Nuclear patrol in the Pacific to boost China’s own security

[jerry_tan]

Can China guaranteed that its 1.5billion population would be saved from U.S.'s ICBMs from its own ABM system? What about US version of the HSV that can penetrate China's ABM system. Waste of time for China to try that then eh? Don't think so.

Why not lets talk about conventional warfare ONLY , nuclear warfare is for Idiots who think the world to be wipe out.

 

[Oldman1]

Why not lets talk about conventional warfare ONLY , nuclear warfare is for Idiots who think the world to be wipe out.

One known fact, Russia was about to launch a nuclear strike back in 1995 when they thought a rocket launch in Norway was a nuclear attack against Russia. So I like to point out that sometimes nuclear launch is possible.

 

[greenwood]

One known fact, Russia was about to launch a nuclear strike back in 1995 when they thought a rocket launch in Norway was a nuclear attack against Russia. So I like to point out that sometimes nuclear launch is possible.

We firstly have to let American know China has nuclear weapons. Because American medias delibrately hide this fact, more than half of American (guessed) don't know China has nuclear weapons. Those blind guys would make false judgement and terrible outcome by impulsion, for example, the Pacific fleet general Harris.

 

[Oldman1]

We firstly have to let American know China has nuclear weapons. Because American medias delibrately hide this fact, more than half of American (guessed) don't know China has nuclear weapons. Those blind guys would make false judgement and terrible outcome by impulsion, for example, the Pacific fleet general Harris.

First time I've heard of American media would hide the fact that China has nuclear weapons.

 

[greenwood]

First time I've heard of American media would hide the fact that China has nuclear weapons.

Really, once a American election candidate didn't know China is nuclear nation. I am shocked, you know candidate has the chance of president, he didnt know that, not to mention common guys.

 

[Oldman1]

Really, once a American election candidate didn't know China is nuclear nation. I am shocked, you know candidate has the chance of president, he didnt know that, not to mention common guys.

Perhaps because the news media is not always the best information for politicians to know about a particular country. I've known China had nukes for a very long time, but nobody in the media tells us otherwise.

 

[greenwood]

Perhaps because the news media is not always the best information for politicians to know about a particular country. I've known China had nukes for a very long time, but nobody in the media tells us otherwise.

I guess Chinese army and navy should "produce" more materials, for American medias. Just like this nuclear patrol, otherwise, those American medias has no interests.

 

[Oldman1]

I guess Chinese army and navy should "produce" more materials, for American medias. Just like this nuclear patrol, otherwise, those American medias has no interests.

You could, but wouldn't change much. Now did the U.S. media try to put down that the Soviets didn't have nukes when this was happening? Who knows.

 

[Red Wolf]

I fully agree with this article.

China should definitely increase its nuclear arsenal.

China should stop being timid and apologising for its power.

The American regime only understand the power of strength.

Nationalist jingoism like this article is often misplaced. China can easily adopt an aggressive posture but it would play into the American narrative, i.e., China is dangerous and hegemonic. This would create the Russia effect where all your neighbours will flock to NATO for safety making NATO relevant again for a generation, or two. Unless, China is looking to start another Cold War, there is no need to give ammo to the US. As it stands, US is doing everything it can to rollback the Multilateral/Multipolar NWO.

 

[greenwood]

Nationalist jingoism like this article is often misplaced. China can easily adopt an aggressive posture but it would play into the American narrative, i.e., China is dangerous and hegemonic. This would create the Russia effect where all your neighbours will flock to NATO for safety making NATO relevant again for a generation, or two. Unless, China is looking to start another Cold War, there is no need to give ammo to the US. As it stands, US is doing everything it can to rollback the Multilateral/Multipolar NWO.

This difference is Russia's neighbor are really scare of the bear but China's neighbor are pretended to be threatened.

Even in China's most powerful empire for centuries, we can't write a long list we ever attack lots of neighbors.

The nowadays most anti-China Pinoys I guess they have to admit, China in all past 2000 year ( after marine record to those islands ) never attack them. China beat Dutch in Taiwan in 1690's, but China didn't go to hurt nearby Pinoys.

All of territory disputes are not created by China. China was the defender, not offender.
China-India disputes were created by British expansion in 1910's,
China-Japan disputes were created by Japan annex Ryukyu kingdom.

 

[Red Wolf]

This difference is Russia's neighbor are really scare of the bear but China's neighbor are pretended to be threatened.

Even in China's most powerful empire for centuries, we can't write a long list we ever attack lots of neighbors.

The nowadays most anti-China Pinoys I guess they have to admit, China in all past 2000 year ( after marine record to those islands ) never attack them. China beat Dutch in Taiwan in 1690's, but China didn't go to hurt nearby Pinoys.

All of territory disputes are not created by China. China was the defender, not offender.
China-India disputes were created by British expansion in 1910's,
China-Japan disputes were created by Japan annex Ryukyu kingdom.

Your arguments are based on semantics. In reality, news articles don't explain history. They simply repeat the lie till it becomes the truth. Now repeat, "China is dangerous and hegemonic."

