Talk:The Chinese threat

From dKosopedia

Dear "roger",

Please forgive the quotes I added because of the initial lower-case "r".

Secondly, I want to thank you for citing me as a reference in your dramatic article. I do agree nobody should forget to 20 to 25 DF-5A ICBMs located about 60 km. SW of the university where I teach. For balance you might add the US has five or six missile-launching submarines on station at all times with 16 Trident missiles, each having up to three multiple, independently-target reentry vehicles, aka warheads. A total of 11 are based in the Pacific; those not on station are in port, going there or heading back out. Two are on hard alert at all times. The rest hang out on a lower level to alert to bounce the rubble. Also note that China has only 15 provinces plus three key cities incorporated as independent entities, lots like Washington DC. In short, a countervalue strike could make do with one submarine to cover the top three cities and all 15 provincial capitals. Obviously you'd want a counterforce strike too and how much you want to throw at the PLA depends on how far down the chain of command you want to go. There are B-2s and B-52s are forward-based in Guam. So yes, don't forget 20 to 25 missiles built from 1960s technology against all of that.

I've been living in China for six years now and my first visit dates back to 1992, so this country has no longer squares with the sort of impact that US TV coverage can have on fertile imagination.

Roger, if you take the trouble to read Chinese history, paying extra close attention to Confucianism along the way somewhere, you may discover that (1) China has been practising single-party central government for several millennia (2) the Chinese are intense social networkers and, by extension, a nation of merchants, (3) the PLA has deployed abroad thrice in the past 60 years -- and made a full withdrawal of forces shortly after cessation of hostilities and (4)the PLA cannot project power beyond neighbouring countries.

Your secret submarine base is no secret. The photos are all over the Internet and marked on Google Earth. So are two others. I guess you're thinking of the one on Hainan Island, the local florida with nice beaches and warm winter temperatures that is becoming increasing popular with honeymooners and other sorts of holidaymakers, both domestic and international. If you go to www.fas.org, you can even see a photo of the latest Jilin Type 094 missile-launching submarine with all 12 hatches left open in order to end the silly debate in the Western media about whether it carried 12 missiles or 16. If you follow the GAS discussion on that naval asset, you will learn the missile is not operational yet and that the submarine would be recklessly adventurous to stray too far offshore -- its design suggests it is relatively noisy for all detection purposes and, interestingly, submarines can be harder to detect in shallow water and it could count on the coastal defense mix to shield it from attack.

The whole Chinese nuclear arsenal (strategic, "long range" and perhaps tactical) stands at about 250 to 300 warheads. If you compare with other nuclear powers, this figure is in the same ballpark as the arsenals of France, india, Israel, Pakistan and the UK. The only folks way, way out past left field are Russia and the USA.

For further research, you might also check the PEW Global Attitudes survey on China: it reports that 86% of the population here thinks the government is "going in the right direction". Like any survey, it has its design limitations but PEW uses the same methodology for its other studies and there aren't many governments that score that high.

Finally, your article needs a new title, less ambitious and all-encompassing than "Chinese Threat" when almost all the content focuses on a grassroots rights issue and any "threat" of potential direct effect upon the readership is... 20 to 25 single-warhead DF-5As.

Oh, and by the way, the one-megaton warheads are not mounted on the launch vehicles and stored in a secure, separate facility -- as one observer quipped: "The Chinese trust the Americans and Russians more than they trust each other."

Kind Regards,

Arthur Borges

Gosh I'm so glad "roger" withdrew his article.

If nobody voices any objections, I'd love to write up a piece on this non-issue.

read

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/20797485/chinas_allseeing_eye