China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

antiterror13

Brigadier
I wonder why is that the DF-41 is always shrouded in a tarp? What is it so secret that we havent yet seen it without a cover? it had it in NE china and now in xinjiang too.

because it is more modern and advance than anything else in the world :) ... so China doesn't really want to shock the world :p:p:p:p
 

supercat

Major
I said it many times before, and I will say it again: "China needs to strengthen its nuclear strike capability significantly and as soon as possible".

US admiral would ‘nuke China next week’ if Trump ordered it

The US Pacific Fleet commander said on Thursday he would launch a nuclear strike against China next week if President Donald Trump ordered it, and warned against the military ever shifting its allegiance from its commander in chief.

Admiral Scott Swift was responding to a hypothetical question at an Australian National University security conference following a major joint US- Australian military exercise off the Australian coast. The drills were monitored by a Chinese intelligence-gathering ship off northeast Australia.

Asked by an academic in the audience whether he would make a nuclear attack on China next week if Trump ordered it, Swift replied: “The answer would be: yes.”

“Every member of the US military has sworn an oath to defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic and to obey the officers and the president of the United States as commander and chief appointed over us,” Swift said.

“This is core to the American democracy and any time you have a military that is moving away from a focus and an allegiance to civilian control, then we really have a significant problem,” he said.

Pacific Fleet spokesman Captain Charlie Brown later said Swift’s answer reaffirmed the principle of civilian control over the military.

“The admiral was not addressing the premise of the question, he was addressing the principle of civilian authority of the military,” Brown said. “The premise of the question was ridiculous.”

The biennial Talisman Saber exercise involved 36 warships including the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan, 220 aircraft and 33,000 military personnel.

It was monitored by a Chinese People’s Liberation Army-Navy Type 815 Dongdiao-class auxiliary general intelligence vessel from within Australia’s 200-mile exclusive economic zone.

Swift said China had similarly sent an intelligence ship into the US exclusive economic zone around Hawaii during the Pacific Fleet-hosted multinational naval exercise in 2014.

China had a legal right to enter the American economic zone for military purposes under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea – or UNCLOS – which defines the rights and responsibilities of nations sailing the world’s oceans, he said.

Governments needed to engage with Beijing to understand why the Chinese did not accept that the United States had the same access rights within China’s exclusive economic zone, Swift said.

“The dichotomy in my mind is why is there a different rules-set applied with respect to taking advantage of UNCLOS in other EEZs, but there’s this perspective that there’s a different rules-set that applies within another nation’s EEZ? ” Swift said.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Here is Sputnik's take:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
I said it many times before, and I will say it again: "China needs to strengthen its nuclear strike capability significantly and as soon as possible".



Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Here is Sputnik's take:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
LOL I think this is one of those stupid things that was created by the circumstances and blown out of proportion for a headline. When I first saw the title, I thought he actually said, "I'd nuke China if I got the order from the president." That actually didn't happen. The dude was there giving a speech on military loyalty to the executive office. (Does that mean that there are factions in the US military that think Trump is crazy and would not obey him? I don't know.) He said,

"Every member of the US military has sworn an oath to defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic and to obey the officers and the president of the United States as commander and chief appointed over us. This is core to the American democracy and any time you have a military that is moving away from a focus and an allegiance to civilian control, then we really have a significant problem.”

And right after he said it, some dickhead asked him if he would nuke China given the executive order to do so, clearly challenging his idea of absolute loyalty hoping to either get him to sound provocative by saying yes or to make him look like an idiot by backtracking on what he just said by implying that he does not actually give his full loyalty to the president. Swift chose the former and just said yes, like when your boss gave you 3 assignments instead of 1 so you just say yes cus you can't say no, but you certainly did not go to him and ask for them. He could not say, "Uh, we only attack little nations like Iraq and Libya; if the president told me to start a war with China or Russia, I'd just stand there and look at him like he had 3 heads."

In reality, if he got an order from Trump to start a nuclear war out of the blue, he'd probably make about 100 phone calls to authenticate the order, then to get all the other generals on board with what the hell is going on, is Trump drunk, etc... I imagine a similar process in China and Russia (though maybe a little less since Xi and Putin aren't globally recognized for being insane but, but not much less). That said, it is the duty of the generals of all nations, including all of the big 3 to obey their presidents and if it is to start a nuclear war, that's listed as a possibility in the job description. If you're a general who won't obey the order to fight, you probably need a new profession.

But anyway, he got asked a dick question, and his colleague, Brown, actually tried to smooth things over with a follow-up:

"The admiral was not addressing the premise of the question, he was addressing the principle of civilian authority of the military. The premise of the question was ridiculous."

It's an interesting stupid thing that happened and I wouldn't change anything for it. Although I do agree with you that China should build more DF-41 and DF-ZF, maybe about 2,500-3,000.
 
Last edited:

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Newspapers, especially on the internet, like to exaggerate, embellish, and spin in the headlines in order to get people to read, or click-on, the article. Pretty hypocritical to complain about Chinese spy ships in Australia's economic zone when the US always sends spy ships into China's economic zone. Remember when Obama use to question China spying on "friends" if they really wanted to be friends? Then after Edward Snowden, the world finds out the US was spying on it closest allies doing literally everything accused of China.
 

Lethe

Captain
Admiral Swift could not answer other than as he did. Nonetheless, if such an order were actually to arrive, one can only hope that the persons involved would consider their duties not only to the chain of command, but also to the American people and indeed to humanity. The same applies for their Chinese counterparts.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
It's an interesting stupid thing that happened and I wouldn't change anything for it. Although I do agree with you that China should build more DF-41 and DF-ZF, maybe about 2,500-3,000.

That many delivery systems would be unnecessary I think.

8 SSBNs with 12-16 mirved SLBMs each (allowing at least 2 SSBNs on patrol at any time) that can cover the important targets from Chinese waters, coupled with 80-100 DF-31A/AG/41 TELs with a combination of mirv and non-mirv warheads will be much more sensible in the medium term... totalling a few hundred ICBM range nuclear warheads, I think will be more than enough for deterrence purposes.


Remember the cost of developing a nuclear arsenal isn't just the warheads, but a massive chunk goes to developing, procuring and maintaining the delivery systems (missiles themselves). 3000 DF-41s would be insane and approach cold war era levels.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top