<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>U.S.Category: Missile Defense &#124; U.S. &#124; TIME.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://nation.time.com/category/missile-defense-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://nation.time.com</link>
	<description>News, Headlines, Stories, Video from Around the Nation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 16:15:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='nation.time.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://nation.time.com/osd.xml" title="U.S." />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://nation.time.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>How Come…</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/05/15/how-come/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/05/15/how-come/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 14:26:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Korea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missile Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Weapons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://battleland.blogs.time.com/?p=74064</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=74064&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/05/15/how-come/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Iran</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/iran-2/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/filesoyuz_tma-03m_rocket_launches_3.jpeg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">File:Soyuz_TMA-03M_rocket_launches_3</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are South Koreans Really Bigger Than North Koreans?</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/24/are-south-koreans-really-bigger-than-north-koreans/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/24/are-south-koreans-really-bigger-than-north-koreans/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 11:54:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missile Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://battleland.blogs.time.com/?p=72262</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Once again, body size on the Korean peninsula is in the news: Are North Koreans really three inches shorter than South Koreans? …the BBC asks. Examining a 2008 inquiry by Daniel Schwekendiek, then with Germany’s University of Tuebingen, the answer is, basically, yes: As North and South Koreans are genetically the same people, these anthropometric gaps seem largely be a manifestation of the socioeconomic differences between the two Koreas: in 2002, GDP per capita was estimated to be twelve times greater in South Korea. It is probable that these large differences are primarily due to nutrition. For instance, according to the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, protein and calorie consumption is 1.4 times higher, and fat consumption 2.2 times higher for South Koreans. In conclusion, after World War II, the two Koreas underwent diametrically opposed political transformations. Before the partition of the peninsula, Northerners were even slightly taller than Southerners. Nowadays, the situation has reversed for socioeconomic reasons. Pre-school children raised in the developing country of North Korea are up to 13 cm shorter and up to 7 kg lighter than children who were brought up in South Korea – an OECD member. North Korean women have also been found to weigh up to 9 kg less than their Southern counterparts. This is the nation that has us spending $10 billion a year defending ourselves from their missiles?<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=72262&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/24/are-south-koreans-really-bigger-than-north-koreans/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Korea</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/korea-2/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/142827106.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/142827106.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/142827106.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Statues of North Korea&#039;s founding presid</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lasers: Tomorrow Never Comes</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/16/lasers-tomorrow-never-comes/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/16/lasers-tomorrow-never-comes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 10:45:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Air Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Contractors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missile Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://battleland.blogs.time.com/?p=71552</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Laser, née L.A.S.E.R. – for Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation – might as well stand for Late And So Extraordinarily Recondite (adj., meaning mysterious, esoteric) at the Pentagon. Defense officials talk of laser weapons being just around the corner – remember President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative 30 years ago that was going to knock Soviet missiles out of the sky with them? – but the laser’s tomorrow never seems to arrive. The latest example is the $5 billion invested in the 747-based Airborne Laser. It made its final flight from California to the U.S. military’s Arizona “boneyard” for unneeded warplanes in February. Earlier, the Advanced Tactical Laser, which had been tested for use aboard smaller C-130 airplanes, also came to an end. It’s fun to glance back at the hopes lasers have always held for defense types. “Accelerating trend toward increased lethality in many dimensions of the battlespace threatens U.S. offensive dominance,” Northrop Grumman warned in a 2005 presentation. “Laser weapons can potentially reverse that trend by increasing the ability of U.S. forces to defend against threats that are otherwise difficult or almost impossible to defeat.” Not only that, a top Air Force laser-fighter said in 2007: they possess “plausible deniability.” Apparently, that means they could be used and the U.S. military could shrug its collective shoulders and ask, “Who, me?” when asked how come some foreign military outpost had been incinerated. The military and its contractors conquered the challenges associated with sending a narrow beam of energy through air and space strong enough to destroy missiles or metal. But both the technology and &#8212; in the case of the ABL, its dubious deployment strategy &#8212; doomed them. “The reality is that you would need a laser something like 20 to 30 times more powerful than the chemical laser in the plane right now to be able to get any distance from the launch site to fire,” the-defense secretary Robert Gates said. “The ABL would have to orbit inside the borders of Iran in order to be able<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=71552&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/16/lasers-tomorrow-never-comes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Weapons</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/weapons-2/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/screen-shot-2012-04-13-at-5-06-31-pm.png?