ChineseTiger1986
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2010
- Messages
- 23,530
- Reaction score
- 12
- Country
- Location
Yes, I totally agree with you! lol:)
I think the best answer is: China has zero nuke.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes, I totally agree with you! lol:)
I think the best answer is: China has zero nuke.
According to the Chinese government they posses smallest operationally deployed nuclear weapon force out of the P5 nations. Of course that statement causes some Chinese members here feel a bit small in their pants, but perhaps one day they realize there is no reason for such feelings since small arsenal gives PRC moral superiority over countries like Russia and USA.
I don't see any reason to doubt PRC's statements when it comes to nuclear weapons.
According to the Chinese government they posses smallest operationally deployed nuclear weapon force out of the P5 nations.
February 11, 2013, 7:10 p.m. ET
Obama's Nuclear Fantasy
The president is setting the stage for a world with more nukes in the wrong hands.
By BRET STEPHENS
As a young Soviet military officer, Viktor Esin was stationed in Cuba during the October 1962 crisis, where he had release authority over a nuclear-tipped missile targeting New York. On his first visit to Manhattan in December, I made sure to thank him for not obliterating our city.
Gen. Esin rose to become chief of staff for the Strategic Rocket Forces, and he is now a professor at the Russian Academy of Military Science. So what's been on his mind lately? Mainly the stealthy rise of China to a position of nuclear parity with the U.S. and Russia. "All in all, they may have 850 warheads ready to launch," he says. "Other warheads are kept in storage and intended to be employed in an emergency." He estimates the total size of the Chinese arsenal at between 1,600 and 1,800 warheads.
That is something to bear in mind as the Obama administration seeks to slash the U.S. arsenal to about 1,000 strategic warheads. That would be well below the ceiling of 1,550 warheads stipulated by the 2010 New Start Treaty. The administration also wants to spend less than the $80 billion it promised on modernizing America's rusting nuclear-weapons infrastructure.
On the strength of that promise 13 Republican senators gave President Obama the votes he needed to ratify New Start. Suckers! Now the president means to dispense with the Senate altogether, either by imposing the cuts unilaterally or by means of an informal agreement with Vladimir Putin. This is what Mr. Obama meant in telling Dmitry Medvedev last year that he would have "more flexibility" after re-election.
But what, you ask, is so frightening about having "only" 1,000 nuclear weapons? Surely that is more than enough to turn any conceivable adversary Paleolithic. Won't we remain more or less at parity with the Russians, and far ahead of everyone else?
It all depends on China. It is an article of faith among the arms-control community that Beijing subscribes to a theory of "minimum means of reprisal" and has long kept its arsenal more or less flat in the range of 240-400 warheads. Yet that is a speculative, dated and unverified figure, and China has spent the last decade embarked on a massive military buildup. Isn't it just possible that Beijing has been building up its nuclear forces, too?
When I broached this theory in an October 2011 columnnoting that the U.S. had, in fact, underestimated the size of the Soviet arsenal by a factor of two at the end of the Cold WarI was attacked for being needlessly alarmist. But one man who shares that alarm is Gen. Esin. In July 2012, he notes, the Chinese tested an intermediate-range DF-25 missile, which Russia carefully tracked.
"In the final stage the missile had three shifts in trajectory, dropping one [warhead] at each shift," he notes. "It's solid evidence of a MIRV [multiple warhead] test." A month later, the Chinese launched a new long-range, MIRV-capable missile, this time from a submarine.
The general runs through additional evidence of China's nuclear strides. But what should really get the attention of U.S. military planners are his observations of how Russia might react. "If China doesn't stop, Russia will consider abandoning the INF Treaty," he warns. "Russia cannot afford not taking this factor into account."
According to the Chinese government they posses smallest operationally deployed nuclear weapon force out of the P5 nations. Of course that statement causes some Chinese members here feel a bit small in their pants, but perhaps one day they realize there is no reason for such feelings since small arsenal gives PRC moral superiority over countries like Russia and USA.
I don't see any reason to doubt PRC's statements when it comes to nuclear weapons.
According to the Chinese government they posses smallest operationally deployed nuclear weapon force out of the P5 nations. Of course that statement causes some Chinese members here feel a bit small in their pants, but perhaps one day they realize there is no reason for such feelings since small arsenal gives PRC moral superiority over countries like Russia and USA.
I don't see any reason to doubt PRC's statements when it comes to nuclear weapons.
New Recruit
New Recruit
According to the Chinese government they posses smallest operationally deployed nuclear weapon force out of the P5 nations. Of course that statement causes some Chinese members here feel a bit small in their pants, but perhaps one day they realize there is no reason for such feelings since small arsenal gives PRC moral superiority over countries like Russia and USA.
I don't see any reason to doubt PRC's statements when it comes to nuclear weapons.
No country discloses openly how many nuclear warheads they have. Its better not to pull such crap out of your arse.
Air Force Strategists Say US Should Unilaterally Cut Nukes By 90 Percent | ThinkProgressIn fact, the United States could address military utility concerns with only 311 nuclear weapons in its nuclear force structure while maintaining a stable deterrence it does not matter if Russia, who is Americas biggest competitor in this arena, follows suit. The relative advantage the Russians might gain in theory does not exist in reality. Even if one were to assume the worsta bolt from the blue that took out all of Americas ICBMsthe Russians would leave their cities at risk and therefore remain deterred from undertaking the first move.
New Recruit
Why you think that's not enough? It was calculated that US could deter China and Russia with 311 weapons.