HS. Trident missiles are our first strike weapons. Part of the reason why the guys who push these systems lack credibility is that they try to justify them with nonexistent missions like the argument that we need them for nuclear strike.
The Cold War is so over and no serious defense analyst argues that we don't have far more nukes than we need.
The reasons in the childish so-called editorial, you are pissing away billions on Tarp, whine, cry, burp, why want you piss away a few more million on a plane that has no useful purpose and costs millions in upkeep. Damn that is really clear thinking.
"First Strike" is not a phrase applied only to nuclear warfare. The F-22 is, after all, a combination of the roles of the F-15 and the F-117 Stealth Fighter. The latter was most assuredly a first-strike weapon and was used as such in the Persian Gulf War and later - air superiority missions are by no means a thing of the past. Nobody is losing credibility over claims that the F-22 is the tip of the airpower spear.
Or maybe I just missed CNN's report on our Tridents taking out the Iraqi army on 16 January 1991.
nukes, not for low intensity wars ... Like taking out Irans nukes.