keywords from my previous post is “surprise first strike”. Majority of the DF-31 and DF-41 missiles are likely be at their bases.
PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC
- Thread starter SEAD
- Start date
Btw, there are only 2 possible trajectories across the surface for a ballistic missile flying in a straight line if u have the same target & launch point (shortest distance one & opposite way around the globe), unless the rocket turns either to the left or right mid flight right? But that's impossible for an ICBM, it can't make a large turn after the boost phase which is only first 3 mins.
the shortest path between 2 points on a map is a great circle which does NOT look like a line in a 2-D projection of the world.
Here's a google maps link to show you the shortest path along the great circle between two random points on the map, which may or may not be relevant: Hotan, Xinjiang, China and NYC.
Note the trajectory heading over western Russia, Atlantic and Eastern Canada like I said. Notice total length of trajectory is ~10000 km, well within range of certain rockets.
It has nothing to do with Alaska or the Pacific. It is often shorter to shoot westwards, people only have a mental bias towards shooting east because of how maps are laid out and because that's where other allies of certain countries are located.
If the path doesn't show up just use the measure distance tool on your own.
But what if it is the US that faces defeat if it goes to war with China?
In 10-15 years time, that should be conventional wisdom.
broadsword
Brigadier
In 10-15 years' time, what if China becomes more powerful than the US? Would they still want to fight? I doubt.
Yes, US bombers could violate Indonesia territory and use Indonesian airspace to launch attacks. But this has a cost.
There are 273 million people in Indonesia. Indonesia can rally another 394 million in the rest of ASEAN.
And don't forget Indonesia is a Muslim country. If the US and Indonesia get into a conflict, the rest of the Muslim Ummah will be sympathetic at a minimum. That is another 1600 million people.
If Indonesia was powerless, then yes, the US could violate Indonesian airspace without consequences.
But we can see how Western sanctions against Russia are failing because the rest of the world (7 of 8 billion people including China/India) aren't joining in.
And Indonesia would definitely receive Chinese support against US bombers violating Indonesian airspace.
Plus would Australia allow US bombers to do this? It would poison Australia-Indonesia relations, and Indonesia does have leverage against a smaller Australia.
So I don't see the benefits of US bombers using Indonesian airspace outweighing the costs.
Yes, a war would be a terrible thing.
But my best guess is that inflation in China would be comparatively muted because so much production capacity will be idled. We would see some domestic Chinese factories being redirected towards war production. Exports and imports will drop in China, but they would still run a large trade surplus. That would support a strong currency like we see with Russia today (NB. it's ridiculous how the EU ripped up the long-term low-cost gas contracts it had with Russia, so now they pay more money to Russia for the same gas on expensive spot markets)
And yes, China can allow Taiwan a lot of autonomy in any political settlement.
250 or 300 or 350 nukes That number, last time I checked, come from American Federation of Scientists back around 2010.
The estimation method used is “judging by the electricity production of China, by the end of 1970s, China have about 300 nuclear warhead”. It is probably true back in the 1970s, since nuclear enrichment require quite a lot of electricity and back in 1970s, China just keeps the minimal deterrent.
That number is later quoted over and over again and somehow, it becomes the number of nukes China has in 2021-2022.
Of course, the glaring hole of logic in the that argument is that China must somehow, over the past four decades, never produces anymore nukes or only made replacement work, but hey, it helps people sleep at night.
It is a state secret and a well kept one at that.
In truth, China have so many uranium mines of all kinds. It also have thousands of miles of coastline with no shortage of sea water for tritium refinement. It also have no shortage of nuclear power stations that can produce plutonium. China also has fully domestic technology on all its nuclear weapons. plus China is the largest electricity producer in the world by a fair distance ..
i don't think so, China have only 300-350 nuke warheads.
The estimation method used is “judging by the electricity production of China, by the end of 1970s, China have about 300 nuclear warhead”. It is probably true back in the 1970s, since nuclear enrichment require quite a lot of electricity and back in 1970s, China just keeps the minimal deterrent.
That number is later quoted over and over again and somehow, it becomes the number of nukes China has in 2021-2022.
Of course, the glaring hole of logic in the that argument is that China must somehow, over the past four decades, never produces anymore nukes or only made replacement work, but hey, it helps people sleep at night.
It is a state secret and a well kept one at that.
In truth, China have so many uranium mines of all kinds. It also have thousands of miles of coastline with no shortage of sea water for tritium refinement. It also have no shortage of nuclear power stations that can produce plutonium. China also has fully domestic technology on all its nuclear weapons. plus China is the largest electricity producer in the world by a fair distance ..
i don't think so, China have only 300-350 nuke warheads.
The most hilarious part of their estimates is that they keep listing DF-4 and H-6 dumb bombs as being part of the arsenal even in 2019 and insist that exactly 24 DF-41 that showed up on parade are all that exists.
Hey, @Patchwork_Chimera, if you're up for it and taking requests, let us know what you think of "Bridge" Colby. I had a hearty chuckle when you called Ian Easton an oxygen thief, so I'm curious what you make of Bridge.