Reply to thread

Message

I think it is fair to say they were looking for a 1:1 replacement with the least upgrades to infrastructure, yes. It probably maintains the ICBM force as a fallback deterrent were SSBNs suddenly to become vulnerable, so it "checks the box" without bringing nothing new to the table. That's probably adequate for the foreseeable future, particularly given the problems Russia is going to have maintaining its current posture. At some point it may prove inadequate vis-a-vis China, and result in some kind of crash development program for an MX like weapon to increase capability. Time will tell.

[QUOTE="Josh_TN, post: 528129, member: 15394"] I think it is fair to say they were looking for a 1:1 replacement with the least upgrades to infrastructure, yes. It probably maintains the ICBM force as a fallback deterrent were SSBNs suddenly to become vulnerable, so it "checks the box" without bringing nothing new to the table. That's probably adequate for the foreseeable future, particularly given the problems Russia is going to have maintaining its current posture. At some point it may prove inadequate vis-a-vis China, and result in some kind of crash development program for an MX like weapon to increase capability. Time will tell. [/QUOTE]

Verification