHER TO KEEP ANY POST-WOT OWG STARFLEET COMMAND = FEDERATION OF PLANETS BASED IN SAN FRANCISCO??? CAPTAIN KIRK > NOT KHAN BUT "NNNNNAAAAAAAAAAANNNNCCCCYYYYY(s), CIIIIIINNNNDDDDDDDYYYYYY, BBBAAAABBBBBBSSSSSS" [Pelosi/Wilson, Sheehan, Boxer]??? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2008-10-28 00:27 |