23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF-41

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: 23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF-41

Re: 23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF

by solomani » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:40 am

Seems the USA has forgotten the old Roman maxim - if you want peace, prepare for war. Hopefully your next leader will rise to the challenge and not inherit ash from the current incompetent incumbent.

Re: 23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF

by NoOneImportant » Tue Dec 24, 2013 6:22 am

What is unfortunate in predicting the future are those who believe that the past is the present - that is just not the case with nuclear armaments.

When MAD reigned supreme, and held both the US, and Soviets at bay the nuclear picture was considerably different than it is now. At the end of the Reagan administration the US had roughly 23,000 nukes; the Soviets had 48,000. Most of those devices no longer exist. Thanks to several nuclear armament agreements over the last 35 years.

MAD - mutually assured destruction - relied on a triad of nuclear delivery capabilities - maned bombers, ICBMs, and Sub launched missiles. That strategy of a triad of nuclear response and delivery is still quietly in effect.

In 2010 Obama signed the most recent arms limitation agreement: the New START arms treaty. Under the New START treaty the US is committed to a position of having a total of 1550 strategic devices deliverable by no more than launch 700 vehicles by 2018. In early 2012 the Obama administration noted that the US had a total of 5113 nuclear devices. Of those 5,113 devices roughly 500 are tactical devices designed for battlefield use, and have no strategic value in the event of a general nuclear exchange. These numbers do not include almost 3000 devices scheduled for decommissioning and disassembly. The most recent six month New START reporting period released by the US State Department - a less than trustworthy office, considering the occupant - may be found here - http://www.state.gov/t/avc/rls/164722.htm. An unaudited clearer look might be obtained by - http://armscontrolcenter.org/issues/nuc ... s_in_2012/
http://bos.sagepub.com/content/69/2/77.full.pdf+html

The US has been in possession of MIRV ICBM technology for several decades. MIRV permits one ICBM launch vehicle to loft up to 10 nukes to independent targets. That technology has been negotiated away, and while the technology still exists, all American ICBMs are now, or soon will be carrying a single device per launch vehicle.

In early 2012 SecDef Panetta was instructed to prepare three different nuclear reduction plans. The three plans included a total force reduction to: 1000-1100 devices, 700 - 800 devices, and 300 - 400 devices. One of Obama's first speeches upon his reelection was to reiterate his intent to further reduce nuclear arms.
One might care to note that this is the same person who gave you the current economy, and debacle that's become Obamacare.

The US Navy is in possession of nuclear deterrent in the form of the nuclear armed surface ships, and submarines - Ohio class - boats. Each of the 14 Ohio class boats has 24 tubes each containing a Trident II DF5 missile. Like it's ICBM counterpart the Trident II sports the ability to deliver up to 8 nukes on a single launch vehicle, and much like its ICBM counterpart much of the MIRV capability has been negotiated away - although not all of it. Future modifications to the Ohio class boats are being considered to alter the missile launch capability from 24 missiles, to 20, with a plan to field a future replacement for the Ohio class boats with a boat capable of delivering only 16 missiles per boat. Though the Navy has 14 of the "boomer" subs no more than 10 are fielded at any given time because of defense budget cuts - essentially 1/3 of the US missile sub capability is grounded. While the Trident's still maintain MIRV capability they each only carry 3 - 5 devices, instead of the full compliment of 8 devices that they are capable of lifting. In light of the ICBM circumstance it may be expected that the remaining MIRV capability of the Trident's will also be negotiated away.

The Chinese are parties to no arms limitation treaties of any sort. Estimates of Chinese nuclear capability range from 250 - two thousand devices, depending upon who you talk to. Being parties to no arms limitation agreements, the Chinese are free to build possess, distribute, alter, and improve any nuclear device(s) that they desire, and can afford to pursue. The US is certain that the Chinese, through spies, have duplicated the miniaturized W88 device used on both the US Trident missiles, and US ICBMs. Further the Chinese have in-service two nuclear missile submarines capable of delivering 12 missiles per, with three more boats scheduled for production. When all five are in-service the Chinese will have 60 missiles capable sub launch. It is further understood that the Chinese are working toward fitting these missiles with a MIRV capability; the recent soft moon landing illustrates China's ability for controlled maneuver in space; assuming 3 MIRV devices per missile, that would give the Chinese a delivery capacity of 180 independently targetable nukes for those five subs alone.

