WASHINGTON CLOSE-UP MCNAMARA VIEW DOOMS BOMBER

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP70B00338R000300090082-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 9, 2006
• Sequence Number: 82
• Publication Date: February 14, 1967
• Content Type: NSPR

Approved For Release 2006/01/30 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300090082-6
Was 14 s-rke ,
McNamara View Dooms Bomber
By RICHARD FRYKLUND
The Air Force will never get can be overwhelmed by great the time, the Air F o r c e
a new long-range bomber if numbers of missiles, and it is argues.
the McNamara view of nu- not expensive to acquire great McNamara and his techni-
....1 ---- nnnrpAp half of
WASHINGTON CLO$~-I!P
probably will. but suppose we ILuoaaa- fm rovements are needed to
There simply is no rational discover a defense that really insure that a bomber will
reason, by Secretary of De- does stop all of the missiles-
fense ;Robert S. McNamara's some device now unknown to penetrate enemy defenses, but
measurement of rationality, science? This is possible, but they say that no one knows
for a new bomber. His policy it is almost inconceivable that today what those improve-
on nuclear war is to deter it, any defense that could catch ments will be and that what-
not try to fight it against a thousands of dodging, hiding, ever they are, they can be
large enemy with any hope of spoofing warheads or rockets put on an old bomber.
or penetrates not
surviving. He probably can couldn't also knock off a An airplane
carry out the policy without bomber. with great speed
any big bomber, certainly Moreover, the McNamara but with electronic devices
without an expensive new one. logic continues, if such a that detect and fend off enemy
McNamara's nuclear war defense is invented, it certain- defensive weapons. A new
policy is a controversial one. ly would be able to catch the bomber would be crammed
The Joint Chiefs of Staff and missiles launched by the with these devices-new and
many congressmen dispute it, bomber. For the fact is, improved ones every year.
b u t technology-advancing modern nuclear-war bombers But whatever devices are
both in performance and cost launch small missiles; they used can be put in a B-52 or
miniaturized, like space
-is on McNamara s side. don't drop bombs. gadgetry, and put into the
The Pent is designing But to carry the argument small FB-111.
today ay for
century. during even farther, if the Air Force The logic of the McNamara
weapons of this
the rest ssib. It os postulates a war in which position is difficult for the Air
offense at t he defense this missiles don't work but bomb- Force to overcome-particu-
and and countries, ese for ers carrying some sort of "X" larly with a dubious hedge
it and other rgrim and what weapon do, McNamara still that would cost $10 billion.
T concluding is :
The cheapest kind of nuclear has an answer: The Air Force its old bombers. During the last year the Air
offense-the long-range ballis- can use Force actually lost ground in
tic mssile-can be made to His technical advisers tell the Pentagon. A year ago Air
overcome the most expensive him that the existing B-52 Force Secretary Harold
kind of defense. heavy bombers can be reno- Brown accepted the argu-
Any country that wants to vated and repaired for another ments of his generals to the
try, therefore, will be able to decade for less than the cost extent of asking for permis-
slaughter its enemies. But it of new planes. And the bomb- sion to do advanced design
will not be able to protect its er version of the TFX, the work on the plane. McNamara
own people. FB-111, will be good for an- said no.
Maximum national security other 20 or 30 years. But this year Brown is
will lie in a deterrent threat to The Air Force reply to this asking only for a continuation
any attacker, and a large argument is that a new bomb- of preliminary paper work.
missile force looks like a er, specifically the "advanced, Unless the technicians and
convincing deterrent. manned strategic aircraft" scientists are wrong, missiles
There are a number of (AMSA) being designed today, will grow increasingly effec-
proposed defenses against will be a better aircraft than tive as the century wears on
long-range missiles. The. the B-52 and bigger and better while defense becomes in-
Soviet Union has started to than the FB-111. creasingly difficult and bomb-
build one, and the Johnson Since one does not know ers more expensive. So even
administration is testing one. what will be militaril useful McNamara's successors may
But both the American and in the future, the'nite Rates take the same dim view of the
Russian defensive systems should improve its planes all Air Force's favorite weapon.
Approved For Release 2006/01/30 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300090082-6