of a typical Third World crisis situation wherein immediate and visible 
U.S. response with large scale force projection would be essential for 
deterring Soviet reaction while proximate U.S. foreign basing assets are 
lacking. 
Establishing comparative cost-effectiveness for the two basing 
systems will require definitive cost analysis including weighted appli- 
cation of an appropriate measure of effectiveness for each of the 
several significant basing functions. Therefore, in the interest of 
timeliness and maximizing benefit deriving from this phase of the system 
development process, detailed cost-benefit evaluation, however essential 
to the ultimate decision process, is necessarily expected to be treated 
in a later phase. 
Conclusions 
In relating to the study objectives, the following conclusions and 
observations characterize the feasibility of modularized ocean basing 
systems as an alternative to diminished foreign basing assets in the 
year 2000 time frame: 
e Conclusion: The U.S. will remain committed to a forward 
strategy of Discriminate Deterrence for the long term (20 
years). 
Observation: It would appear incredible to contemplate any 
U.S. military posture other than total national commitment to 
a forward strategy pending abandonment by the Soviet Union of 
its aggressive military aims and objectives. The CILTS report 
confirms this conclusion. Therefore, it serves as a basic 
assumption to the rationale for system concept development in 
this study. 
e Conclusion: In support of a forward strategy the U.S. must 
anticipate future diminished foreign basing assets by seeking 
to develop viable alternatives. 
vii 
