“This document was written by Brigadier General Patrick McLanahan of the High Technology Aerospace Weapons Center. It’s biased, of course — McLanahan and his team develop air weapons, mostly Air Force — but he has a workable plan that I’d like to present to you for consideration. He relies on some naval assets and some assets of other services, but mostly he relies on experimental assets being developed by him and his team at Elliott Air Force Base.”
“Why am I not surprised?” the President asked sarcastically. He inwardly winced when he heard the name “Elliott,” as in “Brad Elliott”—as he feared, that three-star bastard was still haunting him, tormenting the White House from beyond the grave.
“Response number one: increase surface combat tasking in the region,” Freeman went on. “The first choice would be carriers, and we’ll have to start with the ones we have in the region, but McLanahan outlines a different proposal in his plan. Response number two: increase commitment of long-range air combat forces to the Asia theater. Response number three…” He hesitated, then said, “Commitment to use special weapons in the NEA theater.”
“Special weapons? You mean, nuclear weapons?” Ellen Whiting exclaimed.
“It’s the only viable alternative, ma’am,” Freeman said. “We have less than one hundred active long-range bombers and less than three hundred medium bombers in the Air Force, and with three carrier battle groups we add only another eighty Navy medium bombers and perhaps a thousand cruise missiles. Even if we could surge these aircraft to two sorties a day and limit attrition to one percent, we won’t have nearly enough assets to even put a dent in a massive Chinese ground and armored invasion. And we have to consider the real possibility that China will switch to weapons of mass destruction itself when American forces respond. Therefore, I believe we need to make the commitment right up front to deploy and use tactical nuclear, subatomic-yield, or plasma-yield weapons.”
The President and the Vice President were too stunned to react, so Freeman went on: “There are other concerns as well. This will put a tremendous strain on our other world commitments, since every few months at least one additional carrier needs to be rotated in — that’s more than one-third of our carrier fleet committed to northeast Asia. This will leave important parts of the world, such as the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea, without a carrier battle group for long periods of time. If a crisis erupts in the Balkans, the Aegean, the Baltic, or the eastern Med, we couldn’t respond rapidly. We would have to commit large portions of our air forces to the Pacific theater — bombers, tankers, and support aircraft — and since we’re talking about the northern Pacific, that means deploying those forces north, to Alaska…”
“Aha — the mention of Adak and Elmendorf wasn’t a fluke, eh, Philip?” the Vice President said as she flipped through the report.
“No, ma’am,” Freeman replied. “As soon as we lost the use of our bases in Japan, the Pentagon started looking for other alternatives — and that meant Alaska. Now, with the loss of Korean bases as well, Adak’s importance has skyrocketed. We have proposals awaiting authorization to dump a billion dollars into Adak in the next five years and base as many as thirty support aircraft there year-round.”
“Looks to me like you’d better get that proposal into the congressional paper mill right away,” the President said. “I’ll bet you have an emergency spending plan drafted up as well?”
“One hundred million dollars over the next two years,” Freeman answered. “We can have the Pentagon tack it onto some other spending authorization bill and have it back on your desk for signature in a few days. It won’t exactly be a plum base of assignment, but we operated aircraft out of there for decades before.”
“Do it,” the President said. “Good work. But I’m still bothered about those carriers, Philip. China will start howling at us if we put three carriers around the Korean peninsula. Besides, the carriers are too attack-heavy. How about just a few ships — a little less intrusive, a little more defense-oriented?”
“Section Three,” Freeman said. The President and Vice President smiled and flipped the pages in their documents. “I had another little talk with General McLanahan just a few days ago, and he sent me a draft of a proposal that has been circulating around for years which we appended to his plan. He says we can effectively increase our forward presence around Korea by a factor of between two and five, using assets we already have. He says with a budget, he can set up a missile defense screen over the entire Korean peninsula without one ground-based system at all.”
“What?” the President exclaimed. “How in the hell is that possible?”
“I can get him in here in a matter of minutes and he can explain it all to you,” General Freeman said. “He just happens to be on his way to Washington.”
“Just happens to be?” the President said. “Good. Let’s get him in here and do it.” He skimmed through the document, shaking his head in amazement. “Unbelievable. Simply unbelievable. How come we didn’t implement this plan before?”
“General McLanahan won’t say so, but we both suspect it was because of General Elliott. You remember how fond he was of the Navy.” Sarcasm dripped from every word.
The President shook his head, reminded that inter-service rivalry and mistrust had set fine military plans like these back so many years. “Christ, if he was still alive, with George Balboa still at the Pentagon, we’d be lucky to stop the fighting in our own hallways, let alone in Asia.”
“You mentioned a couple of things I’m not too familiar with, General — subatomic-yield and plasma-yield weapons,” Vice President Whiting said. “What are those?”
“Section Five, ma’am,” Freeman said. “That was drawn up by General Elliott’s successor, General Terrill Samson, the commander of the High Technology Aerospace Weapons Center, along with General McLanahan. He recently made this presentation before a Senate subcommittee. They have devised a way of using the next generation of powerful weapons for use in both attack and air defense applications.
“Subatomic-yield weapons are weapons such as neutron bombs that kill with high doses of radiation but cause little blast effect. They are unpopular, politically and otherwise, for obvious reasons; they can kill humans — sometimes with excruciating pain over many months — but leave buildings and weapons largely undamaged.”
“Never heard of a weapon that was popular,” the President said. “What about that other thing, the plasma-yield weapons?”
“Plasma-yield weapons are just making it out of the testing facilities and into field testing,” Freeman went on. “They kill and destroy with much greater effectiveness than any other kind of weapon ever devised. They use a small nuclear explosion to generate tremendous amounts of plasma energy — heat so intense that it instantly vaporizes anything it touches. The effect is devastating — targets don’t just blow up, they vanish.”
“What do you mean, vanish? Like a space ray or something? Like a Star Trek phaser beam?”
“Exactly,” Freeman said. “Matter is turned into plasma energy, which cannot be sensed by humans — the target vanishes.”
“Talk about politically unpopular!”
“The weapon has many advantages and many disadvantages,” Freeman went on. “It works poorly in the atmosphere. It is horrendously expensive. But a plasma-yield detonation causes no blast effects — no overpressure, no heat, not even much noise, and the size of the blast can be electronically limited and controlled to a great extent. Both weapons are in short supply, but they represent a way to respond to greater threats without resorting to full-yield nuclear weapons.”