Source: The NY Times
Well, isn't this nice?
The Pentagon is pressing Congress to approve the development of a new weapon that would enable the United States to carry out nonnuclear missile strikes against distant targets within an hour.
The Pentagon plan calls for deploying a new nonnuclear warhead atop the submarine-launched Trident II missile that could be used to attack terrorist camps, enemy missile sites, suspected caches of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons and other potentially urgent threats, military officials say.
If fielded, it would be the only nonnuclear weapon designed for rapid strikes against targets thousands of miles away and would add to the United States' options when considering a pre-emptive attack.
While I'm all for anything that's a nonnuclear option....
The proposal has set off a complex debate about whether this program for strengthening the military's conventional capacity could increase the risks of accidental nuclear confrontation.
the plan has run into resistance from lawmakers who are concerned that it may increase the risk of an accidental nuclear confrontation. The Trident II missile that would be used for the attacks is a system that has long been equipped with a nuclear payload. Indeed, both nonnuclear and nuclear-tipped variants of the Trident II missile would be loaded on the same submarines under the Pentagon plan.
"There is great concern this could be destabilizing in terms of deterrence and nuclear policy," said Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee. "It would be hard to determine if a missile coming out a Trident submarine is conventional or nuclear."
Ah, there's the rub.
Nevermind that the Pentagon is asking for $127 million for this project when the country's already in a pickle, financially. That's bad, but wanting to arm a sub with both nuclear and nonnuclear missiles is asking for trouble. As it's been said, who's to know that the thing heading toward them isn't a nuke? Then they fire one back (if they have them, and hell, almost everyone has one, these days). Or what if there's a boo-boo on our end in the version of "Oops, that was the wrong missile. Damage control time!"
Clearly asking for trouble.
And there's another thing I don't quite understand.
The study urged that nonnuclear systems be added to the existing triad of long-range nuclear air, land and sea forces -- a concept that the military nicknamed "Global Strike."
Why would you name it "Global Strike"? Isn't that sort of name usually saved for the nuke option?
In any case, this could lead to less-than-pleasant moments with China or Russia (and let's not forget the lunatic who's up there leading North Korea) if they were unable to tell what's been launched.
But yeah...Donald Rumsfeld loves the idea, so it won't be long before it's implemented, no matter how many worries there are.
Tags: [Pentagon Seeks Nonnuclear Tip for Sub Missiles], [plan calls for deploying a new nonnuclear warhead atop the submarine-launched Trident II missile that could be used to attack terrorist camps, enemy missile sites, suspected caches of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons and other potentially urgent threats], [increase the risk of an accidental nuclear confrontation], [Senator Jack Reed], [Senate Armed Services Committee], [Strategic Command], [General Cartwright]
No comments:
Post a Comment