In this budget-constrained environment, funding for space weapons could only come at the expense of other US defense forces. These forces are constantly challenged by global competitors for technological and operational superiority. So far, the United States has done well to preserve its advantage through relentless modernization of its systems. Those modernizations are expensive, however, and today are stretched out beyond the life cycle of the systems they replace. While acknowledging that today's force can handle today's threats, the current chief of staff of the Air Force recognizes that resources are not available to modernize everything at once. His acquisition plan, therefore, calls for 'just in time' modernization. F-22s are phased in to replace today's fighters just as those fighters are made obsolete by foreign developments. The C-17 is delivered just as C-141s retire. 'We are phasing in the capabilities so that they arrive when we need them,' he states, but 'delays in the modernization will create vulnerabilities very soon.' The point is this: Why start an arms build up in space when budget limitations already threaten essential programs like the joint strike fighter and the evolved expendable launch vehicle? Funds allocated to space weapons undermine the budget upon which the American services' just-in-time modernization is predicated. It gambles that investing in space superiority is worth the resulting decline in relative advantage in the other mediums.

---

Ziegler, David W. Safe Heavens: Military Strategy and Space Sanctuary Thought. Maxwell AFB, AL: USAF Air University, June 1997. [ 9 quotes ]