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/screen-shot-2012-04-13-at-5-06-31-pm.png?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/screen-shot-2012-04-13-at-5-06-31-pm.png?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Screen shot 2012-04-13 at 5.06.31 PM</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/abl1.jpeg?w=360" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">ABL departs Edwards AFB.</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dud Doesn’t Dent Danger</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/13/dud-doesnt-dent-danger/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/13/dud-doesnt-dent-danger/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2012 13:58:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missile Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuclear Weapons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://battleland.blogs.time.com/?p=71492</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That’s the word from Austin Ramzy in Beijing on Time’s Global Spin blog: …the ballistic bust does not mean that North Korean threat has lessened significantly. The isolated authoritarian state still possesses significant conventional artillery with which it could attack Seoul, just 55 km south of the demilitarized zone that separates North and South Korea. “I don’t think we should be taking great sigh of relief that the test failed,” says Rory Medcalf, director of the Sydney-based Lowy Institute’s international-security program. “I don’t think the fundamental issue is about North Korea’s ability to reach the U.S. From a regional perspective the fact is that North Korea can wreak havoc on South Korea and do a lot harm to Japan. There the insecurity is very much alive.”<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=71492&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/13/dud-doesnt-dent-danger/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Korea</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/korea-2/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tokyo: Wait Until Next Time</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/13/tokyo-wait-until-next-time/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/13/tokyo-wait-until-next-time/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2012 12:06:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kirk Spitzer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Korea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missile Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://battleland.blogs.time.com/?p=71467</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[TOKYO – You could almost hear the collective “Aw, damn,” from Japan’s Ministry of Defense Friday as a North Korean missile broke up soon after takeoff and plopped into the sea. Japan spends about $5 billion a year on missile defense and had mobilized forces throughout the country to shoot the missile down if it strayed anywhere close to Japanese territory. It would have been the first shots fired in anger by the Japanese since World War II. “This was not a political show. They were really serious and they would have tried to shoot it down if it came inside Japanese territory,” says Takashi Kawakami, a professor of international affairs and a military specialist at Tokyo’s Takushoku University. The Unha-3 rocket was expected to pass close by Japan’s southern islands. That includes Okinawa, home to 1.4 million Japanese and about 25,000 US troops. ￼Japan sent three of its four Aegis-equipped Kongoh-class destroyers and seven Patriot PAC-3 missile batteries to the region in preparation for the launch. To make sure no one missed the point, it also set up a Patriot battery at the Defense Ministry compound in the heart of Tokyo. That’s a far greater response then in 2009, the last time North Korea launched a missile in Japan’s direction. Tokyo has been working on missile defenses since nuclear-armed North Korea lobbed a long-range rocket over Japan’s main islands in a 1998 test. The government approved participation in missile defense research with the US Defense Department, and gave the go-ahead to a full co-development program in 2005. The U.S. and Japan operate tracking sites throughout the country and earlier this year opened a new joint Air Defense Command at Yokota Air Base, near Tokyo, to coordinate air and missile defenses. The Aegis system uses a network of sensors and computers to track missiles and launch ship-based SM-3 missiles. It can also tie in with land-based PAC-3 missiles. North Korea said Friday’s launch was designed to put an earth-observation satellite in orbit, but most experts believe it was a test of<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=71467&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/13/tokyo-wait-until-next-time/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Japan</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/japan-2/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/9aac2e8b4b7122f08aca8983e54eaa40?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">kirksp123</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/battleland-blogs-time2.jpeg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">battleland.blogs.time</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>More For Show Than Protection</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/11/more-for-show-than-protection/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/11/more-for-show-than-protection/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 12:01:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Korea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missile Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://battleland.blogs.time.com/?p=71194</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That was headline Tuesday in the Japan Times on the prospect that the Japanese military will be able to do anything to protect Japanese citizens if the North Korean rocket launch slated for later this week goes astray. The article notes it was comments from a Pentagon official that debris could fall on Japan or elsewhere in the region that “immediately set off alarm bells in Tokyo.” It adds: Following Japan&#8217;s decision to use its state-of-the-art ¥1 trillion missile defense system, the Defense Ministry has deployed seven PAC-3 land-to-air interceptor missiles in Okinawa and Tokyo. In addition, three Maritime Self-Defense Force destroyers equipped with Aegis combat systems and Standard Missile-3 interceptors will be stationed in the Sea of Japan and in waters around Okinawa. Adding to the show, hundreds of troops have been positioned around Okinawa in case of &#8220;an emergency,&#8221; however unlikely. Who says the Japanese are inscrutable?