Minuteman ICBMs Soldier on As Peacekeepers Get Mothballed

American Forces Press Service ^ | March 26, 2004 | By Gerry J. Gilmore

[Calpernia]

Pro Military News.

President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin signed the Moscow Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions, an arms-control agreement that called for the two countries to substantially reduce their strategic nuclear arsenals over the next 10 years, on May 24, 2002, in Moscow.

Private Mail to be added to or removed from the GNFI (or Pro-Coalition) ping list.

[blackie]

We are winning ~ the bad guys are losing ~ trolls, terrorists, democrats and the mainstream media are sad ~ very sad!

~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~

[baltodog]

I saw a MM launch when I was at Vandenberg in 1981. I had an autowinder on my camera. Pretty nifty pics. VERY quick missile.

FOOM!!! -- and it was gone. Nothing left but a dull roar as it disappeared.

[Seselj]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the MX Peacekeeper a newer and more advanced missile than the Minuteman 3? Wouldn't it make more sense to retire the Minuteman 3's and keep and upgrade the Peacekeepers? Why did they build the Peacekeepers in the first place if they didn't plan to retire the Minuteman 3's? It seems like a waste of money.

[KellyAdmirer]

If Kerry gets too mouthy about President Bush being a warmonger, then an ad discussing President Bush's removal of the Peacekeepers "which did their job in ending the Soviet Union" would shut him up quick.

[The Great RJ]

I think at least one of the "Peace Keepers" needs to be retained with Mecca as its target. It would seem appropriate with a "Peace Keeper" targeted at the center of the "religion of peace."

[glaseatr]

Your correct that the MX is newer. However is was designed for multiple warheads, which have been outlawed by various treaties. One rocket, one warhead. I'd rather have 500 older rockets than 50 new ones.

[finnman69]

Except the MXs have 10 warheads....much more threatening...

[Frohickey]

Which missile system is the one that is rail-based that the Russians were afraid of during the Cold War? I had thought that those were the MX missiles.

[Imal]

Back when the MX Peacekeeper missile was deployed, it was against a Soviet Union which was building up for an impending war. While deterrence was the purpose of them, they were designed and built for immediate use should the need have arisen.

Thankfully, the need did not arise.

As fate would have it, I was privy to information regarding the imminence of the threat. It was very real, and we are lucky to be here talking about it in historical terms.

Things have changed since then. The Soviet Union collapsed, treaties have been signed, and we are complying with those treaties which, among other things, require us to get rid of most of our heavy lifters.

The Cold War was not cheap, but I for one am glad we paid for it more in dollars than in lives.

As a footnote, America's nuclear strategy has also changed in the past 20 years. Land-based missiles are a part of that strategy, but only a part of it.

[Mr. Mojo]

Yep, that's the MX -- (Originally) rail-based, 10 MIRVs ....the best ICBM we ever had, and scared the hell out of the Russians. But the treaties that outlawed MIRVs pretty much made this thing obsolete. Big mistake, those treaties (imo).

[JasonC]

The MX was designed to carry a huge payload, 10 warheads at a time. Back in the 80s, in the arms race with the Russians. The treaties at the end of the cold war did away with multiple warhead missiles, as part of reducing the arsenals on both sides. Multiwarhead missiles have a "use it or lose it" character that tends to encourage a first strike (if you fire one first you might take out 100 enemy warheads, as each of 10 of yours takes out 10 of his). So they were a particular target in the arms control talks. We gave up ours in return for the Russians giving up theirs. Now both sides agree to field single warhead missiles. There is no real point in a huge missile the size of the MX to carry just one warhead. It wasn't a waste of money though, because they were part of what brought the Russians to the bargaining table and ended the cold war. Plus, of course, peace was kept while they served - and that is never a waste.

[Mr. Mojo]

As a footnote, America's nuclear strategy has also changed in the past 20 years. Land-based missiles are a part of that strategy, but only a part of it.

We've had a 3-pronged nuclear force - bombers, SLBM's, ICBM's - for a lot longer than 20 years. ....Land-based ICBM's have always been just a part of that overall force.

[Imal]

I'm familiar with the Triad Doctrine and its history.

[Glenn]

Ah. The Minuteman.

My departed father-in-law, who died less than 10 days after my father, was the lead test engineer on the Minuteman from conception to implementation. Though we lived many miles from the test complex, we would be wakened in the night by the roar of rocket tests. Takes me back a long way.

[BushMeister]

I hate to see us getting rid of the Peacemakers, especially since China was given MIRV technology by Bernie Schwartz. I don't think the Chinese will be rushing to sign any treaties with us in the next few decades.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Did some work on the Minuteman as a grad student many years ago.

[klpt]

[windchime]

Bump!