The GBSD nuclear missile would replace the Minuteman III, pictured, but questions have been raised about its viability in the event of a conflict with Russia. Photograph: Clayton Wear/US Air Force
Scientists say the GBSD project is outdated and the result of lobbying rather than a clear sense of what it will achieve
The US is building a new $100bn nuclear missile based on a set of flawed and outdated assumptions, a new report by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) will say.
The report, due to be published next week, will argue the planned ground-based strategic deterrent (GBSD) is being driven by intense industry lobbying and politicians from states that will benefit most from it economically, rather than a clear assessment of the purpose of the new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).
Read more ....
WNU Editor: Developing and maintaining a nuclear force is never a cheap affair. This $100bn budget for a new ICBM is probably going to be surpassed within a year or two. But even with this high cost, this missile is still going to be built for the simple reason that this is how things are done in Washington.
The FAS report is here .... ICBM Information Project (Federation of American Scientists)
3 comments:
FAS has a long term bias against all nuclear weapons, going back to the 1960’s they have advocated against nukes.
Any organization where the founders have retired or died or basically any organization older than 30 years old, if it has not been taken over by so Leftists soy boys is a candidate for takeover.
This is typical:
Lindsay Milliken
Lindsay received her BA in Political Science with a minor in Physics from American University in Washington, DC. Blah blah blah ...
These are not PhD physicists not that they have PhD physicists are special when it comes to policy. They are mention 9in the history and the founding of FAS toi give weight and gravitas. Just as Sally Struthers parades starving, naked Africa children with distended bellies to pull on heart strings, FAS parades its founders, who were nuclear scientists to sway people.
Correction
These are not PhD physicists not that PhD physicists are special (outside their field)...
Post a Comment