Guía De Compras
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1392
Issue 1392 15 November 2019 // USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1392 // Feature Report “NUCLEAR WEAPONS SUSTAINMENT: Improvements Made to Budget Estimates in Fiscal Year 2019 Joint Report, but Opportunities Remain to Enhance Completeness”. Published by U.S. Government Accountability Office; Nov. 7, 2019 https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-20-37R GAO: The Departments of Energy and Defense expect to spend hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade to sustain and modernize the U.S. nuclear arsenal. The agencies are required to estimate the cost of this work over the next 10 years and provide annual updates in a joint report. We found the departments’ estimates were generally consistent with their internal funding and modernization plans. However, Energy did not include a full 10 years of budget data in the joint report—information that could help Congress understand long-term investment needs. We recommended that Energy include this information in the future. Issue No. 1320 22 June 2018 twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | airuniversity.af.edu/CSDS // 2 // USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1392 // TABLE OF CONTENTS NUCLEAR WEAPONS Navy Undersea Warfare Priorities: Strategic Deterrence, Lethality and Networked Systems (USNI News) With the Columbia SSBN program and the strategic deterrence it provides being a clear top priority, the Navy’s undersea warfare director said, the submarine community views increasing lethality as a second priority and then creating a networked undersea domain as a third priority Here’s How a CR Could Hurt America’s Nuclear Weapons Modernization (Defense News) A long-term continuing resolution will result in delays for modernizing America’s nuclear warheads, while putting at risk an already challenging plan to build plutonium pits needed for the next generation of U.S. -
Air Force Weather, Our Heritage 1937-2012.” AFWA Agreed to This Approach in December 2009
AIR FORCE WEATHER OUR HERITAGE 1937 TO 2012 “DIRECTORATE OF WEATHER” Jul 1937 - 1950 May 1958 - 1978 Apr 1991 - Present Air Weather Service Air Force Weather Agency 14 Apr 1943 - 15 Oct 1997 15 Oct 1997 - Present Air Force, Reserve, & Guard Component Weather Units 1 Oct 1991 to Present “MEETING THE CHALLENGE FOR 75 YEARS” TABLE OF CONTENTS COVER PAGE FRONTISPIECE ………….…………………………………………ii SIGNATURE TITLE PAGE ………………………………………..iii DEDICATION……………………………………………………...iv TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………….…xii SECRETARY OF DEFENSE LETTER…………………………..…xv FOREWARD……………………………………………………...xvi PREFACE..…………………………………………………..…..xvii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…...…………………………………....xix CHAPTER 1—The Roots and Lineage of Air Force Weather……1-1 CHAPTER 2—Chronology1937 – 1946……………………………2-1 CHAPTER 3—Chronology 1947 – 1956……………………….…..3-1 CHAPTER 4—Chronology 1957 – 1966……………………….…..4-1 CHAPTER 5—Chronology 1967 – 1976……………………..…….5-1 CHAPTER 6—Chronology 1977 – 1986………………………..….6-1 CHAPTER 7—Chronology 1987 – 1996……………………….…..7-1 CHAPTER 8—Chronology 1997 – 2006……………………….…..8-1 CHAPTER 9—Chronology 2007 – 2012………………………..….9-1 CHAPTER 10—Air Force Weather Leadership and Staff……....10-1 USAF Directorates of Weather……………………………………10-1 xii Major Air Command Weather Functional Managers……………..10- 32 Air Weather Service Commanders…………………………..…...10- 34 Air Force Weather Agency Commanders………………………...10- 51 USAF Directorate of Weather Staff…………………………...…10- 68 Air Weather Service Staff…………………………………….…10- 71 Air Force Weather Agency Staff………………………………....10- 77 CHAPTER 11—Air Force -
(801) 556-7255 Admiral Charles R. Richard Commander, US Strategic Command Rear
Admiral Charles R. Richard Commander, U.S. Strategic Command Rear Admiral Ronald R. Fritzmeier Director, NC3 Enterprise Center Defense Writers Group Project for Media and National Security George Washington School of Media and Public Affairs 5 January 2021 DWG: Welcome to a Defense Writers Group conversation. It’s an honor to have you and we look forward to it. I should mention to folks on the call that in addition to Admiral Charles Richard, Commander of U.S. Strategic Command, we will also have Rear Admiral Ronald Fritzmeier, who is Director of the Nuclear Command, Control and Communications Enterprise Center. I’m going to just ask my question to Admiral Richard to sort of get us going, to kind of lay out for us in particular the area of NC3 -- Nuclear Command, Control and Communications, and how does the Enterprise Center fit in. Tell us this aspect of your command, sir, and how does that fit? Admiral Richard: Thanks for a chance to talk to the Defense Writers Group. I look forward to any chance that I have to talk about the most important mission in the Department of Defense. What I really do want to concentrate on today is Nuclear Command and Control -- NC3. Which is often a piece that we don’t talk enough about. It is as important to the strategic deterrence mission as the delivery systems and the weapons complex and we are in equal need to recapitalize it alongside the delivery systems. To start, I think the Secretary of Defense got it right back in 2018 when he established the NC3 Enterprise Center that Admiral Fritzmeier leads, and I’d start with that is a separate organization from U.S. -
A Realist's Rationale for a World Without Nuclear Weapons