The above estimate does not include the Chinese cruse missile, or ICBM capability or programs. Obviously with the successful test of the DF41 ICBM the estimates of 250 nuclear devices in the Chinese arsenal is a gross under estimate, or the Chinese are planning to increase dramatically device production in the very near future.

The message is that this is no longer the Cold War, those who lived through the 30s, and 40s are almost all gone, and so is most of the Cold War hardware they gave us, so forget about burning up anything, or anybody. Regarding the use of nuclear devices in war, the two participants who end up visiting destruction upon each other, may count on the third party - the Russians - to wait to see who wins, then bomb the rubble that will be what's left of the weakened "victor."

Re: 23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF

by solomani » Tue Dec 24, 2013 1:20 am

My strategic advice if I was the USA anda nuke was launched at the US (whether in landed or not) would be to burn China except for HK. Between HK and Taiwan a democratic China would be born and US hegemony would be guaranteed for another century.

Re: 23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF

by chrono117 » Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:47 pm

solomani wrote:A single nuke landing in the USA would mean China covered in nuclear fire. The retaliation ability of the USA far exceeds China. I can't see it happening.

War yes, but not directly between the USA and China.
So that's what all the ghost cities China built are for. They're for them to move into after we blow up the occupied ones.

Re: 23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF

by Guest » Mon Dec 23, 2013 5:48 pm

John wrote:
solomani wrote: > Those don't hold. Nuclear destruction was not in the picture. What
> held back the USSR and the USA if not nukes? It will be much more
> like the cold war than your other examples.
The thing that held back the nukes was the generational
Awakening/Unraveling eras. Today most of the world is in a
generational Crisis era, and you don't have a "cold war" during a
crisis era.

The reason that Generational Dynamics works is that people in a Crisis
era always think that everything's the same as things were 10, 20 or
30 years ago. The whole point of generational theory is to say
emphatically that that's not true.


If you want to compare today's mood and behavior to a previous era,
then you have to go back to the 1930s-40s. The 1970s, 80s and 90s are
totally irrelevant.


John
I agree completely. (Unfortunately.)

Re: 23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF

by John » Mon Dec 23, 2013 4:44 pm

solomani wrote: > Those don't hold. Nuclear destruction was not in the picture. What
> held back the USSR and the USA if not nukes? It will be much more
> like the cold war than your other examples.
The thing that held back the nukes was the generational
Awakening/Unraveling eras. Today most of the world is in a
generational Crisis era, and you don't have a "cold war" during a
crisis era.

The reason that Generational Dynamics works is that people in a Crisis
era always think that everything's the same as things were 10, 20 or
30 years ago. The whole point of generational theory is to say
emphatically that that's not true.

If you want to compare today's mood and behavior to a previous era,
then you have to go back to the 1930s-40s. The 1970s, 80s and 90s are
totally irrelevant.

John

Re: 23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF

by solomani » Mon Dec 23, 2013 12:51 pm

John wrote:
solomani wrote: > A single nuke landing in the USA would mean China covered in
> nuclear fire. The retaliation ability of the USA far exceeds
> China. I can't see it happening. War yes, but not directly
> between the USA and China.
I've heard this reasoning many times. The same reasoning explains why
it was impossible for Japan to attack Pearl Harbor in 1941 or for the
American South to attack the North in 1861.
Those don't hold. Nuclear destruction was not in the picture. What held back the USSR and the USA if not nukes? It will be much more like the cold war than your other examples.

Re: 23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF

by John » Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:30 am

RichardTheTrader wrote: > You poor, poor, poor, poor fool. It is the United States that will
> attack China, not the other way around.
I may indeed be a poor, poor, poor fool, but it's China that will
launch a preemptive nuclear attack, not the U.S.

Re: 23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF

by RichardTheTrader » Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:27 am

You poor, poor, poor, poor fool. It is the United States that will attack China, not the other way around.

Re: 23-Dec-13 World View -- China conducts flight test of DF

by John » Mon Dec 23, 2013 10:39 am

solomani wrote: > A single nuke landing in the USA would mean China covered in
> nuclear fire. The retaliation ability of the USA far exceeds
> China. I can't see it happening. War yes, but not directly
> between the USA and China.
I've heard this reasoning many times. The same reasoning explains why
it was impossible for Japan to attack Pearl Harbor in 1941 or for the
American South to attack the North in 1861.

Top