It's finally done-The Three Gorges Dam

ravenshield936 said:

china wont be notified of an imminent attack. plus it's not a legitimate target because thats killing civilians. also i think the damage the dam does will be worse than MULTIPLE strategic nukes combined. no fallout, but the damages are worse. u can explain away a tactical nuke on a regiment, but the message of a dam is you want to kill people, lots of them, millions of them.

destroying the 3 gorges is perhaps nearing in conducting genocide. it's a surefire way of becoming the top enemy of an entire civilization.

?

Click to expand...

Theres a precedence of taking out a country's infrastructure even if it has civilian uses.

eg RAF taking out the German Dams during WW2
USA Bombing raids/strikes in Vietnam
The attacking of the Merchant marine/ during 1st and 2nd WW was considered permissable
Nato bombing in the Balkans taking out bridges etc

THe 3 Gorges dam would be undoubtedly supplying power to the armaments factories or powering other military uses eg radar etc,therefore in a total war situation it does become a legitimate target.

If the forces opposing China was to consider the dam a legit target Im sure it would be well signalled before the actual outbreak of hostilities
To prevent a large scale loss of life downstream, all the authorities in China have to do, is to empty the dam. The ball is in their court so to speak


(All you have to do is go back and read about all the possible targets published prior to the IRAQ wars 1&2 and all possible targets againts Iran by the warmongerers ), and what measures will be taken if IRAN was to play silly buggers in the gulf.

Similarly targets in China would be discussed by the free press in the West, with comments supporting or dismissive from the military.

Would it not be simpler to target the electrical transmission lines and transformer buildings leading away from the Dam than the dam itself after all it is a massive lump of Concrete.

The dams in Germany were relativly thin dams, and the target in thouse mission was the War industry more that the elecrical generating capasiity of the dam.

Two things the Three gorges dam provide electricity and transportation in the grand scheme of things the electrical generation capacity is only a fraction of chinas total output.

It would be easier to attack the thousands of Cole power plants, and target the locks with a few 1000+LB JDAM cripaling them for a few months/years.

I think the probability of a major earthquake damaging the dam is far more worrisome than the possibility of a military or terrorist attack.

Not only can the dam be drained several days before hostilities begin, the dam itself can withstand a tactical nuclear blast.

Simply put, the dam was designed with nuclear warfighting in mind.

AssassinsMace said:

We live in an age where the definition of words change according to who sees fit. If the definition of words can change on a whim, how hard is it for rules? I can point to many examples of note. If you look at what's been happening in the world you can see human rights crimes of the highest order happening where if China were committing them, the world would be on the brink of nuclear war... seriously. Rules are to trick people into believing that those that make them are fair. Crimes today are solely determined by who commits it and who's the victim. By that I'm sure the Three Gorges Dam is considered a "legitimate" target. All you need is the media to spell it out that the dam does something like supply power to a bomb factory and voila... it becomes a legitimate legal target regardless of what you think.

Click to expand...

In your logic, the history is writen by the victory side. Even if an attack on the dam fail to make a substantial dent, as long as China´s media can put enough spin on it, it would be O.K. that China choose to wipe the naiton responsible off the surface of the earth.

bladerunner said:

Theres a precedence of taking out a country's infrastructure even if it has civilian uses.

eg RAF taking out the German Dams during WW2
USA Bombing raids/strikes in Vietnam
The attacking of the Merchant marine/ during 1st and 2nd WW was considered permissable
Nato bombing in the Balkans taking out bridges etc

THe 3 Gorges dam would be undoubtedly supplying power to the armaments factories or powering other military uses eg radar etc,therefore in a total war situation it does become a legitimate target.

If the forces opposing China was to consider the dam a legit target Im sure it would be well signalled before the actual outbreak of hostilities
To prevent a large scale loss of life downstream, all the authorities in China have to do, is to empty the dam. The ball is in their court so to speak


(All you have to do is go back and read about all the possible targets published prior to the IRAQ wars 1&2 and all possible targets againts Iran by the warmongerers ), and what measures will be taken if IRAN was to play silly buggers in the gulf.

