remember how during China EU trade talks, the Europeans demanded rare earths and arrogantly sanctioned China? Doubtless they were doing it on behalf of the pentagon to shunt rare earths to America.
PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency
- Thread starter pugachev_diver
- Start date
remember how during China EU trade talks, the Europeans demanded rare earths and arrogantly sanctioned China? Doubtless they were doing it on behalf of the pentagon to shunt rare earths to America.
In virtually every major conflict North America was never touched and its civilian population especially its rich/powerful elites ,but the now real possibility of losing everything and actually suffering boggles their minds(even during the USA/SU cold war didn't have this aspect of evident economic/social decline as now) and this stark reality may just induce some common sense into the westoids not to accept defeat but to a accept a fairer ,multipolar world with peaceable,acceptable,mutually beneficial coexistence for all.Can it be that hard?
Last edited:
I believe this topic should consider what mutual assured destruction tactics truly entail. Because the actual number of nuclear warheads required to literally annihilate a nation far exceeds most people's imagination. If we're merely discussing how to win a nuclear war, it becomes extremely difficult to determine precisely how many warheads would guarantee victory. We'd likely have to factor in the enemy's nuclear arsenal and delivery systems. At least for now, the number of warheads is woefully inadequate, especially considering China's significant geostrategic disadvantages. U.S. SSBNs can approach launch positions and carry a full complement of 14 Trident D5 warheads. In contrast, China's JL-3 missile, while potentially comparable in performance, can only deliver a single warhead against U.S. silo targets tens of thousands of kilometers away. This disparity compels China to maintain a larger nuclear arsenal.
China probably only needs enough for the US and their non-European allies. Once the threshold is reached, the US will most likely launch against Russia. The Americans are not going to entertain the idea of Russia emerging out of a post nuclear war as a potential great power. Triggering the Russians to retaliate on NATO.
Pretty sure at the rate things are going, the USA will destroy itself well before China has to fire a single nuke. Also, the nukes in the USA has a use by date and given how they really suck when it comes to the things that matter (maintenance and upgrades, both of which are lacking), whose to say if the nuclear stockpile of the USA has been already compromised long ago. It’s only a matter of time before the bluff is called and given the current win rate, the USA is bound to lose yet again. Also I do wonder, given how hush hush things are, I wonder, is Fort Knox already empty?
Trying for a MAD-breaker is dumb. It's dumb when people push for Golden Dome to do it, and it's dumb for China to try as well. As soon as you start deploying it, the other guy will just set off a couple dozen nukes in the upper atmosphere and fry every satellite in orbit. The resulting Van Allen belt will ensure any replacements get fried too. So the end result is simply no satellites of any kind for anyone. Plus a few percentage points added to global cancer statistics.
Perfect example of a lose-lose scenario.
