U.S. 'exaggerates' China's defense

Oh, those rules. im sorry. understood.

only 20 (4-5 megatonn) nuclear bombs capable of reaching the US! thats plenty. Mutually Assured Destruction is still relevent, could melt all the ice caps and cause tidal waves with the rest if it really came to that. China will not get pushed around because they only have 20.

Spike said:

Perhaps it has come to the point where MAD is no longer relevent in diplomacy between major powers

Click to expand...

$$$ is the new weapons of this world... with a exchange reserve at $1 trillion and $700 billion of that comes from the US, it's easy to see why they don't give a care about nukes.

mvmccorry said:

china has inter continental ballistic subs right!?

Click to expand...

You are also forgetting the Type-094 SSBN with 16 JL-2 and a range of 8,000km...

mvmccorry said:

only 20 (4-5 megatonn) nuclear bombs capable of reaching the US! thats plenty. Mutually Assured Destruction is still relevent, could melt all the ice caps and cause tidal waves with the rest if it really came to that. China will not get pushed around because they only have 20.

Click to expand...

Eh if you can't win just launch those 200 warheads toward Siberia or Lop Nor region and the world can suffer with you...

Currently the US maintains about 500 ICBM's, 350+ SLBM's, 320 nuclear-tipped Tomahawks, & 850 nuclear bombs. The total US nuclear stockpile is estimated at 6,000-7,000 active + 3,000 in reserve.

The PRC's nuclear stockpile is estimated at 400-430 warheads, with couple dozen ICBM's, couple dozen SLBM's, and assorted MRBM, SRBM, and free-fall bombs. Please keep in mind that the primary hypothetical threat to the PRC during cold war was USSR and not the US, so ICBM's was not the highest priority.

The PRC doesn't currently have effective nuclear deterrance against the US. The SORT treaty signed by US and Russia has pledged to reduce each country's deployed warheads to 1,700 - 2,200:


I think it's possible for the PRC to bump its nuclear stockpile in a decade or so to match, but not the delivery systems. Honestly I just don't see DF-31A's rolling off production line by the hundreds. The trend is moving away from city-busting ICBM's to smaller battlefield bunker-busting nukes. We should prepare for a day when minature battlefield nukes are used in a "conventional" war.

Well just about those "mini-nukes". Isn't there a US congressional ban to develop nukes under a certain yield ? I remember to have read something like that but couldn't find it no shortly. So do you US fellows think that might fall ?
And what about: "I don't fear those who own a thousend nukes, but the one who owns a single one because he might use it." Don't know who said this ...
And since US troops/bases/instalations are widely spread around the world, it's not essential to carry the warheads around half the world.
Not that it might be politicly wise or strategic helpfull, just the military aspect.
But granted the last thoughts may be a bit too fictional

mvmccorry said:

Oh, those rules. im sorry. understood.

only 20 (4-5 megatonn) nuclear bombs capable of reaching the US! thats plenty. Mutually Assured Destruction is still relevent, could melt all the ice caps and cause tidal waves with the rest if it really came to that. China will not get pushed around because they only have 20.

Click to expand...

Only 20 nuclear warheads means that a deterrent of sorts exists now... until the US National Missile Defense system becomes operational. Then all of a sudden no more deterrent exists for China against the US. Even without a NMD shield, having only 20 warheads pointed at America means that in a nuclear shootout, America is badly scarred, but as a nation and society America will continue to exist. China, at the end of a nuclear war with America, will only be spoken of in the past tense.

Kongo said:

Only 20 nuclear warheads means that a deterrent of sorts exists now... until the US National Missile Defense system becomes operational. Then all of a sudden no more deterrent exists for China against the US. Even without a NMD shield, having only 20 warheads pointed at America means that in a nuclear shootout, America is badly scarred, but as a nation and society America will continue to exist. China, at the end of a nuclear war with America, will only be spoken of in the past tense.

Click to expand...

