AHC/WI: Atomic Peace Dividend

And I think under Presidents Nixon, Ford, or Carter, the American public would have been in favor of more conventional forces in Europe so that NATO would be the equal of the Warsaw Pact.

The sticking point may have come with Americans asking, hey, why are we spending more money when the French, British, Germans, etc, are not?

And then, the process of buffing up conventional forces, even to reach equality, may bring its own periods of instability. That's the theme that if we rerun the tape with any change, even a seemingly positive change, we're not guaranteed to get lucky this next time.
 
Let's try to focus on what kind of forces would be possible on reduced spending focused on benefits of atomic firepower. As a POD, let's have Eisenhower force through a major restructuring of forces around 1954, for target year of 1960 as any reorganizations need a few years time to get through.

USAF:

-SAC as historic, as it's a key element in deterrence. Instead of any programs for manned bomber replacement there's focus on ICBM development. This may lead to more Titan and Atlas ICBM's.

-NORAD as historical as the main threat is still Soviet bombers

-TAC: Three major deployments: 1) Europe 2) Japan 3) CONUS.
Focus on limited conventional battle (against incursions) and deployment
of nuclear weapons in major conflict. CONUS forces to be deployed
rapidly in crisis areas when necessary.

-MAC: More investment than historically in order to transport and support
intervention forces

-ANG: Various support and transport units instead of any combat focused
units.

USN / USMC

-CVA task forces as the main focus. CVS (ASW) task forces in numbers
just enough to support CVA task forces. Main mission of CVA task forces
to function as intervention forces. Limited SIOP role.
-SSBN's will be coming on line in few years
-Major refocus on less ASW, as the trade convoy defense role is not important anymore
-USMC largely as historical. Possible accelerated LPH development.
-Major effort to purchase and develop fast transports to carry USMC / Army
intervention forces around the globe as necessary.

USA
-Less but better equipped and trained conventional forces in Europe and
Japan / Korea. Probably around size of three divisions in Europe, two
in Japan, one in Korea. Role of these forces is mobile reserve to act
in small incidents and as tripwire in major conflict. Equipped with
ability to utilize various tactical nuclear weapons.
-In CONUS an intervention army with three armoured, three infantry and
three airmobile / airborne divisions. Equipped and trained to same
high standards as forward deployed units.
-Army National Guard combat units mainly infantry units. To be used in
constabulary role after nuclear war as well as to be combat units in cases
of long term low intensity wars (ie. Korea type situation).
-Special Forces to fight in low-intensity conflicts and to support allied
forces in training and force support missions.
 
Top