Similarly targets in China would be discussed by the free press in the West, with comments supporting or dismissive from the military.

Click to expand...

In those above-mentioned cases, the attacked didn´t have the capabilities to wreak havoc on the homeland of the attackers. Barring an Amargeddon scenario, do you expect any country to Bombard a nation with full range of nuclear retaliatory capabilities?

victtodd said:

In those above-mentioned cases, the attacked didn´t have the capabilities to wreak havoc on the homeland of the attackers. Barring an Amargeddon scenario, do you expect any country to Bombard a nation with full range of nuclear retaliatory capabilities?

Click to expand...

The name of the game is measured response. A failed conventional strike on a strategic target does not deserve a nuclear response. Such a response would result in international condemnation, no mater what spin you tried to put on it.

Here is a passage taken from the atimes printed yesterday. I dont know whether you will agree with the authors views.


By Francesco Sisci
...

"Furthermore, China has no real, deep friends in the world whereas America, despite all its weakness, can command friendship and loyalty from many countries. The US can muster global forces around China or any country it deems a problem. America can command global public opinion and even influence Chinese domestic public opinion, whereas the Chinese government sometimes has a hard time commanding its own arena. "..........."

cmb=1968 said:

Would it not be simpler to target the electrical transmission lines and transformer buildings leading away from the Dam than the dam itself after all it is a massive lump of Concrete.

The dams in Germany were relativly thin dams, and the target in thouse mission was the War industry more that the elecrical generating capasiity of the dam.

Two things the Three gorges dam provide electricity and transportation in the grand scheme of things the electrical generation capacity is only a fraction of chinas total output.

It would be easier to attack the thousands of Cole power plants, and target the locks with a few 1000+LB JDAM cripaling them for a few months/years.

Click to expand...

That would be the way to go, but the original question was what if the dam was attacked which then led to the posting of scenarios of whys and therefores.

bladerunner said:

"Furthermore, China has no real, deep friends in the world whereas America, despite all its weakness, can command friendship and loyalty from many countries. The US can muster global forces around China or any country it deems a problem. America can command global public opinion and even influence Chinese domestic public opinion, whereas the Chinese government sometimes has a hard time commanding its own arena. "..........."

Click to expand...

ROFL...

America can influence Chinese public opinion? I think that boat has sailed with the 2008 Tibet riots.

As for friends, is this guy truly naive, or deluded, enough to believe that there is such a thing as friendship in international politics?

Sure, the US can muster force anywhere on the globe, but it does so by paying a heavy economic price. China's defense budget is only a fraction of that of the US, allowing it to further its economic growth.

solarz said:

ROFL...

America can influence Chinese public opinion? I think that boat has sailed with the 2008 Tibet riots.

As for friends, is this guy truly naive, or deluded, enough to believe that there is such a thing as friendship in international politics?

Sure, the US can muster force anywhere on the globe, but it does so by paying a heavy economic price. China's defense budget is only a fraction of that of the US, allowing it to further its economic growth.

Click to expand...

Be that as it may I only put the author of the articles views in because I think it does reflect much of the Western geo political view in a China V America situation.
The former prime minster of Australia reflected mainstream Australian View by saying "Where America goes, so does Australia" and many NZ still think the same way as well. There are many other countries with a attitude not to distant from that, I cant see Canada, while not always agreeing with America, embark on a course to undermine it. Can China count on such allies? or are China's allies only fair weather friends?

As for Chinas defence spending in relation to Americas, Some sources claim that its actually twice the Chinese govts figure which would put it at abot $140 billion.
This can only increase at a faster speed as China's economy grows and it needs a expanded military to protects its economic interests while Americas might start to decrease inproportion to her GDP as her power wains, thus giving her excess money to invest in the economy.