gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
Errrr...Yeah...Philosophically believing missiles would provide a credible defense was a major part of that 'mis-calculation and threat assessment'.Soviet went banckupt not because of the missiles program but geopolitical mis-calculation and threat assessement, if China and Soviet got alone, this world will still bi-polar: communist and capitalist. As for China, since the opening, we're on steady rise this is due to the fact we have draw lessons from others and calibrate ourself to adapt with new situation. Missile might not cost effective but it's still valuable.
A missile is essentially a throwaway weapon. That is like having a single shot pistol and throw it away after you pulled the trigger. All the while your opponent is developing reusable multiple shots machine guns. Yes, each missile will be less costly than an aircraft carrier or an air base and you can build a lot of them. But each missile is also far less flexible and limited in deployment, and am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that no Chinese members here will properly understand the context of 'deployment', a missile cannot have its mission changed once launched, a missile cannot report the dynamics of a battlefield, leaving its masters really clueless, a missile cannot provide feedback on enemy responses...Do I need to continue?
I hope the entire PLA leadership thinks like you do.