Here's what the Pentagon says:
Gee, doesn't that sound familiar? Where have I heard that before? Let me call my CMC friend again.
China ICBM/SLBM, nuclear arms thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Here's what the Pentagon says:
Gee, doesn't that sound familiar? Where have I heard that before? Let me call my CMC friend again.
You know you can just quote the report directly right? I literally gave you the link.
And of course, such a posture is perfectly compatible with launch-on-warning. Nobody said 100% of your missiles need to be ready to launch 100% of the time. You can put down the goalposts now.
2025 FP article on this very topic, discussing pros and cons of launch on warning for China.
According to Pentagon, China maybe moving towards launch on warning posture but haven't done so yet. Ok, I accept your position that China has moved some forces to "higher state of readiness".But I also maintain my position that vast majority of China's nukes are not mated with their missiles. So, China is incapable of launching a Nuclear mass strike on LOW.
I see many experts saying China intends to have the capbility to do launch on warning but haven't changed the political doctrine to actually do Launch on Warning.
Many experts are worried about China making such a change. So, I accept your opinion that China maybe moving towards it. But so far, they haven't done so.
The sudden introduction here of qualifiers like "maybe" and "majority" and "massive" are exactly the goalposts I was talking about. You cite an expert, and I give you the words of that very same expert. You cite the Pentagon, and I give you the words of the Pentagon. Every time you lose a position, you keep moving the goalposts further and further back. This is the reason I mentioned my CMC friend, because anything less just causes you to equivocate with weasel words.
For someone who claimed to be happy to be proven wrong, you sure seem a lot happier to run away.
Last edited:
Can we please agree to a fact that we have no nuclear policy expert on China because no one has a clear idea of how everything works but instead we are seeing the writing on the wall like EW system and test launches from Jilantai. What Zhao Tong did is to make nuclear posture and analysis like theology, with no data, no range/yield/target analysis, just repeating scripted line written by previous policy analyst.
Btw it is what DoD report and OSINT nuclear expert are like, they are quoting each other in a sense we lost track who is the original source then somehow a speculation from random "expert" becomes "well established fact" in between.
DoD has its own methods and sources that they may or may not intend to reveal in unclassified report. For example they have already known the existence and test launch of DF-27 well back to early 2023 but they still pretend not to know for certainty about it in public.
Btw it is what DoD report and OSINT nuclear expert are like, they are quoting each other in a sense we lost track who is the original source then somehow a speculation from random "expert" becomes "well established fact" in between.
DoD has its own methods and sources that they may or may not intend to reveal in unclassified report. For example they have already known the existence and test launch of DF-27 well back to early 2023 but they still pretend not to know for certainty about it in public.
I have real trouble understanding this discussion.
NFU or LOW etc are nuclear pledges and policies that are made at the highest political level and are always communicated to the whole world. The whole idea is for everyone to know exactly what the nuclear posture of your state is. None of this is expected to be secret, covert or clandestine.
When China moves to a LOW policy, we are going to immediately know about it. Because they will communicate that on the highest level. We have seen ample evidence that they are working on their posture, training and assets to implement this policy in the near future, but it is not yet in effect.
This is real life. There is no such thing as a secret nuclear doctrine. There is no room for ambivalence. You don't need an expert to tell you what the nuclear posture of a state is, the state itself is responsible of plainly communicating it to everyone.
NFU or LOW etc are nuclear pledges and policies that are made at the highest political level and are always communicated to the whole world. The whole idea is for everyone to know exactly what the nuclear posture of your state is. None of this is expected to be secret, covert or clandestine.
When China moves to a LOW policy, we are going to immediately know about it. Because they will communicate that on the highest level. We have seen ample evidence that they are working on their posture, training and assets to implement this policy in the near future, but it is not yet in effect.
This is real life. There is no such thing as a secret nuclear doctrine. There is no room for ambivalence. You don't need an expert to tell you what the nuclear posture of a state is, the state itself is responsible of plainly communicating it to everyone.
Last edited:
Did the US declare it has a launch-on-warning posture?
It is way worse than that. The US reserves the right to use its weapons on a first strike if necessary. Heck, you had W threaten to nuke Iraq if they used "WMD" to defend themselves against the US invasion. In 2003.