l’art pour l’art, fonction de baise
- Apr 18, 2013
- Reaction score
- Political Leaning
Simpleχity;1066146696 said:Despite Objections, Pentagon Takes Step Toward Buying New Nuclear Weapons
The U.S. Air Force has asked defense firms to bid to supply new ICBMs and controversial nuclear cruise missiles....
US to other countries: You can't build nuclear weapons, and if you do we will ****ing wage war against you, kill your leader, and force you to live under the governmental system we like!
US: Hey defense firms, we need more nuclear weapons.
I see no problem with the logic. /sarcasm.
That would be a fine argument in an international security system in which the US were not the power of last resort or we had implemented a supranational guarantor of general security for populations that was robust, believable and legitimate.
Without that? Forbid others getting them and use massive power to enforce it unilaterally, if necessary. Unfair? Absolutely. Necessary? No question.
There is term used in the article: "Force Multiplier"
We are not going to build new bombs by treaty. But we will worry the Russians with new delivery capability.
I see you didn't look. They call it "TsNIITochMash".
I know what they call it. I have spent all of my working life (more than half a century) in the defense industry and a great deal of that time at Wright Patterson working with DARPA.
When I say they have nothing like it I mean they have no organization that is allowed to do R&D and fail. It is a philosophical difference. The Russians are not going to spend money without a return. They dont take the long view like DARPA does. Failure is an accepted option there.
I suggests you pick up a copy of, "The Pentagon's Brain: Uncensored History of DARPA..."
The Russians have supposedly begun work on a new generation of nukes and deploying new deluvery systems. I cannot tell, if we need new ones. But it seems to make sense, unless I am missing something.