(Un)veiled threats: The "quiet neutralization" of China´s nuclear deterrent.

Martian

Martian

Senior Member
plawolf said:
China has been building and launching it's Long March serious of space rockets and is making more and more launches, and with it's continued brisk SRBM and possibly IRBM production, it has probably the most up-to-date and readily available human resources and industrial base of any country in the world to start mass producing ICBMs.

Obviously SRBMs and satellite carriers are not ICBMs, but the skills needed to make the former could easily be transferred into the mass production of the latter. It will take a bit of time and a lot of effort, but it will be much quicker and easier than having to set up all the infrastructure and train up the people from scratch.

Even then it will not come close to 100 DF31s per year, but who needs 100 DF31s to be produced each year? Last I checked, we only have one earth to blow up, and even 50 DF31s will put a big enough dint in this earth for us all to be royaly screwed.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that PlaWolf is correct. 50 DF31s, with a one-megaton warhead each, will produce significant nuclear fallout. The radioactive fallout will create health problems. Also, when you nuke the other side with 50 city-busters, they'll retaliate in kind. Now, the vicious cycle begins and we're really screwed.

It's a lot of fun to compare thermonuclear weapons, but it's unthinkable for someone to actually use one of them. There's bluffing and then there's unimaginable stupidity.
 
Last edited:
A

antiterror13

Brigadier
Martian said:
I'm pretty sure that PlaWolf is correct. 50 DF31s, with a one-megaton warhead each, will produce significant nuclear fallout. The radioactive fallout will create health problems. Also, when you nuke the other side with 50 city-busters, they'll retaliate in kind. Now, the vicious cycle begins and we're really screwed.

It's a lot of fun to compare thermonuclear weapons, but it's unthinkable for someone to actually use one of them. There's bluffing and then there's unimaginable stupidity.
Click to expand...

With your logic, even 1 DF-31 would blow the earth up ?
 
Martian

Martian

Senior Member
antiterror13 said:
With your logic, even 1 DF-31 would blow the earth up ?
Click to expand...

If you nuked the other side's city then you incur a very real risk of escalating into an all-out nuclear exchange. Let's say Beijing, New York, or Moscow was nuked. For smaller countries, you don't need a nuke. Conventional forces can be easily deployed to bomb weak countries. Anyway, there is a real risk that lighting the match in a powder-keg room (e.g. thousands of thermonuclear warheads on hair-trigger alert) could blow us all straight to "kingdom come." Good luck surviving the nuclear winter and worldwide radioactive fallout.

I make posts on China's nuclear deterrence, but I don't expect them to ever fire one during battle. I have never truly believed in the concept of a "limited nuclear war." When the Air Force ROTC instructor taught me the scenario, I never found it to be convincing.

If one of my major cities had been nuked, I would be worried about sub-launched stealth nuclear cruise missiles, incoming B-2 stealth bombers, or stealth nuclear warheads pre-positioned in orbit headed for my nuclear silos. I would rather launch them all then wait for them to be destroyed by the other side.
 
Last edited:
R

Red___Sword

Junior Member
antiterror13 said:
With your logic, even 1 DF-31 would blow the earth up ?
Click to expand...

Martian said:
If you nuked the other side's city then you incur a very real risk of escalating into an all-out nuclear exchange. Let's say Beijing, New York, or Moscow was nuked. For smaller countries, you don't need a nuke. Conventional forces can be easily deployed to bomb weak countries. Anyway, there is a real risk that lighting the match in a powder-keg room (e.g. thousands of thermonuclear warheads on hair-trigger alert) could blow us all straight to "kingdom come." Good luck surviving the nuclear winter and worldwide radioactive fallout.

I make posts on China's nuclear deterrence, but I don't expect them to ever fire one during battle. I have never truly believed in the concept of a "limited nuclear war." When the Air Force ROTC instructor taught me the scenario, I never found it to be convincing.

If one of my major cities had been nuked, I would be worried about sub-launched stealth nuclear cruise missiles, incoming B-2 stealth bombers, or stealth nuclear warheads pre-positioned in orbit headed for my nuclear silos. I would rather launch them all then wait for them to be destroyed by the other side.
Click to expand...


MAD topic again.

I don't object this kind of topic, but I DO aware that some patriotic thoughts of "China don't have big enough stick, to wipe (preciously) ME out!!!" - getting us no where, previously.

IMO, don't bother to start this (MAD) topic, unless people involved in the discussion have a sober mind that his own ass is ("was", actually) on the same line.

Edit:

Martian said:
...

It's a lot of fun to compare thermonuclear weapons, but it's unthinkable for someone to actually use one of them. There's bluffing and then there's unimaginable stupidity.
Click to expand...

I like the last sentence.
 
Last edited:
D

delft

Brigadier
plawolf said:
China has been building and launching it's Long March serious of space rockets and is making more and more launches, and with it's continued brisk SRBM and possibly IRBM production, it has probably the most up-to-date and readily available human resources and industrial base of any country in the world to start mass producing ICBMs.

Obviously SRBMs and satellite carriers are not ICBMs, but the skills needed to make the former could easily be transferred into the mass production of the latter. It will take a bit of time and a lot of effort, but it will be much quicker and easier than having to set up all the infrastructure and train up the people from scratch.

Even then it will not come close to 100 DF31s per year, but who needs 100 DF31s to be produced each year? Last I checked, we only have one earth to blow up, and even 50 DF31s will put a big enough dint in this earth for us all to be royaly screwed.
Click to expand...
Different industrial plants produce liquid and solid fueled rockets. The US chose solid rocket boosters for the Space Shuttle despite higher costs for production and handling and scary joints that would kill Challenger in 1986 because it supported a solid rocket producer.
 
D

delft

Brigadier
plawolf said:
China has been building and launching it's Long March serious of space rockets and is making more and more launches, and with it's continued brisk SRBM and possibly IRBM production, it has probably the most up-to-date and readily available human resources and industrial base of any country in the world to start mass producing ICBMs.

Obviously SRBMs and satellite carriers are not ICBMs, but the skills needed to make the former could easily be transferred into the mass production of the latter. It will take a bit of time and a lot of effort, but it will be much quicker and easier than having to set up all the infrastructure and train up the people from scratch.

Even then it will not come close to 100 DF31s per year, but who needs 100 DF31s to be produced each year? Last I checked, we only have one earth to blow up, and even 50 DF31s will put a big enough dint in this earth for us all to be royaly screwed.
Click to expand...
Different industrial plants produce liquid and solid fueled rockets. The US chose solid rocket boosters for the Space Shuttle despite higher costs for production and handling and scary joints that would kill Challenger in 1986 because it supported a solid rocket producer.
China is producing a much wider variety of solid fueled rocket weapons and might anyway not have been tempted to use solid fueled space rockets.
The hysterical sounding propaganda about liquid fueled Iranian space rockets was obnoxious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top