Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

National News
See other National News Articles

Title: Air Force sidelines 17 ICBM officers at Minot AFB
Source: minotdailynews.com
URL Source: http://www.minotdailynews.com/page/ ... CBM-officers-at-Minot-AFB.html
Published: May 8, 2013
Author: WASHINGTON (AP)
Post Date: 2013-06-04 17:20:03 by GreyLmist
Keywords: None
Views: 662
Comments: 55

Excerpts:

"We are, in fact, in a crisis right now," the commander, Lt. Col. Jay Folds, wrote in an internal email obtained by The Associated Press and confirmed by the Air Force.

The Air Force publicly called the inspection a "success."

But in April it quietly removed 17 officers at Minot from the highly sensitive duty of standing 24-hour watch over the Air Force's most powerful nuclear missiles, the intercontinental ballistic missiles that can strike targets across the globe. Inside each underground launch control capsule, two officers stand "alert" at all times, ready to launch an ICBM upon presidential order.

The 17 cases mark the Air Force's most extensive sidelining ever of launch crew members, according to Lt. Col. Angie Blair, a spokeswoman for Air Force Global Strike Command, which oversees the missile units as well as nuclear-capable bombers. The wing has 150 officers assigned to missile launch control duty.

The trouble at Minot is the latest in a series of setbacks for the Air Force's nuclear mission, highlighted by a 2008 Pentagon advisory group report that found a "dramatic and unacceptable decline" in the Air Force's commitment to the mission, which has its origins in a Cold War standoff with the former Soviet Union.

In 2008, then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates sacked the top civilian and military leaders of the Air Force after a series of blunders, including a bomber's mistaken flight across the country armed with nuclear-tipped missiles. Since then the Air Force has taken numerous steps designed to improve its nuclear performance.

The email obtained by the AP describes a culture of indifference, with at least one intentional violation of missile safety rules and an apparent unwillingness among some to challenge or report those who violate rules.

Although sidelining 17 launch officers at once is unprecedented, the Air Force said stripping officers of their authority to control nuclear missiles happens to "a small number" of officers every year for a variety of reasons.

In addition to the 17, possible disciplinary action is pending against one other officer at Minot who investigators found had purposefully broken a missile safety rule in an unspecified act that could have compromised the secret codes that enable the launching of missiles, which stand on high alert in underground silos in the nation's midsection. Officials said there was no compromise of missile safety or security.

Folds also complained about unwarranted questioning of orders from superior officers by launch crews and failure to address superiors with the proper respect.

The launch simulator is used in testing for inspection because, for obvious reasons, they can't perform an actual missile launch.

Exposure of shortcomings within Vercher's unit recalls an earlier series of stunning mistakes by other elements of the nuclear force, including the August 2007 incident in which an Air Force B-52 bomber flew from Minot to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., without the crew realizing it was armed with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles. One outcome of the incident was the creation of Global Strike Command in January 2009 as a way of improving management of the nuclear enterprise.

Bruce Blair, who served as an Air Force ICBM launch control officer in the 1970s and is now a research scholar at Princeton University, said the Folds email points to a broader problem within the nuclear weapons force.

Blair is co-founder of Global Zero, an international group that advocates the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 3.

#1. To: GreyLmist (#0)

The officers with button pushing duties weren't robotic enough. They need unquestioning robot people to push "those buttons" .

titorite  posted on  2013-06-04   17:33:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: titorite (#1) (Edited)

The officers with button pushing duties weren't robotic enough. They need unquestioning robot people to push "those buttons" .

"For God's sake can't we Privatize the whole thing? I'm sure some lean and hungry Chinese company can do the job for HALF what the Air Force costs!" -- Sarcastic(?) comment at the guardian.co.uk source on this matter.

Might be something like that stirring in the background, I don't know but this is another comment there that was intriguing:

"here's a little anecdote from my Marine Corps days:

I was at the pass & ID office at the main gate of MCAS New River when a few vans full of Airmen came in to get passes for their rental vehicles.

They were all wearing utility (camo) uniforms, but their rank insignia was all over the place. Some were wearing stripes sewn onto their sleeves, some sewn on their collars and some were wearing patches on the flap of their left breast pockets.

I just had to ask, 'Hey guys, what the heck?' They told me that the regs were being rewritten so at the time they were allowed to put their rank insignia pretty much wherever they wanted.

Being a Marine I was flabbergasted, quite literally speechless. Isn't a uniform supposed to be, you know...uniform?

But that's the Air Force for ya. Like Delta Airlines...but with guns."

That last statement might be colored by rivalry between branches of service but the rest is concerning, if accurate.

Edited 1st paragraph + spelling and punctuation.

GreyLmist  posted on  2013-06-04   19:09:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 3.

        There are no replies to Comment # 3.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 3.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest