SAC and the Anglo-American Connection

  • Samuel R. WilliamsonJr.
  • Steven L. Rearden
Part of the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute Series on Diplomatic and Economic History book series (WOOROO)


The Korean re-armament was a multibillion-dollar effort, the first of its kind in the “peacetime” history of the United States. Not only did it more than treble the size of the American defense budget, but also it earmarked substantial additional funds for foreign military assistance, anti-Soviet propaganda on an unprecedented scale, and stepped-up covert operations. NSC 68 had posited that a major objective of the defense buildup was less American dependence on nuclear weapons. But, as we have already seen, the costs and other consequences of such a policy appeared, or so it seemed, both prohibitive and beyond the willingness of American decision-makers to risk. Thus, by 1952, a curtailment of the re-armament program gradually began, with conventional forces the most immediately affected. Once more, strategic air power and nuclear weapons became the bulwark of American and Western defenses.


Nuclear Weapon Defense Posture Military Assistance Conventional Force Nuclear Capability 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 2.
    John T. Greenwood, “The Emergence of the Postwar Strategic Air Force, 1945–1953,” in Alfred F. Hurley and Robert C. Ehrhart (eds.), Air Power and Warfare (Washington, D.C.: Office of Air Force History, 1979), 236.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Lt. Gen. Walter E. Todd, “Evolution of Aerospace Power,” Air University Quarterly Review 12 (Winter–Spring 1960–61): 11. On the development and capabilities of SAC aircraft, see Knaack, Post-World War II Bombers;Google Scholar
  3. and Lloyd S. Jones, U.S. Bombers, 1920–1980s (Fallbrook, Calif.: Aero Publishers, 3rd ed., 1980).Google Scholar
  4. 8.
    Gen. Curtis E. LeMay, with McKinlay Kantor, Mission with LeMay: My Story (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1965), 431.Google Scholar
  5. 10.
    Rosenberg, “Origins of Overkill,” 15; ltr, Lt. Gen. Curtis LeMay, CG SAC, to Gen. Nathan Twining, Vice CoS, sub: Reec and Intelligence Capabilities, Apr. 26, 1951, Twining Papers, box 54, Reading File May 1951, L.C.; William S. Borgiasz, “Struggle for Predominance: Evolution and Consolidation of Nuclear Forces in the Strategic Air Command, 1945–1955 (Ph.D. diss., American University, 1991), 197–219.Google Scholar
  6. 11.
    K. Condit, JCS and National Policy, 194749, 285–293. For a contemporary analysis of targeting policy, see Col. John H. de Russy, “Selecting Target Systems and Targets,” Air University Quarterly Review 1 (Spring 1947): 69–78.Google Scholar
  7. 13.
    Rosenberg, “Toward Armageddon,” 173; Paul Bracken, The Command and Control of Nuclear Forces (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1983), 79.Google Scholar
  8. 27.
    David C. Elliot, “Project Vista and Nuclear Weapons in Europe,” International Security 11 (Summer 1986): 163–183;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Matthew Anthony Evangelista, “Technological Innovation and the Arms Race: A Comparative Study of Soviet and American Decisions on Tactical Nuclear Weapons” (Ph.D. diss., Cornell University, 1986), 259–283, 296.Google Scholar
  10. 34.
    Andrew Brookes, V-Force: The History of Britain’s Airborne Deterrent (London: Jane’s, 1982), 21.Google Scholar
  11. 42.
    Much of the criticism fell personally on the architect of the bombing campaign, Air Marshal Sir Arthur Harris. See Dudley Saward, Bomber Harris: The Story of Marshal of the Royal Air Force Sir Arthur Harris (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1985).Google Scholar
  12. 52.
    Rearden, Formative Years, 482. The best account of U.S. military assistance is Lawrence S. Kaplan, A Community of Interests (Washington, D.C.: Historical Office, Office of the Secretary of Defense, 1980).Google Scholar
  13. Also see James A. Huston, Outposts and Allies: U.S. Army Logistics in the Cold War, 1945–1953 (London: Associated University Presses, 1988);Google Scholar
  14. and Chester A. Pach, Jr., Arming the Free World: The Origins of the United States Military Assistance Program, 1945–1950 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1991).Google Scholar
  15. 56.
    Evelyn Shuckburgh, Descent to Suez: Diaries, 1951–56 (New York: W.W. Norton, 1986), 35.Google Scholar
  16. 57.
    May, “American Commitment to Germany,” 448–450. Also see Lawrence S. Kaplan, The United States and NATO: The Formative Years (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1984), 145–175.Google Scholar
  17. 59.
    Robert C. Richardson III, “NATO Nuclear Strategy: A Look Back,” Strategic Review 9 (Spring 1981): 38.Google Scholar
  18. 61.
    Quoted in diary entry, Jan. 4, 1952, Lord Moran, Churchill Taken from the Diaries of Lord Moran: The Struggle for Survival, 1940–1965 (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1966), 376.Google Scholar
  19. 62.
    John Colville, The Fringes of Power: 10 Downing Street Diaries, 1939–1955 (New York: W. W. Norton, 1985), 636.Google Scholar
  20. 67.
    Charles J. V. Murphy, “A New Strategy for NATO,” Fortune (Jan. 1953): 80–83; Andrew J. Pierre, Nuclear Politics: The British Experience with an Independent Strategy Force, 1939–1970 (London: Oxford University Press, 1972), 86–87.Google Scholar
  21. 70.
    R. N. Rosecrance, Defense of the Realm : British Strategy in the Nuclear Epoch (New York: Columbia University Press, 1968), 162–163.Google Scholar
  22. 76.
    For an interesting analysis of the behind-the-scenes maneuvering over the H-bomb test and the consultants’ role, see Barton J. Bernstein, “Crossing the Rubicon: A Missed Opportunity to Stop the H-Bomb?” International Security 14 (Fall 1989): 132–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 82.
    David Holloway, “Soviet Thermonuclear Development,” International Security 4 (Winter 1979–80): 192–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 84.
    Ltr, Nitze to Joseph Alsop, July 1, 1954, in Kenneth W. Thompson and Steven L. Rearden (eds.), Paul H. Nitze on National Security and Arms Control (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1990), 50.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Samuel R. Williamson, Jr. and Steven L. Rearden 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Samuel R. WilliamsonJr.
    • 1
  • Steven L. Rearden
    • 2
  1. 1.SewaneeUSA
  2. 2.USA

Personalised recommendations