CHAPTER 3 A Realist’s Rationale for a World without Nuclear Weapons Steven Pifer Introduction Speaking in Prague on April 5, 2009, President Barack Obama declared “America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world with- out nuclear weapons.” The president attached important qualifiers to his objective. “This goal will not be reached quickly—perhaps not in my lifetime,” he said, and also, “As long as these weapons exist, the United States will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adver- sary. .”1 Many, however, ignored the measured language and immedi- ately dismissed the president’s goal as unattainable, idealistic, and even naïve. Sometimes it takes a great goal to inspire great achievement, even if reaching that goal, or planning to do so, will be difficult. President John F. Kennedy in 1961 set the objective of putting a man on the moon by the end of the decade, even though the United States at the time had taken just baby steps in space. When he delivered his May 25 speech calling for 1. The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, “Remarks by President Barack Obama, Hradcany Square, Prague, Czech Republic,” April 5, 2009. 82 | STEVEN PIFER “longer strides,” only one American, Alan Shepard, had been in space— and just on a suborbital flight. Eight years later, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin stood on the moon. Obama’s goal may seem idealistic to some. But acknowledged realists also have called for a world without nuclear weapons. Writing in the Wall Street Journal in January 2007, four senior American statesmen—George Shultz, Bill Perry, Henry Kissinger, and Sam Nunn—noted the growing risks posed by nuclear weapons and endorsed “setting the goal of a world free of nuclear weapons and working energetically on the actions required to achieve that goal.”2 The authors developed that theme in subsequent Wall Street Journal opinion pieces, proposing a “joint enterprise” to move toward the objective. -
The War That Must Never Be Fought
Praise for The War That Must Never Be Fought “This important book is a collection of thoughtful papers written by a stellar cast of experienced students of today’s dilemma posed by nuclear weapons and deterrence policy. Recognizing the unimaginable devasta- tion to humanity and the planet we all inhabit in the event of a failure of this policy, either by deliberate action or human error, the authors add valuable insights into policies and initiatives that nations should pursue in a global effort to reduce existing dangers of entering into The War That Must Never Be Fought.” —Sidney D. Drell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and a professor emeritus of theoretical physics at Stanford’s SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, where he served as deputy director. “More than an assertion, The War That Must Never Be Fought calls for a robust public debate of the dilemmas of nuclear deterrence. It challenges us all to decide what kind of a world we want and to participate in getting there. The articles included provide a balanced and thoughtful catalyst for beginning that discussion.” —William J. Perry was the 19th secretary of defense, and is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and the Freeman Spogli Institute of International Studies at Stanford University. ”In 2007, I joined with George Shultz, Henry Kissinger, and Bill Perry in warning that ‘unless urgent new actions are taken, the U.S. soon will be compelled to enter a new nuclear era that will be more precarious, psychologically disorienting, and economically even more costly than was Cold War deterrence.’ That new nuclear era is fast approaching. -
CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1391
Issue 1391 8 November 2019 // USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1391 // Feature Report “The Air Force of the Future: A Comparison of Alternative Force Structures”. By Todd Harrison. Published by Center for Strategic & International Studies; Oct. 29, 2019 https://www.csis.org/analysis/air-force-future-comparison-alternative-force-structures Section 1064 of the fiscal year (FY) 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) mandated three separate studies of the Air Force’s current and future force structure. The law specified that the studies consider future threats to air and space forces, traditional and alternative roles and missions for the Air Force, the role of new technology and remotely piloted aircraft (RPAs), and operation and sustainment costs, among other factors. It further mandated that each study include a force-sizing construct for the Air Force and recommended inventories by aircraft type in the 2030 timeframe. The purpose of this report is to compare, contrast, and critique the three studies of the Air Force’s future force structure. While each study had the option of producing a classified annex with additional material, this analysis only considers the unclassified material released from the three studies. The Air Force of the Future provides an independent assessment of the current state of the Air Force, areas where the studies agree, areas where they disagree, and areas where additional research and analysis is needed. Issue No. 1320 22 June 2018 twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | airuniversity.af.edu/CSDS // 2 // USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1391 // TABLE OF CONTENTS NUCLEAR WEAPONS The Air Force’s ‘Doomsday Plane’ Is in the Shop (Defense One) The E-4B — whose nickname alludes to the Cold War-era flick Dr.