Does the US still need nuclear missiles? Russia’s and China’s swift missile developments suggest yes. Peter Huessy, @MitchellStudies, @hobeyoco, @HuessyPeter; and @GordonGChang.

Oct 22, 2020, 04:16 AM
Image: Grand Forks Air Force Base Painted Murals, Missile Alert Facility Charlie-Zero, Grand Forks, Grand Forks County, ND


Does the US still need nuclear missiles?  Russia’s and China’s swift missile developments suggest yes.  Peter Huessy, @MitchellStudies, @hobeyoco, @HuessyPeter; and @GordonGChang.

Peter Huessy, @MitchellStudies, @hobeyoco, @HuessyPeter, director of Strategic Deterrent Studies of the Mitchell Institute of the Air Force Association; and Gordon Chang, @GordonGChang, Daily Beast, in re:   Proposed elimination of the land leg of the nuclear-deterrent "triad."  The triad is: subs, bombers, and missiles in silos. Do we still need the silos? Peter's answer is: Yes; it'd be stupid to get rid of the ICBMs.  The proposal unilaterally to get rid of missiles to encourage Russia, China and Iran to do the same comes from the disarmament community, who hold that if the US got rid of its arms then the arms race would stop. Since it's Russia and China adding exponentially to their missiles, this doesn't seem like a good bet.  

Note that US arms protect Europe and all of NATO. Europe supports deploying regional nuclear forces in Europe, which lets Europeans not have to go nuclear.