U.S. military leadership has once again stressed the need to modernize and maintain the combat readiness of the country’s nuclear arsenal.
General Thomas Bussiere, head of the U.S. Air Force Global Strike Command, recently addressed the Senate Armed Services Committee.
According to his statements, the U.S. must maintain and upgrade all aging weapons systems, as it faces the challenge of deterring two major nuclear powers. He also voiced concerns about growing threats from North Korea and mentioned that Iran could potentially acquire nuclear weapons.
In conclusion, the general expressed worry that the Air Force has little margin left and is running low on resources—further highlighting the urgent need for modernization and the development of new nuclear capabilities to ensure effective deterrence.
Following him, Vice Admiral Johnny Wolfe Jr. of the U.S. Navy spoke next. He asserted that the Navy remains the most resilient leg of the nuclear triad.
Like the Air Force, Wolfe emphasized that modernization and support are critical for ensuring ongoing readiness. He also noted that the Navy depends heavily on a relatively small number of highly skilled personnel.
The U.S. already possesses a powerful nuclear arsenal. So why expand it if the goal is purely deterrence? Is the Pentagon exaggerating the threats to secure more funding? It's hard to imagine any bomber making it to a nuclear-armed adversary and successfully dropping a bomb, especially with today’s advanced missile defense systems — let alone making it back. How will modernization shift the balance of power? Will it make the world safer, or could it lead to greater instability? What do you think?