China's nuclear arsenal is one of the most advanced in the world

[illusion8]

India exists within the Sino-Pak sphere of Asia you will have to learn to live with it if you want to continue as a republic.

Sino Pak sphere of Asia what is that? I thought you were America's buddies?

 

[ares]

If India even dares to send a nuke into the air against either country that will be the end of India as we know it, at least try and live for a century as a republic before killing yourself.

We aren't the 'rabid' animal with a nuclear itch..who's unsafe nuclear weapons and unstable policies, the entire world is vary off...we are stable nation with declared no first use doctrine.

We would not be the first to fire a nuclear weapon..but we can assure you, if you fire one against us..that would be last thing you will ever do!!

 

[illusion8]

Well, your ballistic missiles cannot carry your cumbersome nukes.

Right - so Agni's and Prithvi's will have conventional warheads.

 

[ares]

Well, your ballistic missiles cannot carry your cumbersome nukes.

Please support your brain fart with proofs.

 

[illusion8]

Please support your brain fart with proofs.

Hold on @ares, I am waiting for proof about the W88 chinese copy from the last couple of pages - he took me in circles but hasn't yet given any.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Please support your brain fart with proofs.

Well, USA and USSR have both carried about 1000 nuclear tests, while China has carried about 45 nuclear tests.

With today's advanced supercomputer, there is no difference between 1000 and 45, because all the nuclear tests can be done by the simulation of the supercomputer as long as you possess the first hand data of your real nuclear tests.

India hasn't successfully created a fully yielded nuke, thus all your first hand datas are useless, you need to retestify everything over again.

Hold on @ares, I am waiting for proof about the W88 chinese copy from the last couple of pages - he took me in circles but hasn't yet given any.

China doesn't possess the W-88 copy, but it does possess the miniaturized megaton warhead.

 

[ares]

China will survive without having a scratch, while India will be off the map.

But remember, China doesn't want a dead India, China wants India to follow its creation of the BRICS bank.

So having war with India is not worthy compared to the cooperation with India for creating the foundation of the BRICS bank.

If this is the intellect level of common Chinese..who thinks ..they can survive a nuclear war without a scratch...then perhaps your govt does the right thing by not involving you people in important decisions in your country..like 'electing a govt'..they too realize the people are outright dumb.

 

[illusion8]

Well, USA and USSR have both carried about 1000 nuclear tests, while China has carried about 45 nuclear tests.

With today's advanced supercomputer, there is no difference between 1000 and 45, because all the nuclear tests could be simulated by the supercomputer as long as you possess the first hand data of your real nuclear tests.

India hasn't successfully created a fully yielded nuke, thus all your first hand datas are useless, you need to retestify everything over again.



China doesn't possess the W-88 copy, but it does possess the miniaturized megaton warhead.

Brainf@rts galore - and no, I am not going to counter your post - because I don't think I can counter stupidity, I have got a fair inkling of your intellectual level here.

 

[Martian2]

Hold on @ares, I am waiting for proof about the W88 chinese copy from the last couple of pages - he took me in circles but hasn't yet given any.

NTI: [Seismic data show] Chinese W-88 is similar but NOT IDENTICAL to American W-88

The most interesting and controversial debate regarding China's reverse-engineering was the development of China's W-88 class miniaturized thermonuclear warhead. The U.S. claims China appropriated the designs and reverse-engineered the W-88 warhead. China says that isn't true.

China says this is a case of convergent engineering. For example, an airplane must have two wings to provide lift and an engine to provide thrust in the rear. Another example of convergent engineering is all rockets are long and thin. In other words, form must follow function. There is only a very limited way to create a massive thermonuclear explosion using a compact warhead.

Here is the crux of the problem. "U.S. government realized that information derived from Chinese tests in 1992-1996 were similar to U.S. nuclear designs." The Chinese nuclear tests data are "similar," but not identical to U.S. nuclear tests on the W-88 (see NTI citation below).

W88 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The W88 is a United States thermonuclear warhead, with an estimated yield of 475 kiloton (kt), and is small enough to fit on MIRVed missiles. The W88 was designed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in the 1970s. In 1999 the director of Los Alamos who had presided over its design described it as "The most advanced U.S. nuclear warhead."[1]

The Trident II SLBM can be armed with up to 8 W88 (475 kt) warheads (Mark 5) or 8 W76 (100 kt) warheads (Mark 4), but it is limited to 4 warheads under SORT."

