The Effects of the United States' Show of Militaristic Might

In 1953, the Air Force's Strategic Air Command began a systematic and sustained campaign of harassment and intimidation by launching planes and penetrated Soviet Union airspace, “probing for weaknesses in radar defense.” Some planes were nuclear-laden long-range bombers that would head for Moscow, but at the last minute, turn back. Some squadrons of B-47 Stratojets flew in attack formations deep in Siberian territory during broad daylight. One pilot said, “With any luck, we could have started World War III."

In retaliation, the Soviet Union began to build an ICBM (Intercontinental Ballistic Missile). Sergei Pavlovich Korolev, the person in charge, was given a blank check for the building the IBCM. In 1957, The unveiling of the Sputnik, a tiny Soviet Union satellite on which the ICBM was placed on, demonstrated Russia’s air superiority.

By flaunting our air superiority at the expense of the Russians, they retaliated by starting a crash program to build an ICBM. While we cut our budget for missiles and expanded our budget for bombers, we lost air superiority to the Russians when the Sputnik was launched. By placing a missile interceptor shield in Poland instead of in Central Asia were it was publicized to be, Russia resumed the global patrols of its nuclear bomber fleet, tested a new "father of all bombs" and fast-tracked development of a new-generation ballistic missile capable of evading U.S. interceptor shields. What would have happened if we didn’t do these things?

If we didn’t flaunt our air superiority, the Soviet Union wouldn’t have built an ICBM and launched the Sputnik. If we didn’t shift our budget towards bombers, we might have been able to have regained air superiority by building an ICBM of our own. If we had announced what we planned to do with our missile interceptor shield or placed it in Central Asia like it was supposed to and trusted Russia not to launch any missiles, they wouldn’t have resumed the global patrols of their nuclear bomber fleet, wouldn’t have tested a new “father of all bombs” or fast-tracked the development of a new-generation ballistic missile capable of evading U.S. interceptor shields.

By choosing such militaristic routes, we have sped-up the militaristic advances of Russia. If we had carefully weighed the options and effects they would inevitably bring, we might have avoided this outcome.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-brzezinski30sep30,0,7479398.story?coll=la-opinion-center