|
|
|
New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject:
RE:do we need a new ICBM to replace Minuteman III?
SB
5/17/2005 7:31:56 PM
|
I believe the current flavor of START treaties, and/or whatever they're called, does away with land based ICBM MIRVs.
Thus the Peacekeepers are being retired, with their warheads moving to Minuteman III's as single warhead missiles.
There are a number of advantages for the Nat'l Command Authority to keep land based ICBMs:
- They have faster response in a crisis, no waiting around for 12 hrs. for a bomber, and much faster to get in contact with then a sub.
- The bombers are generally not doing standing alert with nukes, thus there's a period of vulnerability, as well having more uncertainty as to mission success.
- The subs are a pain to re-target, communications are slow (ELF), unless you want one to come to the surface for a message and I'm not sure the protocols are in place to allow the NCA to send new target data to a sub once it's on patrol, at least for the Tridents.
- The land based component can be readily/quickly re-targeted.
For the NCA, a land based missile can get a "message" to an enemy (China ?) quicker then
SB |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
