Why "Prompt" Global Strike? -- Armchair GeneralistI've been puzzled by General Kevin Chilton's push for what they call "prompt" global strike for the US military. You see, it's not enough that we can target and engage an enemy nearly anywhere in the world. He believes (and I'm sure there are others) that we need a conventional weapon that can strike anywhere in the world within an hour of launch - and that otherwise we have to rely on nuclear weapons. Oh, and he wants it in the next five or six years. We can't get the president's next generation helicopter in five to six years, and he wants super-fast conventional strike weapons...
Under the conventional prompt global strike mission, the Pentagon anticipates an ability to hit targets anywhere around the world within just 6o minutes of a launch order. Lacking such a capability, the only long-range attack option typically available to a U.S. president under urgent circumstances would be a nuclear weapon, which military officials have described as unlikely to be used.
Read more ....
My Comment: The Generalist has a point. Such a weapon system will cost millions of dollars, but there is only a target or two (even then) that will justify such a huge R&D expenditure and procurement.
This plan sounds like someone's wish system to wipe out an enemy in 60 minutes without any sensitivity to its cost.
No comments:
Post a Comment