<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=71194&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/11/more-for-show-than-protection/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Japan</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/japan-2/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/142603941.jpg?w=584" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">A Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3)</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>This Week: North Korean Fireworks?</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/09/this-week-north-korean-fireworks/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/09/this-week-north-korean-fireworks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2012 10:40:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missile Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Weapons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://battleland.blogs.time.com/?p=70932</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As Kim Jong-un&#8217;s minions ready a rocket for takeoff – likely within this week – his neighbors are marshalling their missile-defense shields in the East Asia Sea and around cities that might be hit by an errant booster or rocket. If North Korea launches its missile, and if it drifts off course, and if the allies try to shoot it down, we could be in for some fireworks well before July 4. Three Japanese ships sailed for the East China Sea Saturday, along with a lone U.S. Navy vessel, to prepare to shoot down the North Korean missile if it drifts off course and threatens populated areas in Japan, South Korea, the Philippines or elsewhere. Japan dispatched eight Patriot missile batteries to locations in Okinawa (where half of the 50,000 U.S. troops in Japan are based) and around Tokyo. South Korea is also deploying ships and interceptors in anticipation of the launch. The ships would shoot down an errant missile in space; the Patriots are a second layer of defense if the ships&#8217; interceptors missed. The U.S. also dispatched its Sea-Based X-band radar from Pearl Harbor last month to monitor the missile&#8217;s flight. The projected path of the missile suggests it will travel south over the East China Sea and Okinawa and beyond to the Pacific, rather than the more easterly route a 2009 North Korean launch took that had it fly over Japan&#8217;s main island. North Korea insists it is only lobbing an &#8220;Earth observation satellite&#8221; into space to honor the 100th anniversary of its founder&#8217;s birth – and the current leader&#8217;s grandfather – Kim Il-sung next Saturday. The U.S. and its east Pacific allies view the firing as a long-range missile test barred by U.N. resolutions. In North Korea&#8217;s two prior tests (both which apparently failed), the U.S. and its allies did little but watch Pyongyang&#8217;s missiles ascend. A shoot down might shut up Pyongyang because if – as it has pledged – treats such an operation as an act of war, the regime&#8217;s days will be numbered.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=70932&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/04/09/this-week-north-korean-fireworks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Korea</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/korea-2/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/141127916.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/141127916.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/141127916.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">---EDITORS NOTE--- RESTRICTED TO EDITORI</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>President Obama&#8217;s Defense Budget Falling Flat on Capitol Hill</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/02/16/president-obamas-defense-budget-falling-flat-on-capitol-hill/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/02/16/president-obamas-defense-budget-falling-flat-on-capitol-hill/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:17:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mackenzie Eaglen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foreign Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leon Panetta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missile Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuclear Weapons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Troops]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Weapons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://battleland.blogs.time.com/?p=66603</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thursday morning, the Defending Defense coalition—The American Enterprise Institute, The Heritage Foundation, and the Foreign Policy Initiative—will host members of Congress discussing the negative consequences of the Obama administration’s defense guidance and budget. The event will feature speakers such as Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), House Armed Services Committee Chair Howard “Buck” McKeon (R-CA), Congressman J. Randy Forbes (R-VA), and others. While these policymakers all bring different backgrounds to the table, expect a common theme to be the Obama administration’s embrace of American military decline. Despite rhetoric to the contrary, President Obama is not pivoting to the Pacific. Rather, the U.S. military is treading water with rapidly falling budgets. As former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld once observed: “the budget is policy.” Unfortunately, the administration has chosen a policy of neglect. Budget cuts are hitting all of the Armed Forces, but special attention needs to be paid to several themes that the Defending Defense speakers are likely to highlight: Strategic Forces Senator Kyl has long been a proponent of America’s strategic forces and nuclear readiness. He is likely to find much to disprove of in the administration’s budget request for 2013. America’s nuclear forces are some of the oldest in the world. While other nuclear powers have modernized their arsenals through developing new prototypes and designs, the U.S. has chosen to only upgrade