ISSN 2330-717X

Stratcom Commander Says US Should Look To 1950s To Regain Competitive Edge

By

By C. Todd Lopez

The current conflict in Ukraine is not the worst that the U.S. should be prepared for. Around the corner, said the commander of U.S. Strategic Command, the U.S. must be prepared for much more.

“This Ukraine crisis that we’re in right now, this is just the warmup,” Navy Adm. Charles A. Richard, commander of Stratcom, said. “The big one is coming. And it isn’t going to be very long before we’re going to get tested in ways that we haven’t been tested a long time.”

During a speech at the Naval Submarine League’s 2022 Annual Symposium & Industry Update Richard said the U.S. must get itself prepared.

“We have to do some rapid, fundamental change in the way we approach the defense of this nation,” he said. “I will tell you, the current situation is vividly illuminating what nuclear coercion looks like and how you, or how you don’t stand up to that.” 

Competitors like China, Richard said, are outcompeting the U.S., and in a dramatic fashion. The U.S. must step up its deterrence game, he said, or it’s going to be bowled over. 

“As I assess our level of deterrence against China, the ship is slowly sinking,” he said. “It is sinking slowly, but it is sinking, as fundamentally they are putting capability in the field faster than we are. As those curves keep going, it isn’t going to matter how good our [operating plan] is or how good our commanders are, or how good our horses are — we’re not going to have enough of them. And that is a very near-term problem.”

One area where the U.S. still dominates is with its underseas capabilities — the U.S. submarine fleet, Richard said. 

“Undersea capabilities is still the one … maybe the only true asymmetric advantage we still have against our opponents,” Richard said. “But unless we pick up the pace, in terms of getting our maintenance problems fixed, getting new construction going … if we can’t figure that out … we are not going to put ourselves in a good position to maintain strategic deterrence and national defense.” 

Regaining the advantage in other areas might mean looking backwards, as much as 60 or more years, Richard said, to a time when the U.S. military was able to do things faster than what it does today.

“We used to know how to move fast, and we have lost the art of that,” he said.

One example he provided was that of the AGM-28 Hound Dog cruise missile, which entered service in 1960. 

“The Air Force went from a request, almost written on a napkin … when they figured out in the late 1950s that the Soviet integrated air defense systems were getting to the point that the B-52 just wasn’t going to make it in, and we needed a thing called up ‘cruise missile.’ And so, they envisioned what a standoff weapon looks like.” 

The U.S. military was able to deliver the Hound Dog cruise missile in just 33 months. 

“We had two squadrons of B-52s equipped with this 800-nautical-mile Mach two-plus, one megaton nuclear warhead with accuracy that was really good for its day, hanging off the wings of B-52s in less than three years,” he said. “This weapon was so cool you could actually turn the engines on, on its cruise missiles on your wings, to give you additional thrust on takeoff.” 

Richard said there are other examples of how the U.S. military was able to rapidly develop and field capability to meet its needs, and that the U.S. must get back to that. 

“We have got to get back into the business of not talking about how we are going to mitigate our assumed eventual failure to get Columbia in on time, and B-21, and LRSO, and flip it to the way we used to ask questions in this nation, which is what’s it going to take? Is it money? Is it people? Do you need authorities? What risk? That’s how we got to the Moon by 1969. We need to bring some of that back. Otherwise, China is simply going to outcompete us, and Russia isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.”

DoD News

DoD News publishes news from the US Defense Department.

9 thoughts on “Stratcom Commander Says US Should Look To 1950s To Regain Competitive Edge

  • November 5, 2022 at 12:32 pm
    Permalink

    The CCP may be outperforming us at every turn but I’ll bet they don’t have a military that can use proper pronouns or one which regularly is trained in sensitivity and diversity. We are light years ahead of them in those things.

    Reply
    • November 10, 2022 at 12:08 pm
      Permalink

      Agree with Admiral. Richardson. We got to ask the right questions to get the answers we must have ASAP! LOSING is not a acceptable option!

      Reply
      • November 12, 2022 at 1:47 am
        Permalink

        Hopefully the pentagon will this comments seriously and act Expeditiously

        Reply
  • November 6, 2022 at 3:36 am
    Permalink

    All the talk about the Chinese having such a advantage is just BS TO JUSTIFY spending more money on weapons system that will end up in bone yards and not on the battle field, Do your homework and you will uncover the truth.
    There is no real competitor to the US period closed case.

    Reply
    • November 10, 2022 at 1:30 pm
      Permalink

      You think you’re so smart and you open your mouth and prove yourself wrong. Ever read a history book?

      Reply
  • November 10, 2022 at 12:08 am
    Permalink

    build more build faster our military needs everything at their disposal

    Reply
  • November 10, 2022 at 4:36 am
    Permalink

    to much on development not enough. manufacturing of armament.

    Reply
  • November 10, 2022 at 6:04 am
    Permalink

    Litigation, including labor and liability has done much to cripple the U.S. defense industry. That, combined with good old-fashioned laziness and entitlement, precludes a proper functioning military if drastic measures aren’t taken to reverse decades of personnel coddling.

    Reply
  • November 10, 2022 at 8:50 am
    Permalink

    I agree with you 100%, we fid these left wing bureaucrat to let the Pentagon do what it does best, keep these other Countries afraid to try anything because of our massive capabilities.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *