US admiral would ‘nuke China next week’ if Trump ordered it

[Penguin]

china will respond it by nuking u.s using df41 icbm and jl2 slbm.it will be suicidal for u.s

Nicely missed the point of the post, keep at it.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

China has advantage in land-based nuclear warheads while US leads in sea-based nuclear warheads.
Overall, both countries are roughly equal now.

Indeed, China is now also enhancing the naval and air nuclear deterrence.

I think the coming 12 Type 096 class SSBNs with the JL-3 are enough to meet its strategic requirement in the following decades.

Meanwhile, the stealth intercontinental range H-20 will be groundbreaking for China's aerial arsenal, since the current H-6K bomber is only long-medium range with non-stealth capability.

 

[UKBengali]

Indeed, China is now also enhancing the naval and air nuclear deterrence.

I think the coming 12 Type 096 class SSBNs with the JL-3 are enough to meet its strategic requirement in the following decades.

Meanwhile, the stealth intercontinental ranged H-20 will be groundbreaking for China's aerial arsenal, since the current H-6K bomber is only long-medium with non-stealth capability.

China needs a massive nuclear arsenal as it needs enough to deal with US, India and Russia(just in case).

 

[Penguin]

The Commander was asked if he will follow his president's order ? and he said, Yes!

And that is in principle the correct answer (although the Neurenburg and Tokyo warcrime trials suggest that blind obedience is not what is expected)

The creation of e.g. the International Military Tribunal served as a model for other tribunals, including The Hague in the Netherlands - for trying crimes committed during the Balkan wars - and the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, which tried Japanese officials for crimes against peace and against humanity. The trials also significantly influenced the development of international criminal law, serving as models for conventions such as the 1948 Convention on Genocide.

One would expect this level of commander has certain level of communication acumen when commenting on public. His response could be that he follows president/political decision, whatever that may be. This US general who happens to be commander of pacific fleet; him making such explicit comment actually showcase US as warmongering state in desperation. If anything, underline frustration of US military not being able to challenge China as before 9say 3 years back) clarified. In conventional military term, US no longer has overwhelming edge over China. So, desperate nuclear options are taunted without considering MAD. US general public is more or less hostage to fake mainstream media and have no clue how their politicians, elites and generals are plying with their life. Come MAD scenario, they sure will have something to say about it or simply accept the fate.

Who was it again recently telling neighbours 'to get used to it'?

China has advantage in land-based nuclear warheads while US leads in sea-based nuclear warheads.
Overall, both countries are roughly equal now.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

China needs a massive nuclear arsenal as it needs enough to deal with US, India and Russia(just in case).

China doesn't want to openly disclose its actual nuclear stockpile, because the US and Russia would force China to sign into those reducing stockpile treaties. Since China's nuclear arsenal is relatively new compared to those Cold War relics that are waiting to be disarmed, it would be absolutely a bad deal for China to disarm its own brand nuclear weapons in exchange with those obsolete Cold War relics.

Just look at the treaty of the medium range ballistic missile, both USA and Russia have restricted themselves to develop further capabilities of the medium range ballistic missile. Meanwhile China has now become the biggest player of the conventional ballistic missile, from DF-21D to DF-26, then to DF-31AG. All of them are capable to targeting the moving objects. A unique capability developed by China without being bounded by those stupid treaties.

So always keep in low profile even you are rich, then you could get yourself with less trouble.

 

[UKBengali]

And you think that the numbers for China, that is the richest country in the world in PPP and exploded hydrogen bomb as far back as 1967, is accurate on this map?

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

And you think that the numbers for China, that is the richest country in the world in PPP and exploded hydrogen bomb as far back as 1967, is accurate on this map?

It is ok for China if the West wants to keep believing that it got only few hundred nuclear warheads, but I doubt they could even believe their own statement wholeheartedly. Most likely a political stance to assure their little buddies in Asia. "Hey look, China is weak with a little nuclear stockpile, so just go ahead and mess with them, and Uncle Sam will be on your back!"

Meanwhile China will keep getting 'rich' in low profile by arming itself with full of DF-41 and JL-3 with the HGV nuclear warheads.

 

[LeGenD]

China has deployed at least four brigades of the DF-41. Such brigade consists 12 TELs with 24 missiles. That's totally 96 DF-41 ICBMs in account, and each DF-41 possesses at least 10 MIRVed warheads. Furthermore, China got many more variants from the DF-31 family, not mentioning the good ole DF-5 family. Also, the JL-2 and the coming JL-3 as China's cornerstone of the naval deterrence.

Can you provide sources that confirm these numbers? I haven't seen any.

A large number of reports suggest that China has not developed a massive nuclear arsenal and strike package much like US and Russia; see references below. China has certainly developed ICBMs to ensure a credible nuclear deterrence on its part but they are not massive in number and not all of them are capable of threatening US mainland (current status). A small number of Chinese ICBMs are MiRV capable but there is no credible information that they are actually MiRV'ed in practice. Furthermore, Chinese ICBMs are not deployed in such a way that they are ready to strike an enemy on moment's notice (24/7) much like in the case of US and Russia.

References:

https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/
https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2017-06/fs_1707_wnf.pdf
https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/160721_China_Nuclear_Weapons_Report.pdf

As for DF-41 ICBM:

The Pentagon has reported for more than two decades that China is developing a new follow-on road-mobile ICBM known as the DF-41. After considerable delay, the program appears to have made progress with several flight tests over the past few years, some of which have included multiple payloads. Reporting in the Washington Free Beacon, Bill Gertz reported that the “DF-41 is assessed by U.S. intelligence agencies to be powerful enough to deliver between six and 10 warheads up to 7456 miles – far enough to reach every corner of the United States from launch areas in eastern China” (Gertz 2016). However, Gertz did not provide a specific source for the assessment, which may be an exaggeration. To “reach every corner of the United States,” a missile with a range of 7456 miles (about 12,000 km) would have to launch from the most northeastern provinces of China, at least 400 km northeast of Beijing. But Chinese ICBMs tend to be based much further inside China to protect them against preemptive attacks.