NTI: Research Library: Country Profiles: China

"...According to the Cox Committee Report, suspicion of China's nuclear espionage started after the U.S. government realized that information derived from Chinese tests in 1992-1996 were similar to U.S. nuclear designs. This similarity, combined with other information derived from classified sources, led the Cox Committee to claim that China had stolen several bomb designs, including the U.S.' most advanced W-88 design and a design for an enhanced radiation weapon (neutron bomb). Yet, the Cox Report has been severely criticized by both experts and officials in the United States as a political document that has several technical inaccuracies."

 

[Martian2]

New York Times article on Chinese W-88 thermonuclear warhead

BREACH AT LOS ALAMOS - A special report. - China Stole Nuclear Secrets For Bombs, U.S. Aides Say - NYTimes.com

"BREACH AT LOS ALAMOS: A special report.; China Stole Nuclear Secrets For Bombs, U.S. Aides Say
By JAMES RISEN and JEFF GERTH
Published: March 6, 1999

WASHINGTON, March 5— Working with nuclear secrets stolen from an American Government laboratory, China has made a leap in the development of nuclear weapons: the miniaturization of its bombs, according to Administration officials.

Until recently, China's nuclear weapons designs were a generation behind those of the United States, largely because Beijing was unable to produce small warheads that could be launched from a single missile at multiple targets and form the backbone of a modern nuclear force.

But by the mid-1990's, China had built and tested such small bombs, a breakthrough that officials say was accelerated by the theft of American nuclear secrets from Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

The espionage is believed to have occurred in the mid-1980's, officials said. But it was not detected until 1995, when Americans analyzing Chinese nuclear test results found similarities to America's most advanced miniature warhead, the W-88.

By the next year, Government investigators had identified a suspect, an American scientist at Los Alamos laboratory, where the atomic bomb was developed. The investigators also concluded that Beijing was continuing to steal secrets from the Government's major nuclear weapons laboratories, which had been increasingly opened to foreign visitors since the end of the cold war.

The White House was told of the full extent of China's spying in the summer of 1997, just before the first American-Chinese summit meeting in eight years -- a meeting intended to dramatize the success of President Clinton's efforts to improve relations with Beijing.

White House officials say that they took the allegations seriously; as proof of this, they cite Mr. Clinton's ordering the labs within six months to improve security.

But some American officials assert that the White House sought to minimize the espionage issue for policy reasons.

''This conflicted with their China policy,'' said an American official, who like many others in this article spoke on condition of anonymity. ''It undercut the Administration's efforts to have a strategic partnership with the Chinese.''

The White House denies the assertions. ''The idea that we tried to cover up or downplay these allegations to limit the damage to U.S.-Chinese relations is absolutely wrong,'' said Gary Samore, the senior National Security Council official who handled the issue.

Yet a reconstruction by The New York Times reveals that throughout the Government, the response to the nuclear theft was plagued by delays, inaction and skepticism -- even though senior intelligence officials regarded it as one of the most damaging spy cases in recent history.

Initially the Federal Bureau of Investigation did not aggressively pursue the criminal investigation of lab theft, American officials said. Now, nearly three years later, no arrests have been made.

Only in the last several weeks, after prodding from Congress and the Secretary of Energy, have Government officials administered lie-detector tests to the main suspect, a Los Alamos computer scientist who is Chinese-American. The suspect failed a test in February, according to senior Administration officials.

At the Energy Department, officials waited more than a year to act on the F.B.I.'s 1997 recommendations to improve security at the weapons laboratories and restrict the suspect's access to classified information, officials said.

The department's chief of intelligence, who raised the first alarm about the case in 1995, was ordered last year by senior officials not to tell Congress about his findings because critics might use them to attack the Administration's China policies, officials said.

And at the White House, senior aides to Mr. Clinton fostered a skeptical view of the evidence of Chinese espionage and its significance.

White House officials, for example, said they determined on learning of it that the Chinese spying would have no bearing on the Administration's dealings with China, which included the increased exports of satellites and other militarily useful items. They continued to advocate looser controls over sales of supercomputers and other equipment, even as intelligence analysts documented the scope of China's espionage.

But after learning that Mr. Samore had insisted that this case had no implications for China policy, the President's national security adviser, Samuel R. Berger, acknowledged tonight that the case was clearly relevant.

''We already knew that China was a country that ought not to get sensitive technology,'' said Mr. Berger. ''This reinforced that.''

Mr. Samore, the Security Council official, did not accept the Energy Department's conclusion that China's nuclear advances stemmed largely from the theft of American secrets.

