Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) supports three of the four National Defense Strategy (NDS) priorities; however, in an era of simultaneous conventional and nuclear modernization, is substantially higher defense spending fiscally and politically sustainable? As the Department of the Air Force (DAF) aligns its weights of effort and resourcing with these stated priorities, it faces fundamental strategic dilemmas regarding where to allocate its next dollar. Specifically, from security to survivability, which should the Air Force prioritize first: the modernization, certification (AFI 63-125), and physical security of nuclear weapons and warhead sustainment, or the acquisition and survivability of nuclear delivery platforms (such as the Sentinel, B-21, and LRSO)? Moving beyond slogan-level debates, what budgetary and operational tradeoffs are required to sustain long-term deterrence against multiple major adversaries? This research should compare proposed defense toplines with projected nuclear-force costs, evaluate how different prioritization strategies between weapons and platforms affect the credibility of U.S. commitments to allies and adversaries, and suggest how the DAF can optimize its long-term programming decisions to maintain effective deterrence.