I’m writing to express my concern with Sen. King’s position on funding the upgrade of U.S. intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), which are now being referred to as Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD).

Back in May, Sen. King was leaning toward this endorsement but wasn’t fully convinced. By September, though, he expressed full support for the plan. He said that what persuaded him, in the end, is his concern about new technology that may evolve to be able to detect our submarines.

But spending billions of dollars to update Cold War-era nuclear weapons delivery systems is the wrong approach.

We should be phasing out nuclear weapons, not investing in them. As it is, having nuclear-armed submarines deters our adversaries from nuclear attack. Additionally, the type of investments Sen. King wants will trigger a new and dangerous arms race.

And if we keep spending on nuclear weapons because of fears of possible future technology that may never exist, we’ll never stop spending.

The amount the U.S. already plans to invest in nuclear weapons comes to over $4.5 million per hour, every hour for the next 30 years. What if we invested all that money in programs to keep U.S. citizens safe and healthy? Imagine what we could do.

So, instead of pouring more money into nuclear weapons, I urge Sen. King to consider putting that money toward more immediate and definite needs such as climate change. And let’s stick with diplomacy to reduce the number of nuclear weapons.

Erica Bartlett
Portland

Copy the Story Link