In 1997, as Mr. Clinton prepared to meet with President Jiang Zemin of China, Mr. Samore asked the Central Intelligence Agency for a quick alternative analysis of the issue. The agency found that China had stolen secrets from Los Alamos but differed with the Energy Department over the significance of the spying.
...
China's technical advance allows it to make small warheads for use in submarines, mobile missiles and long-range missiles with multiple warheads -- the main elements of a modern nuclear force.

While White House officials question whether China will actually deploy a more advanced nuclear force soon, they acknowledge that Beijing has made plans to do so at some point. (article continues)"

 

[illusion8]

NTI: [Seismic data show] Chinese W-88 is similar but NOT IDENTICAL to American W-88

The most interesting and controversial debate regarding China's reverse-engineering was the development of China's W-88 class miniaturized thermonuclear warhead. The U.S. claims China appropriated the designs and reverse-engineered the W-88 warhead. China says that isn't true.

China says this is a case of convergent engineering. For example, an airplane must have two wings to provide lift and an engine to provide thrust in the rear. Another example of convergent engineering is all rockets are long and thin. In other words, form must follow function. There is only a very limited way to create a massive thermonuclear explosion using a compact warhead.

Here is the crux of the problem. "U.S. government realized that information derived from Chinese tests in 1992-1996 were similar to U.S. nuclear designs." The Chinese nuclear tests data are "similar," but not identical to U.S. nuclear tests on the W-88 (see NTI citation below).

W88 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The W88 is a United States thermonuclear warhead, with an estimated yield of 475 kiloton (kt), and is small enough to fit on MIRVed missiles. The W88 was designed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in the 1970s. In 1999 the director of Los Alamos who had presided over its design described it as "The most advanced U.S. nuclear warhead."[1]

The Trident II SLBM can be armed with up to 8 W88 (475 kt) warheads (Mark 5) or 8 W76 (100 kt) warheads (Mark 4), but it is limited to 4 warheads under SORT."

NTI: Research Library: Country Profiles: China

"...According to the Cox Committee Report, suspicion of China's nuclear espionage started after the U.S. government realized that information derived from Chinese tests in 1992-1996 were similar to U.S. nuclear designs. This similarity, combined with other information derived from classified sources, led the Cox Committee to claim that China had stolen several bomb designs, including the U.S.' most advanced W-88 design and a design for an enhanced radiation weapon (neutron bomb). Yet, the Cox Report has been severely criticized by both experts and officials in the United States as a political document that has several technical inaccuracies."

I went through all the links posted by your comrade - one spoke of a 1 megaton nuclear device tested in 1992, the other was Cox's report about American stolen tech by Chinese - how does it prove that china indeed has a W 88 class warhead?

 

[Martian2]

I went through all the links posted by your comrade - one spoke of a 1 megaton nuclear device tested in 1992, the other was Cox's report about American stolen tech by Chinese - how does it prove that china indeed has a W 88 class warhead?

Try reading the New York Times article. It's written in plain English.

Quote from The New York Times:

"But it was not detected until 1995, when Americans analyzing Chinese nuclear test results found similarities to America's most advanced miniature warhead, the W-88."

----------

If you can't understand the New York Times citation, it serves no purpose for me to post five more identical citations.

It has been common knowledge for fifteen years that China has a W-88 class thermonuclear warhead. For some reason, you Indians seem to be pretty clueless. I can only conclude you don't follow major American newspapers and think-tanks.

 

[illusion8]

Try reading the New York Times article. It's written in plain English.

Quote from The New York Times:

"But it was not detected until 1995, when Americans analyzing Chinese nuclear test results found similarities to America's most advanced miniature warhead, the W-88."

----------

If you can't understand the New York Times citation, it serves no purpose for me to post five more identical citations.

It has been common knowledge for fifteen years that China has a W-88 class thermonuclear warhead. For some reason, you Indians seem to be pretty clueless. I can only conclude you don't follow major American newspapers and think-tanks.

Yeah wasted 5 minutes - again but couldn't find it - point it out if you can., I don't exactly have common knowledge about chinese warheads - the whole discussion developed around your comrade claiming somethings and I asking proof of it - I haven't received a diect reply for it yet.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

China today set off the largest underground nuclear test it has ever conducted, the State Department said. The explosion was thought to have a yield of about one megaton, equivalent to a million tons of TNT.

The blast, which took place about 1 A.M. Eastern daylight time, had 70 times the explosive power of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, and exceeded the 150-kiloton limit observed by Washington and Moscow under a 1990 treaty, scientists said.

The Bush Administration said it regretted the action by Beijing and urged restraint. Limit on Underground Tests

There were sharp condemnations of China in Congress. Legislators from both major parties have been critical of what they see as an unacceptably conciliatory policy toward China by President Bush.

