Copy and paste the page source to get around the paywall.
China ICBM/SLBM, nuclear arms thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Independent experts at NOSAR, a Norwegian organization that monitors for nuclear testing say the reading at the Kazakh site (PS 23) was NOT clear enough to rule out a natural event. Analysis is ongoing.
If you want to restart nuclear test, just make up a good lie (or partial lie) that your rival started first.
However, folks couldn’t see facts that a resumption of nuclear tests and unconstrained buildup would benefit China FAR MORE than any other nuclear powers. In fact, since China’s high speed rail construction industry is near saturation, all those construction firms and capacities could be diverted to Nop Nur to dig underground tunnels. Cement and steel companies could be given new opportunities to build new PLARF underground facilities needed to house thousands of nukes. So a resumption of nuclear tests could help China keep many infrastructure construction jobs destined to be lost soon. Also, Chinese has the industrial capacity to carry out hundreds of nuclear tests (like the US in the 1950s) should it choose to and use such critical data for all purposes. This in turn would create the scale of economy that China’s nuclear industry needs in order to be profitable. Overall, a resumption of unlimited nuclear arms race could bring about the very Keynesian economic boom that China’s infrastructure construction and nuclear industries need to prevent further job losses and bankruptcies. Albeit China’s debt problem could worsen significantly in the process just like how the current US debts started under the War on Terror.
However, folks couldn’t see facts that a resumption of nuclear tests and unconstrained buildup would benefit China FAR MORE than any other nuclear powers. In fact, since China’s high speed rail construction industry is near saturation, all those construction firms and capacities could be diverted to Nop Nur to dig underground tunnels. Cement and steel companies could be given new opportunities to build new PLARF underground facilities needed to house thousands of nukes. So a resumption of nuclear tests could help China keep many infrastructure construction jobs destined to be lost soon. Also, Chinese has the industrial capacity to carry out hundreds of nuclear tests (like the US in the 1950s) should it choose to and use such critical data for all purposes. This in turn would create the scale of economy that China’s nuclear industry needs in order to be profitable. Overall, a resumption of unlimited nuclear arms race could bring about the very Keynesian economic boom that China’s infrastructure construction and nuclear industries need to prevent further job losses and bankruptcies. Albeit China’s debt problem could worsen significantly in the process just like how the current US debts started under the War on Terror.
Last edited:
Not only that but china did like 50 tests by 1996. US did a 1000 tests by 1992. With each successive test you get diminished info value.
So if everyone gets to continue testing, china gets a lot more to learn and gain than US with additional, say 100 or 200 tests.
Its actually in US interest not to give anyone else excuse to test. Even if china was doing it secretly on its own, it still makes sense for US not to open the testing floodgate because secret tests must be done seldomly if they are to remain secret and deniable. If to remain deniable and secret, china probably can't do more than several in a decade. And they must remain tiny yield tests which arent nearly as valuable as larger scale tests. So US advantage in test information is still likely to remain pretty big, for as long as testing is only occasional and of tiny yield.
So if everyone gets to continue testing, china gets a lot more to learn and gain than US with additional, say 100 or 200 tests.
Its actually in US interest not to give anyone else excuse to test. Even if china was doing it secretly on its own, it still makes sense for US not to open the testing floodgate because secret tests must be done seldomly if they are to remain secret and deniable. If to remain deniable and secret, china probably can't do more than several in a decade. And they must remain tiny yield tests which arent nearly as valuable as larger scale tests. So US advantage in test information is still likely to remain pretty big, for as long as testing is only occasional and of tiny yield.
A deeply ironic and amusing conclusion drawn from this farce is that every media presumed it was gigahappening, yet in reality, it's merely the tip of the iceberg.
This “test” was most likely conducted in the Tunnel 5, where massive amounts of soil were excavated between 2017 and 2021. Now we finally understand the purpose behind that extensive soil removal.
However, the new round of tunnel and shaft excavations commencing in 2021 leads one to speculate that China has preemptively hedged against a potential U.S. reaction after realizing the significance of the 2020 event. They likely anticipated the need for shafts capable of accommodating large yields, preparing for either a full-yield or a 150kt reduced-yield test. Yet it wasn't until 2026 that the U.S. fully grasped or rather, became absolutely certain of what had actually transpired back then.
This “test” was most likely conducted in the Tunnel 5, where massive amounts of soil were excavated between 2017 and 2021. Now we finally understand the purpose behind that extensive soil removal.
However, the new round of tunnel and shaft excavations commencing in 2021 leads one to speculate that China has preemptively hedged against a potential U.S. reaction after realizing the significance of the 2020 event. They likely anticipated the need for shafts capable of accommodating large yields, preparing for either a full-yield or a 150kt reduced-yield test. Yet it wasn't until 2026 that the U.S. fully grasped or rather, became absolutely certain of what had actually transpired back then.
Last edited:
You mean when Mark Milley called Li Zuocheng to reassure China that Trump was not starting a war?