Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Back when nuclear weapons were relevant, every service wanted them. The air force wanted bombers and ground-based missiles. The navy wanted submarine-launched missiles. Even the army got in on it, with nuclear artillery.

Why have we waited until missiles are fading from relevance, years after the end of the cold war, and only now decided they need their own branch?



Missiles are still relevant.

Basically, most countries need a dedicated org to manage A2AD and Geospatial strategy - Missiles, Rockets, Satellites, you name it.

Before the USSF the closest thing to this was a couple sub-departments within the USAF, US Army, and USN plus the NGA (which is just a supporting agency).

This has been something on the books for decades now [0]

[0] - https://www.comw.org/qdr/fulltext/1002QDR2010.pdf


I suppose USAA is a typo, and since I'm trying to widen my knowledge on the subject, what did you mean instead?


US Army, was too lazy to type and USA feels too on-the-nose


I think you can be charitable and assume they meant US Army (which has the somewhat contextually ambiguous acronym "USA").


Not to be snarky (ok, yes) - when did nuclear weapons become irrelevant exactly? Is it because of their irrelevance NK and Iran tries to get them?


At the end of the cold war. In the present day, a launch is inconceivable.

That's why we don't much care if the missile crews sitting around in underground bunkers are napping, playing xbox, wearing pyjamas, taking LSD and cheating on their proficiency exams.

And the fact there won't be a launch is a great thing - No reasonable person would enjoy it if mutually assured destruction was to occur.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: