Yuanwang 4 Sunk by Carrier killer missle DF21 in One test?

[gambit]

I agree, that is why with the "prompt global strike program" Bush decided to pursue the hypersonic option. Instead of converting trident missiles for conventional use. It would be to easy to mistake a ballistic missile launch as a nuke attack. Unfortunatly Obama seems to have revived the conventional Trident option.

If the next administration even HINTED that any ballistic missile attack would be regarded as a nuclear attack, therefore earning a nuclear response, regardless of target type and location, it would render the DF-21 either useless or a national suicide weapon.

 

[casual]

Any use of nukes takes everything to a whole new level. The Chinese know this as well as the U.S.

China is not going to commit suicide to destroy a carrier.

it's dangerous to make assumptions in war.

 

[Thomas]

Sir,
Why would one go for a conventional trident when there is a cheaper alternative? Sounds a bit ridiculous to me!

The speed at which a far away target can be attacked and the accuracy that Trident Mirv's are capable of.

 

[casual]

If the next administration even HINTED that any ballistic missile attack would be regarded as a nuclear attack, therefore earning a nuclear response, regardless of target type and location, it would render the DF-21 either useless or a national suicide weapon.

which would earn a nuclear response in return.

o well.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

The speed at which a far away target can be attacked and the accuracy that Trident Mirv's are capable of.

Sir,
Aren't all ICBM systems considered as strategic systems? Wouldn't it lead to mistaking it for a Nuclear weapon launched by the US. And that will lead to paranoia by many countries?

This first to react will be the Russians. This is not a nice idea IMHO.

 

[gambit]

which would earn a nuclear response in return.

o well.

Yes...The Chinese government is either stupid or shortsighted, which I do not agree for both. They must know that this American policy option is ALWAYS available. So the best possible explanation for the DF-21 would be that it is a gamble that the Americans will enter a financially costly arms race. A bet that my G/F, who is a dealer in the Bellagio, would love to take.

 

[gambit]

it's dangerous to make assumptions in war.

Sorry...But if you study military history, particularly in the events leading up to wars, you will find that such assumptions are quite common. The fate of the nation is at stake and with nuclear weapons where an entire city can be wiped out in a single strike, assumptions in the absence of evidences are all that political and military leaders have to go by.

 

[Thomas]

it's dangerous to make assumptions in war.

That's right, especially in the fog of war. What happens when a perfect storm of events causes the wrong conculsions to be made? Look at what almost happened with Russia in 1995. An experimental Rocket in Norway was launched to study the aurora borealis. Prior notice was given to Russia. However that information was not passed to the Russian Military.

WashingtonPost.com: Cold War Report

"This event resulted in a full alert being passed up through the military chain of command all the way to President Boris Yeltsin, who was notified immediately and the "nuclear briefcase" (known in Russia as Cheget) used to authorize nuclear launch was automatically activated. It is reported that President Boris Yeltsin activated his "nuclear keys" for the first time in his tenure."

 

[Akasa]

Yes...The Chinese government is either stupid or shortsighted, which I do not agree for both. They must know that this American policy option is ALWAYS available. So the best possible explanation for the DF-21 would be that it is a gamble that the Americans will enter a financially costly arms race. A bet that my G/F, who is a dealer in the Bellagio, would love to take.

The US still retains the option of a nuclear first strike. China, on the other hand, does not.

If incoming medium-range ballistic missiles are inbound for a ship, then I'm pretty sure the US experts can already figure out that it's a DF-21, not some nuclear-tipped ICBM. A nuclear first strike would involve hundreds of missiles simultaneously, with intercontinental ballistic missiles, and the target would be the mainland US. A DF-21D strike, on the other hand, involves a single medium-range missile and the target is a military ship.

Even if they view it as a nuclear attack, why risk nuclear war for an incoming missile that might not even be nuclear? The risks are too high to gamble.

 

[Thomas]

The US still retains the option of a nuclear first strike. China, on the other hand, does not.

If incoming medium-range ballistic missiles are inbound for a ship, then I'm pretty sure the US experts can already figure out that it's a DF-21, not some nuclear-tipped ICBM. A nuclear first strike would involve hundreds of missiles simultaneously with intercontinental ballistic missiles, and the target would be the mainland US. A DF-21D strike, on the other hand, involves a single medium-range missile and the target is a military ship.

Even if they view it as a nuclear attack, why risk nuclear war for an incoming missile that might not even be nuclear? The risks are too high to gamble.

There are a lot of what if's in war, especially in the heat of battle. And just becuase China's public policy is no first strike. If China was taking severe losses from say U.S. submarines and stealth aircraft. There would be a a lot of preassure to ratchet up the battle to try and overcome losses.

 

[HongWu]

C'mon.... a nuclear exchange with China will reduce the US population by about 50%. China will target all cities with population over 100,000 with MIRV 400 kt warheads. Also target all military and industrial facilities. Target clean water and agricultural infrastructure. The survivors in the USA will fight each other for food and water. If you think the present political situation is bad now......

 

[Thomas]

C'mon.... a nuclear exchange with China will reduce the US population by about 50%. China will target all cities with population over 100,000 with MIRV 400 kt warheads. Also target all military and industrial facilities. Target clean water and agricultural infrastructure. The survivors in the USA will fight each other for food and water. If you think the present political situation is bad now......

yes full scale Nuclear war is bad for both sides.

 

[below_freezing]

So the ball is in the US court. The DF-21 is a defensive weapon. If the US simply refuses to put carriers in range it's completely useless. If the US declares war on China and puts its carriers in range, then it should prepare for the consequences.

 

[Thomas]

So the ball is in the US court. The DF-21 is a defensive weapon. If the US simply refuses to put carriers in range it's completely useless. If the US declares war on China and puts its carriers in range, then it should prepare for the consequences.

The U.S. isn't going to declare war on China. But it will honor it's treaty obligations with South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan. So actually the ball is in China's court.

 

[Martian2]

The U.S. isn't going to declare war on China. But it will honor it's treaty obligations with South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan. So actually the ball is in China's court.

Which existing defense treaty between the U.S. and Taiwan are you referring to? The website for the U.S. State Department states that the defense treaty had been terminated decades ago.

Taiwan

"Following de-recognition, the United States terminated its Mutual Defense Treaty with Taiwan. However, the United States has continued the sale of appropriate defensive military equipment to Taiwan in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act, which provides for such sales and which declares that peace and stability in the area are in U.S. interests. Sales of defensive military equipment are also consistent with the 1982 U.S.-P.R.C. Joint Communiqué."