Interesting opinion piece in the New York Times recently about plans by the U.S. navy to build a new fleet of nuclear powered and nuclear armed submarines. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/14/run-silent-run-deep-run-obsolete/?hpThe "old" submarines have glided through the seas of the world for decades with the capability of blowing Americas enemies to smithereens. The acronym is MAD, for mutual assured destructiveness. In other words, if the bad guys hit us with weapons of mass destruction, we'll guarantee to smack 'em right back. Who knows how successful this strategy was during the so-called Cold War.
There was a time when we were encouraged to be really scared of the "Russkies." In grade one in the early sixties my class was instructed on getting under our school desks, as though that would make a difference. The Cuban Missile Crisis had a lot of people lying awake at night.
The world has thawed, and the commentator writing the opinion piece asked why the States needs to act as though it hasn't. The newer acronym is SALT which stands for strategic arms limitation, and president Obama is leading the way toward reducing the number of nuclear weapons floating around out there. God knows, the vast majority of them reside in the United States.
Back to the submarines.The first would cost 13 billion dollars with subsequent versions a bargain at about 8 billion. Does this make sense in a country where the deficits are numbered in the trillions of dollars.
Any thoughts on this? Maybe when Jesus said that we are the SALT of the earth he anticipated the dawning of a new day of sanity and world peace.
The SALT acronym was first coined by Robert McNamara's Defense Department in John Kennedy's administration in mid-1962. Versions of it and the treaties themselves (through the Carter and Reagan administrations) also came to be in varying degrees of success. Arms reduction has therefore been an issue in the U.S. for a long time!
ReplyDeleteThe American defence budget alone is roughly 4 times that of the entire federal budget of the United Kingdom. Given their dire economic straits, you've got to wonder how the decision David mentions, or the decision made by Congress this week to extend military funding to the Afghanistan effort by $56 billion are sustainable ventures in the long run.
The numbers are just bananas when you look at 'em, aren't they?!
Thanks Ian. I am out here, enjoying the beauty of Newfoundland. Yesterday we were on an island in Notre Dame bay picking berries. Today we stood on Signal Hill and watched humpback whales swimming by below.
ReplyDeleteJEALOUS.
ReplyDeleteI, on the other hand, am marking math exams on this, the last day of summer school.
I live vicariously through your last message, big man!