existing warheads with new technology. While this has saved money in the short-term, America’s nuclear arsenal is increasingly out of date with weapons so heavily modified from their original designs, untested to ensure accuracy. Because America has not built a nuclear warhead in years, many of the scientists who produced these weapons during the Cold War have long since retired or moved on. Today’s nuclear workforce has studied and maintained America’s strategic arsenal, but it has never actually built a nuclear bomb. As former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates observed, &#8220;to be blunt, there is absolutely no way we can maintain a credible deterrent and reduce the number of weapons in our stockpile without either<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=66603&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/02/16/president-obamas-defense-budget-falling-flat-on-capitol-hill/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Military Spending</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/military-spending-2/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/800px-double_bitted_felling_axe.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/800px-double_bitted_felling_axe.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/800px-double_bitted_felling_axe.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">800px-Double_bitted_felling_axe</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/4882b2f4fffbf34585ccf6d58ad2f566?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">meaglen</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Report Examines &#8220;Worst Case&#8221; Scenario for the U.S. Military</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2011/09/30/report-examines-worst-case-scenario-for-the-u-s-military/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2011/09/30/report-examines-worst-case-scenario-for-the-u-s-military/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 15:19:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mackenzie Eaglen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Air Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aircraft carriers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Army]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missile Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Troops]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Weapons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://battleland.blogs.time.com/?p=58171</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The debt ceiling deal passed this summer contains a sequestration “trigger.” If the Super Committee fails to agree on a plan to meet its deficit reduction targets&#8211;or if Congress fails to approve the plan, the legislation stipulates that huge amounts of discretionary spending funds will be automatically sequestered&#8211;i.e., taken off the table. That would mean axing roughly $1 trillion in defense spending&#8211;a prospect that (quite rightly) freaks out Washington’s defense establishment. What makes this possibility so frightening is what’s already happened to the U.S. military budget. Defense cuts made over the last three years under President Obama, totaled over their lifetime, already approach the neighborhood of $1 trillion. With the defense cuts underway right now, the military could easily go hollow&#8211;even without the “doomsday” scenario of sequestration. This week, the majority staff of the House Armed Services Committee released a report outlining the severe and immediate impact of the “worst case” defense cuts. Those who say massive additional defense cuts will do no real damage to our security have never offered evidence to back their claim. The committee report, however, attempts to quantify and qualify the impact of ongoing and additional cuts on long-held national capabilities, force structure, endstrength and force posture. The report describes, factually, the current condition of America’s military and its inability to absorb any more budget cuts. It documents a widening strategy-resource disconnect&#8211;a huge shortfall in the assets and investment needed for the military to meet its worldwide responsibilities. Here, from the report, are some examples of the degradations in strength we can expect&#8211;even without further cuts: The point is that, even without sequestration, our armed forces will be increasingly hard-pressed to accomplish critical missions&#8211;humanitarian as well as military&#8211;with the severely diminished resources at their disposal. For example, to meet current requirements, the Marine Corps needs 38 amphibious ships. It has only 29 now, and current spending plans will drop this inventory to roughly 23. Full replacement of Army and Marine equipment worn out in Iraq and Afghanistan will probably be deferred indefinitely. And full-spectrum training,<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=58171&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2011/09/30/report-examines-worst-case-scenario-for-the-u-s-military/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Weapons</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/weapons-2/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/4882b2f4fffbf34585ccf6d58ad2f566?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">meaglen</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/troop-cut-chart.png" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">troop cut chart</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/force-cut-chart.png" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">force cut chart</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Star Wars: Practice Makes Perfect</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2011/07/19/star-wars-practice-makes-perfect/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2011/07/19/star-wars-practice-makes-perfect/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2011 10:58:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Homeland Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missile Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Weapons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://battleland.blogs.time.com/?p=53906</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=53906&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2011/07/19/star-wars-practice-makes-perfect/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Weapons</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/weapons-2/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/ballistic-missile-defense-system-bmds-overview.jpeg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) Overview</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
