China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

ZeEa5KPul

Colonel
Registered Member
And 3 DF-17?
No, the tarp covered vehicles don't look like the DF-17 TEL (wheel spaces and missile outlines look different). They seem to be just more of the same type of the missiles they're beside - 1 DF-26, 2 DF-21D, and 1 DF-16.

No DF-17 was involved in the making of these pictures.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Like I said, a third silo site...
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
As I said nothing prevent China from enlarging their strategic missile forces With this new find we can be sure that China's Sibir is now in place and they change their strategy to LOW

Adm.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, said Thursday that the first two missile fields being built are part of an “explosive” expansion of nuclear forces by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

The
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
officials said the missile field will be used for the DF-41,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
‘s newest ICBM, which is believed to be able to accommodate up to 10 warheads carried on multiple, independently targetable reentry vehicles, or MIRVs.

No details were provided on the location of the third ICBM field, but it is believed to also be in western
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, where most of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
‘s missiles and underground nuclear complexes are located. The other missile fields under construction were identified in commercial satellite imagery over the past two months by non-government analysts. Those bases are located at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, in western
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, near Mongolia in northwestern
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

Together, the three new missile bases will house 350 to 400 new long-range nuclear missiles, U.S. officials said. If 10 warheads are deployed on the DF-41s,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
‘s warhead level will increase to more than 4,000 warheads on its DF-41s alone.


By contrast, the United States has an estimated 3,800 warheads, with 1,357 deployed for use and the rest in storage.

Adm.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
noted that the United States has a larger warhead stockpile than
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
but said two-thirds of those weapons are “operationally unavailable” because of treaty constraints, such as provisions of the New START treaty with Russia.

The
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
estimated in its annual report on the Chinese military last year that the number of warheads stockpiled by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
is in the “low 200s” and will increase by around 200 in the coming years. Adm.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
told Congress in April that intelligence estimates of Chinese nuclear buildup needed to be updated weekly because of the fast pace of Beijing’s strategic arms development.
 

ChongqingHotPot92

Junior Member
Registered Member
Before Covid it was assumed they had little appetite for casualties and could be deterred by the prospect of mass loss. Guess that was a flawed assessment.
I don't see how this is a joke. One of the founding principles of the United States is the idea of governments hands off the daily well-beings of citizens. The Federal Government is only responsible for defense, foreign policy, implementation and interpretations of laws, and overseeing contracts. In this sense, it has never been the job of government entities to deal with the lives and deaths of ordinary people. Contrast to the small government of the US, both the Chinese emperors and contemporary CCP leaders are expected under the Confucian political culture to care for the ordinary people like an authoritative, but benevolent father (as imperfect as this maybe in reality). This is why if there were large-scale famines or man-made disasters, citizens were justified to rebel and establish a new dynasty (installing a new ruling father that does his job). Therefore, maybe it is China that should worry more about mass deaths as a result of great power war than the United States. The small government in the form of a representative government has ironically been one of the strengths of the US in riding disasters because the Federal Government face much less expectations to directly take care of its citizens.
Like I said, a third silo site...
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
I remember Dr. Zhao Tong from Carnegie mentioned that the think is Beijing is although the Russian economy is only a 10th of China's, its massive nuclear arsenal and capabilities is highly effective in deterring any potential NATO interventions in Moscow's perceived near abroad (think Ukraine). Therefore, in order for China to pull off something like an armed unification with Taiwan or maritime war against Vietnam/Philippines, it would need a massive nuclear arsenal to back up its regional wars and deter potential US interventions. Gone are days of minimum deterrence (less than 200 bombs).

In fact, the Chinese may be right. I spoke to a former US Ambassador of the Clinton Administration in LA about Taiwan. He said that "when it comes dealing with major nuclear powers, there is limited military options for the US. It is simply unwise to engage in nuclear exchange simply to protect Taiwan or Ukraine. They are not Japan or NATO allies." Anyway, this is one man's outlook. Still need to balance his view with from hawks like Elbridge Coby, Pottinger, etc. (and folks who are willing to risk nuclear war over Taiwan due to ideological and other reasons).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top