2 ms·
That’s revisionist history. Its intended role was nuclear strikes deep in the heart of the Soviet Union. It has certainly not been used to great effect or other
by bradleyjg 8y ago
That’s revisionist history. Its intended role was nuclear strikes deep in the heart of the Soviet Union. It has certainly not been used to great effect or otherwise for that.
Likewise, we will never go to conventional war with those “geopolitical rivals”. Instead we go to war with countries like Syria and sub-national actors like ISIS neither of which have similar tech entering service, to put it mildly.
- mulmen 8y agoThe B-2 was always a long range bomber capable of deploying both nuclear and conventional weapons. It needed to have the capability to reach and bomb Russia but that was never the only intended role. It was also the first plane to drop JDAMs which are useful regardless of the tech level of the enemy. It’s a long range bomber that was designed to fly long distances and drop bombs that entered service and flew long distances and dropped bombs. No part of that history is “revised”. Furthermore, maintaining military parity with geopolitical rivals is why we do not engage in conventional warfare with them. The MAD doctrine has proven to be effective for decades. I’m happy to hear reasoned criticism of American foreign policy but the B-2 and F-22 are both performing exactly the jobs they were designed for. Both as combat vehicles and as deterrents.