But China doesn't seem to care that it can't achieve MAD with the US. It's not panicking like the Soviets did and matching warhead with warhead, delivery system with delivery system. Obviously they won't be trying a pre-emtive nuclear attack on the US anytime soon, and the US can't nuke China without getting nuked itself first. Perhaps conventional high megaton nukes are now irrelevent between the US and China?

If he's referring to the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system, I think the system was forced into accelerated deployement before it's ready. But that's for another discussion.

Assuming the system works and has 100 intercetor rockets ready, it should defend the US mainland against PRC's ~20 ICBM stockpile. Though by then we should except to see DF-31A and JL-2's in service.

Alternatively, the US could simply scrap the ABM treaty that restricts its missile defense deployement. The Soviet Union has fallen and the US is under no obligation to treat Russia as its equal.

The PRC is in a fairly good strategtic situation today, where the primary foe (soviet union) has fallen and the country is under no threat of war, other than of its own making (Taiwan). However, to protect the country from nuclear blackmail, it must obtain effective secondary nuclear strike / nuclear deterrance against ANY nation on Earth.

We're entering an era where more and more countries are getting the bomb. Besides nation to nation conflicts, we have to worry about sub-national terriorist organizations too. Though they might not represent any legit government, only threat of nuclear anniliation of their home country may give them pause. Osama bin Laden was said to have considered using "dirty" nuclear bomb, but decided against it because of the possible retribution/revenge attack from the US to the middle east.

Spike said:

But China doesn't seem to care that it can't achieve MAD with the US. It's not panicking like the Soviets did and matching warhead with warhead, delivery system with delivery system. Obviously they won't be trying a pre-emtive nuclear attack on the US anytime soon, and the US can't nuke China without getting nuked itself first. Perhaps conventional high megaton nukes are now irrelevent between the US and China?

Click to expand...

They were one of the most vocal opponents to the US developing NMD system. China cares alright. But the problem is that producing DF-31s means additional costs incurred. Not only the DF-31s cost money. The C&C system to tie them together costs a hell of a lot of money too. What's going to go to pay for these additional DF-31s? 093s? J-10s? As you said, the US isn't going to use a nuke unless in retaliation to Chinese employment of one... so other platforms take priority. That doesn't mean that they are not concerned with the neutralisation of their nuclear deterrant.

Interesting how neocons think they can survive even a limited nuclear strike. Look at how they thought how easy Iraq was going to be to conquer. The US can destroy China but destroy the world in the process. And I'm sure Japan has some radiation shield to protect themselves from the fallout that'll be a bullet train straight to Japan. The only ones that will start a nuclear war are the ones that think they'll survive it. Americans generally believe China having nuclear weapons is a recent event. I'd use to hear all the time, "If China ever got nukes, they'd start WWIII." Then I'd tell them China has had nukes since 1964. Their reaction was either to deny it because that was when it was thought a third world country didn't have the intellectually capability to put together a nuclear bomb or they'd be embarrassed from their ignorance. But now because of the whole Wen Ho Lee fabrication, they're both in denial and think China got nukes from stealing them from the US. So I guess that means China must've had a time machine back in 1964 that traveled to the future to steal nuclear secrets with the help of Wen Ho Lee. I guess that means China must've had a stolen a time machine in order to steal a time machine that the US hasn't invented yet.

The DF-31 and JL-2 is next-generation replacement for the DF-21 and JL-1, while the DF-31A is intended to supplement the DF-5 as well as replace the cancelled DF-41. I seriously doubt these ICBM/SLBM's would be cancelled to save cost at this point. According to James, 8-12 DF-31's are already deployed in 2005.

The DF-5 use liquid fuel and require long prep time (30-60+ min) before it can be launched. It's not really suitable for today's needs and should be replaced by solid propellant ICBM's like the DF-31A.

Personally, I think a nuclear exchange between PRC and US is very unlikely, but the PRC should build nuclear deterrance that can reach any point on the globe, possibly through a modest fleet SSBN's.