The Manned Penetrating Bomber: Time to Reconsider? Advocating Removing Strategic Bomber from Triad, New Nuclear Dyad, History of Bomber Mission and the Way Ahead for Strategic Deterrence

This report has been professionally converted for accurate flowing-text e-book format reproduction - it is not a print replica, and thus it is suitable for all devices. Contents: The Manned Penetrating Bomber: Time to Reconsider? * 2019 U.S. Intelligence Community Worldwide Threat Assessment.

During the Cold War, the United States constructed a nuclear triad, which consists of three components: strategic bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). The triad's mission was to ensure that the U.S. nuclear force would not be crippled or destroyed should an enemy attempt a first strike attack against the United States. This in turn offered a credible threat of a U.S.-launched second strike, enhancing the overall effectiveness of our deterrent strategy. This thesis challenges a central tenet of traditional U.S. nuclear doctrine by asking, "Is the Triad still needed?" Although some in the Air Force, along with various government personnel and those outside of the National Capital Region, have questioned the continued reliance on the bomber, there has been insufficient debate about either the bomber's deterrence value or second-strike launch capability in the event that nuclear deterrence collapses. This research examines the historic and contemporary reasons for maintaining bombers as part of the Triad. This thesis concludes that the strategic bomber should be removed from the Triad and the financial savings be redistributed to the remaining legs of the newly formed nuclear dyad.

I. Introduction * II. History Of The Nuclear Triad *III. Post-Cold War Bomber Mission * IV. Current State Of Nuclear Deterrence Doctrine And Strategy * V. The Way Ahead For Strategic Deterrence

In the post-Cold War era, America is confronted by an evolving political backdrop that challenges our decision makers in how to best utilize our military capabilities to sustain our national interests. Nowhere are these questions more pertinent than in the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. security policy. The United States built a nuclear arsenal, made of traditional strategic bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). If an enemy attempted a first strike attack against the U.S., the triad's mission would be to ensure that its nuclear force would not be crippled or destroyed. This action would ensure a credible threat of a second strike, which ultimately, would result in the increase of effectiveness of our deterrent.

This thesis addresses a central issue in U.S. nuclear strategy: Is the Triad still necessary? What role does each component of the Triad still play? There has been insufficient debate about whether or not the bomber has effectively deterred our enemies or our ability to use its capability in the launch of nuclear weapons in the event that nuclear deterrence collapses. The continuing need for nuclear-capable bombers should be questioned. A broader discussion is needed. This thesis is intended to contribute to that broader discussion. To examine this question, the thesis examines the history of the triad, its stated rationales that have evolved over time, with an assessment of the relevance of the triad to today's strategic environment. The thesis draws empirical evidence principally from U.S. government strategy documents and presidential statements and from secondary source documents that frame the arguments over different aspects of the triad. The thesis will specifically focus upon the manned bomber leg of the triad.