Article

2006-02-04 Home Front: WoT

10% reduction in US Nukes -- Or, I got a few Iranian places to put them

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Captain America 2006-02-04 14:15|| || Front Page|| [6 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Under the long-range plan, called the Quadrennial Defense Review, the Pentagon will increase special operations forces by 15 percent, including the establishment for the first time of a Marine Corps commando unit.

And what would one call Carlson's Raiders

Also the idea of converting some of the Tridents to non-nuclear ballistic just does not make sense to me. Launch one and how do we know some body is not going to get itchy trigger fingers

Posted by Cheaderhead 2006-02-04 15:47|| 2006-02-04 15:47|| Front Page Top

#2 Is it really the time to reduce nuclear deterrent and navy?
I'm just a clueless jerk wondering, but even if the USA are currently needing an "agile" projectable army able to defeat guerilla, do Naton-building, etc, etc,... there is still China acting all imperial and busy anting up its own forces, most probably with your army in mind.
Conventional forces, with tracked heavy armored vehicle, serious firepower (self-propelled artillery type), plenty of warships and nukes (theses would come in handy),... is what's needed there.

How do you get the two together?
Frankly, for the USA, the only real "military" threat from the Lions of islam is mega-terror (scary, but hopefully unlikely), and self-inflicted political defeat à la Viet Nam. There is still the "global djihad" thingie, but as in Europe's case (much more threatening, the USA are the ennemy, Europe is the prize), it is cultural, demographical, subversive,... not really a war, but a clash of collective will and popular lifeforce.

Shouldn't China be recognized as the main strategical threat to you, and priorities assigned that way?

Just askin', in my blissfully ignorant way.

Posted by anonymous5089 2006-02-04 16:01|| 2006-02-04 16:01|| Front Page Top

#3 Anonymous50898. The way I see it, we will never use nukes, at least not in the thousands. They are very expensive to maintain. Money spent on them, above a certain level, is wasted. Let's cut them back, dramaticly. Redirect the money into systems that will be used against enemies we do have. To my mind, these reductions are insufficient.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-02-04 16:05|| 2006-02-04 16:05|| Front Page Top

#4 DOD is reducing the old systems for division/corps/army level force-on-force ground wars to build up SOCOM on one end and high-tech capabilities on the other end of the spectrum.

Makes sense to me. We don't need to put armies all around China and we have plenty of capability to do a MAD balance with China.

Posted by lotp 2006-02-04 16:18|| 2006-02-04 16:18|| Front Page Top

#5 Anon5089 - see my quicky link/post (Pg 2) to the Navy's refocus on China - we are awake

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-02-04 16:24|| 2006-02-04 16:24|| Front Page Top

00:00 Frank G
23:57 Jules
23:37 Glump Chaitch6097
23:19 DanNY
22:42 trailing wife
22:41 gromgoru
22:38 trailing wife
22:37 Whager Thavimble9071
22:37 Gravins Sheamble1516
22:33 trailing wife
22:31 phil_b
22:20 trailing wife
21:57 Nimble Spemble
21:52 Pappy
21:49 Robert Crawford
21:49 JosephMendiola
21:43 Robert Crawford
21:43 Redneck Jim
21:42 JosephMendiola
21:38 JosephMendiola
21:38 Robert Crawford
21:37 JosephMendiola
21:30 mrp
21:29 JosephMendiola