Trump’s new ‘battleship’ should not carry nukes

The mainstream framing treats a new sea based nuclear option as a reckless toy, as if deterrence is a vanity project. That misses the point: adversaries do not grade our intentions, they measure our capabilities and our willingness to defend them.

Saying a new Navy nuclear missile would make us “less safe” assumes stability comes from restraint alone. Conservatives look at a world where Russia modernizes, China expands, and arms control is fraying. A survivable sea leg can strengthen credible deterrence and reduce pressure to escalate in a crisis.

The real question is governance: clear doctrine, secure command and control, and costs that do not crowd out readiness. National security realism, public trust, and institutional stability demand discipline, not unilateral vulnerability.

In the end, peace through strength is not bravado. It is the sober work of keeping war unlikely by making aggression unprofitable.