[ The Chinese Foreign Ministry issued a statement confirming that Beijing had held a nuclear test. The statement said China was in favor of "complete prohibition on nuclear tests within the framework of effective nuclear disarmament." ]

The Chinese test was only one-fifth as powerful as the largest underground test by the United States, a five-megaton blast in Alaska on Nov. 6, 1971, the most powerful underground nuclear explosion on record. A megaton is 1,000 kilotons.

The largest underground test by the Soviet Union was a 2.8 to 4 megaton blast on Oct. 27, 1973, a year before Moscow and Washington signed a treaty limiting the size of those explosions to 150 kilotons. The pact was ratified in 1990.

The Chinese test comes on the heels of persistent reports that Beijing is selling missile technology to Middle Eastern nations, and at a time when Beijing is rejecting all criticism of its human-rights record.

Arms-control experts also seized the chance to criticize the Bush Administration for its opposition to a comprehensive international test-ban treaty.

China's last and largest previous underground test, an explosion of between 50 and 200 kilotons, was on Aug. 16, 1990.

The United States set off two underground nuclear explosions this year in Nevada, on March 26 and April 30. Both were reported to be less than 150 kilotons.

Large underground tests, even on the scale of today's blast in China, are considerably smaller than the atmospheric explosions of the 1950's and 1960's. On Feb. 28, 1954, the United States tested a 15 megaton bomb at Bikini Atoll in the Pacific. The largest atmospheric test on record was conducted by the Soviet Union, a 58-megaton explosion on Oct. 30, 1961.

Atmospheric tests were prohibited by the 1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty, signed by more than 100 countries.

Today's Chinese underground explosion was situated in Xinjiang Province in northwestern China by Scandinavian seismologists, according to reports from Stockholm. In Hong Kong, scientists at first thought they were registering an earthquake.

"This suggests that the Chinese must be trying to develop large yield, offensive nuclear warheads for long-range missiles," said Gary Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control. "This is a city-buster."

But he emphasized that China was still no threat to the United States in the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Richard A. Boucher, the State Department spokesman, said, "We regret that the Chinese have conducted this test and that they are not demonstrating the same restraint as shown by Russia, ourselves, or the other nuclear weapons states." Cold-War Mentality

China is not a party to the Threshold Test Ban Treaty between the former Soviet Union and the United States, which came into effect in December 1990. Under that pact, underground tests are limited to 150 kilotons.

"It is rather ironic that the United States would criticize other countries for testing," said Dunbar Lockwood, senior analyst at the Arms Control Association, a private research organization. "The United States under the Reagan and Bush Administrations has been one of the major impediments to progress toward a comprehensive test ban."

Mr. Milhollin described the Chinese test as illustrative of a cold-war mentality in Beijing. He added: "This is the price we're paying for not having a worldwide comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. It means China can improve its ability to destroy U.S cities at long range by testing."

Leonard S. Spector, a nuclear-weapons expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who has recently been in China, said in an interview that Beijing's test could take the pressure off the Bush Administration to agree to a comprehensive test ban. Pressure has been growing internationally and in Congress for that action. Moratorium on Tests

In October 1991, the former Soviet President, Mikhail S. Gorbachev, announced a one-year moratorium on the testing of nuclear weapons. Boris N. Yelstin, the Russian President, has suggested in public remarks that he is preparing to resume testing this fall if there is no reciprocal movement from the United States.

The French have also stopped testing to encourage international action on a comprehensive ban.

"Thoughtful advocates of testing restraint think that a comprehensive test ban might draw in India," Mr. Spector said.

Senator Alan Cranston, Democrat of California and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on East Asia, reacted to reports of today's test by calling China a "renegade nation."

"This test will strongly reinforce Congressional efforts, which I once again will help lead, to deny China most-favored-nation trade staus unless China complies with international non-proliferation standards," Senator Cranston said in a statement.

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/05/22/world/chinese-set-off-their-biggest-nuclear-explosion.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

prolly a weibo version of the article has the part that you mentioned about.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Well, W-88 weighs about 350kg and it has a yield of 475kt, while the Chinese miniaturized nuclear warhead weighs a bit more and it has a yield about 1000kt.

Why it is so hard for you Indians to understand?

 

[ares]

Well, W-88 weighs about 350kg and it has a yield of 475kt, while the Chinese miniaturized nuclear warhead weighs a bit more and it has a yield about 1000kt.

Why it is so hard for you Indians to understand?

Why don't you provide a reliable source for your tall claims?