China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread
- Thread starter peace_lover
- Start date
- Status
US urges China nuclear talks amid concerns over its rising capabilities alongside Russia threat
- Push follows Biden administration’s release of Nuclear Posture Review reflecting its desire for ‘integrated deterrence’ approach
Amid growing unease over China’s rising nuclear capabilities and a lack of bilateral dialogue, Washington is calling for talks with Beijing, concerned that for the first time in history the US will soon face two “major nuclear powers”.
Unsure where China is going with its nuclear arsenal, the US would “really like to have a conversation with them about each other’s doctrines about crisis communication, crisis management”, said Alexandra Bell, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for arms control, verification, and compliance, speaking at an Atlantic Council event in Washington on Tuesday.
“We’ve been working this issue with the Russians for 60 years. And as everyone can see, it’s still quite difficult,” Bell said. “We’re not in that space with Beijing yet.”
seems like US fears losing its nuclear leverage.. lamfooo
Ayi put it best yesterday - back in the days during Korean War the US would openly threaten to use nuclear weapon against both PVA in Korea as well as mainland China. Even back then Chairman Mao could clearly see through their nature and declared them to be paper tiger and said you go ahead and throw your atomic bombs, I'll just keep on throwing my hand grenades.
If such open Nuclear Blackmail could not threaten a pre-nuclear China, nor later on Vietnam nor North Korea than how is it that today's "mah integrated deterrence", "mah F-35 with its little B61-12 tactical nuke" could threaten the one country on the planet with the most amount of SRBMs, MRBMs and IRBMs? That's not even paper tiger, that's pointing at a piece of paper and threaten to fold it into an origami tiger.
members only video
Yes really great video and explained everything from china's perspective. Highly worth the couple of dollars a month imo.
I didn't watch the video as I am not their VIP member and am not willing to give any payment details to Youtube anyway. But I have discussed the new NPR in private with Ayi, and tbh he might be misinterpreting the so-called "nuclear blackmail" comment from the Chinese Foreign Ministry.
Let us be absolutely frank here, W76-2 doesn't even make sense against a nuclear peer at all. Is anyone expecting to drop a 5kt nuclear warhead on, supposedly a Chinese military base to demonstrate the nuclear capability and Chinese won't throw back a 650kt warhead in response towards Guam or Okinawa? Are we gonna pretend like "Ok we just nuked a Chinese military base. But it is low-yield and military target only with little fallout effect. Those damn Chinese won't dare to fight back because they don't have a similar low-yield warhead in their arsenal."
Not to mention that W76-2 is supposed to be made of primary-stage-only, where the most budget is. Li-6 or Li-7 is much cheaper than either plutonium or uranium. So what USN suggested is that they are using the same cost to procure a low-yield weapon, which is also bounded by treaty btw and slight increase flexibility from 0.000000001% to 0.0000000011%.
As for B61 with its stealth platform, the offensive force has to fly from Guam for about hours to strike silo targets deep inside Chinese mainland to force a China's capitulation. (Hint: China won't capitulate even if all silos are destroyed) First of all, the main B61 storage is in Europe as deterrence against Russia, it takes weeks if not months to re-locate them in Guam and deploy 20 B-2 or hundreds of F35 spread out in Okinawa, North Australia or Guam, making them very vulnerable targets in a nuclear war. That is also why US only deploys 20 nuclear warheads per base in Europe simple as it is a two way street in deterrence.
What if US gives up B61 deterrence on Russia and re-locate them all to Asia in advance and all its "allies" are willing to take the nuclear risk. So USAF needs 20 nuclear bases to secure a minimal first strike ability against China, all of them need dedicated maintenance teams and storage securities. Air based nuclear leg is the most expensive leg in triad and all China needs to do is to increase decoys among silo fields or simply build new silo bases. Building decoys is much much cheaper than building new air bases & training, so how is it winning in a nuclear arm race to pursue the least cost-effective way?
Back to the nuclear perception, Biden administration is an iteration of Trump but no SLCM-N and drop "hedge against future uncertainty." No nuclear expansion, no promise on nuclear pivot to Asia, muh ”integrated deterrence." It looks like a nothing burger compared with reality of Chinese nuclear expansion. All China needs to do is to rapidly develop & deploy ICBMs with warheads and EW systems. At the last, I think China has got 25% done on build a MAD deterrence and still long way to go in training & deployment.
The B61 is a nothing burger. They need to overfly a target to hit it. China's long wave radar will detect the strike way before that happens. The real problem is if/when the US starts deploying the Dark Eagle missile. But for that they need to actually get it to work first.
they are shit scared that is why they want to talk!
- Status