By overreacting, China will be giving impetus to the narrative above. Sooner or later, a Cuban missile crisis moment will come along and the world will be dragged back into a Cold War.

 

[greenwood]

Your arguments are based on semantics. In reality, news articles don't explain history. They repeat the lie till it become the truth. Now repeat, "China is dangerous and hegemonic."

By overreacting, China will be giving impetus to the narrative above. Sooner or later, a Cuban missile crisis moment will come along and the world will be dragged back into a Cold War.

When they can get benefits from repeat "China is dangerous and hegemonic", I don't doubt they will do it.
They can't gain benefits from repeaing the lies, they will return to be rational.

For example, China has a neighbor called Nepal. They onced repeated scaring China badly and sold "China is dangerous". Nowadays this sound almost disappears.

Your arguments are based on semantics. In reality, news articles don't explain history. They repeat the lie till it become the truth. Now repeat, "China is dangerous and hegemonic."

By overreacting, China will be giving impetus to the narrative above. Sooner or later, a Cuban missile crisis moment will come along and the world will be dragged back into a Cold War.

Pus, you seem to not think highly of a people's historical memory. In present American influence, it maybe run.
For long period, historical memory will control a people / nation's behavior. In Eastern Europe, you must be clear Armenia and Turkey relationship. The memory flow in their blood, it could be hiden sometimes, when facing some real conflict, the memory will be activate again.
If you don't believe in my opinion, Germany could try to act offensive against its neighbors. They will certainly flood WWII history over you and wash all Germany-neighbors present friendship into trash bin.
But China don't have this historical burden with neighbors, at least not our victim.

 

[Red Wolf]

When they can get benefits from repeat "China is dangerous and hegemonic", I don't doubt they will do it.
They can't gain benefits from repeaing the lies, they will return to be rational.

For example, China has a neighbor called Nepal. They onced repeated scaring China badly and sold "China is dangerous". Nowadays this sound almost disappears.

The benefit is obvious: Start a new Cold War with China and make NATO relevant again.

Pus, you seem to not think highly of a people's historical memory. In present American influence, it maybe run.
For long period, historical memory will control a people / nation's behavior. In Eastern Europe, you must be clear Armenia and Turkey relationship. The memory flow in their blood, it could be hiden sometimes, when facing some real conflict, the memory will be activate again.
If you don't believe in my opinion, Germany could try to act offensive against its neighbors. They will certainly flood WWII history over you and wash all Germany-neighbors present friendship into trash bin.
But China don't have this historical burden with neighbors, at least not our victim.

Historical memory? Japan is an ally of US, a country that dropped two nukes on it. Vietnam fought a bloody war against US, now its an ally. All of this has nothing to do with the fact that your daily news doesn't give you historical context.

For example, what do you know about Ethiopia? Why are the Ethiopian security forces killing Oromo people? If I repeat the lie, "Oromo people are a threat to Ethiopia." Sooner or later, people who don't know the history of Ethiopia will believe the lie. Just like people who don't know the history of China will believe, "China is dangerous and hegemonic."

Bottom line, China should focus on the economy. Nuclear weapons didn't save USSR, they won't save China either.

 

[greenwood]

The benefit is obvious: Start a new Cold War with China and make NATO relevant again.





Historical memory? Japan is an ally of US, a country that dropped two nukes on it. Vietnam fought a bloody war against US, now its an ally. All of this has nothing to do with the fact that your daily news doesn't give you historical context.

For example, what do you know about Ethiopia? Why are the Ethiopian security forces killing Oromo people? If I repeat the lie, "Oromo people are a threat to Ethiopia." Sooner or later, people who don't know the history of Ethiopia will believe the lie. Just like people who don't know the history of China will believe, "China is dangerous and hegemonic."

Bottom line, China should focus on the economy. Nuclear weapons didn't save USSR, they won't save China either.

That's America's benefits of making NATO relevant. China's neighbors benefits is getting benefits from both China and America. It is obvious Eastern nations, Poland, Austria, Greece etc and Middle East didn't get any benefits during cold war, their choosing alternatives had been badly crushed.
I badly doubt other Asian nation will impulsly collide with China.
And you ignore USSR irritated a lot neighbors from China, US to West Europe. Nowadays China-Russia cooperation cover almost half of Euro-Asia continent. You check the map. America is not the major power anymore like 40 years ago. China has tremendous economic relationship with South America, Africa and Caspian sea areas by the way.

 

[TaiShang]

The benefit is obvious: Start a new Cold War with China and make NATO relevant again.

My friend, NATO is already super-relevant. Remember the intervention in Libya? That was NATO's doing.

But, that is within the European context.

In East Asia, the US cannot have a NATO-like institution. Hence they developed security bilateralism, that is, hub and spokes model.

China already has been facing the threat and that goes well before the SCS or patrol in the Pacific.

The US is already at China's doorsteps and has been doing all it can to scare others against China.

What China needs to do is to flex muscle, both economic and military, give out economic benefits and incrementally punish those who infringe upon its sovereignty. It is not that China will invade anyone. It will only achieve full control over its sovereign territories, without which national territorial integrity is incomplete.