Jane Harman: “I rise in support of the B-2 and its priority role in American military strategy. This amendment offers us the wrong…”

“I rise in support of the B-2 and its priority role in American military strategy. This amendment offers us the wrong choices. This issue is not about the reserve components or about whether the B-2 is capable of doing what it is advertised to do. In future warfare, technology will be more important than manpower. Using large forces, whether for combat or to support forces engaged in combat, will be very risky given the lucrative target they present for weapons of mass destruction. The reserve components are being drawn down, and that is an appropriate course of action given likely warfare scenarios. Trading the B-2, a vital asset for all parts of our strategy, to fund reserve component accounts that will be substantially reduced in the future does not make much sense. The question is not whether the B-2 does what is promised, as some would have us believe, or whether other platforms can do the same job, because B-2 performance exceeds standards. We have heard about its stealth, we have heard about how it can meet the QDR requirements of shape, respond and prepare. It is the only system that can fly great distances, penetrate hostile airspace and deliver massive amounts of munitions on key targets with acceptable, even minimal, risks.”