Source: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00963402.2016.1194054

No confirmation of deployment of DF-41 missile brigades per this source yet: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/china/df-41.htm

This isn't to say that China will not improve and expand its nuclear forces in coming years - such efforts are already visible.

It is only in your pipe dream that China cannot achieve the MAD status.

I never said that and you need to calm down.

My point is that existing form of nuclear MAD is likely to diminish in coming years since defenses against ballistic missiles are becoming more and more capable and also expanding over time. Conversely, ballistic missile concepts are not going to improve much and their countermeasures are no longer as effective as they were once thought to be; latest generation of American interceptors can easily distinguish between real warheads and decoys and US is also planning to MiRV them in coming years.

Whether MAD remains a reality for long or not, nuclear weapons are a powerful deterrence and will remain so. And a full-scale war between two nuclear-armed states can be very costly to both so there's that.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Can you provide sources that confirm these numbers? I haven't seen any.

A large number of reports suggest that China has not developed a massive nuclear arsenal and strike package much like US and Russia; see references below. China has certainly developed ICBMs to ensure a credible nuclear deterrence on its part but they are not massive in number and not all of them are capable of threatening US mainland (current status). A small number of Chinese ICBMs are MiRV capable but there is no credible information that they are actually MiRV'ed in practice. Furthermore, Chinese ICBMs are not deployed in such a way that they are ready to strike an enemy on moment's notice (24/7) much like in the case of US and Russia.

References:

https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/
https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2017-06/fs_1707_wnf.pdf
https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/160721_China_Nuclear_Weapons_Report.pdf

As for DF-41 ICBM:

The Pentagon has reported for more than two decades that China is developing a new follow-on road-mobile ICBM known as the DF-41. After considerable delay, the program appears to have made progress with several flight tests over the past few years, some of which have included multiple payloads. Reporting in the Washington Free Beacon, Bill Gertz reported that the “DF-41 is assessed by U.S. intelligence agencies to be powerful enough to deliver between six and 10 warheads up to 7456 miles – far enough to reach every corner of the United States from launch areas in eastern China” (Gertz 2016). However, Gertz did not provide a specific source for the assessment, which may be an exaggeration. To “reach every corner of the United States,” a missile with a range of 7456 miles (about 12,000 km) would have to launch from the most northeastern provinces of China, at least 400 km northeast of Beijing. But Chinese ICBMs tend to be based much further inside China to protect them against preemptive attacks.

Source: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00963402.2016.1194054

No confirmation of deployment of DF-41 missile brigades per this source yet: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/china/df-41.htm

This isn't to say that China will not improve and expand its nuclear forces in coming years - such efforts are already visible.


I never said that and you need to calm down.

My point is that existing form of nuclear MAD is likely to diminish in coming years since defenses against ballistic missiles are becoming more and more capable and also expanding over time. Conversely, ballistic missile concepts are not going to improve much and their countermeasures are no longer as effective as they were once thought to be; latest generation of American interceptors can easily distinguish between real warheads and decoys and US is also planning to MiRV them in coming years.

Whether MAD remains a reality for long or not, nuclear weapons are a powerful deterrence and will remain so. And a full-scale war between two nuclear-armed states can be very costly to both so there's that.

The DF-41 pics are everywhere around different locations in China.

And you have already been proved to be ignorant when it comes to China's midcourse test.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/t...ilot-snaps-launch-anti-ballistic-missile.html

 

[LeGenD]

What did you expect our resident US bootlicker to say!

You should be the last person to declare anybody as bootlicker of any state.

And you are known to comment on various developments blindly (without any homework) so it doesn't matters.

 

[UKBengali]

And you are known to comment on various developments blindly (without any homework) so it doesn't matters.

Proof please.

And we can clearly see the "homework" you do as well.

 

[Jlaw]

China has deployed at least four brigades of the DF-41. Such brigade consists 12 TELs with 24 missiles. That's totally 96 DF-41 ICBMs in account, and each DF-41 possesses at least 10 MIRVed warheads. Furthermore, China got many more variants from the DF-31 family, not mentioning the good ole DF-5 family. Also, the JL-2 and the coming JL-3 as China's cornerstone of the naval deterrence. It is only in your pipe dream that China cannot achieve the MAD status.

@UKBengali

No point to discuss here. Two things Chinese government keep tight lip on: nuclear sub and nuclear weapons. Let them keep guessing how many nukes China has.
Even US intelligence don't know true estimate

 

[Penguin]

And you think that the numbers for China, that is the richest country in the world in PPP and exploded hydrogen bomb as far back as 1967, is accurate on this map?

And you think China has as many as e.g. US or Russia?

https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat

----
From a production standpoint, China probably does not have enough fissile material to produce 3,000 nuclear weapons. Such an arsenal would require 9–12 tons of plutonium as well as 45–75 tons of enriched uranium and a substantial amount of tritium. The Chinese are estimated to have only 2 tons of weapons-grade plutonium, which limits their arsenal to 450–600 weapons, despite a 16-ton disposable supply of uranium, theoretically enough for 1,000 warheads.

The U.S. Department of Defense 2013 report to Congress on China's military developments stated that the Chinese nuclear arsenal consists of 50–75 ICBMs, located in both land-based silos and Ballistic missile submarine platforms. In addition to the ICBMs, the report stated that China has approximately 1,100 short-range ballistic missiles, although it does not have the warhead capacity to equip them all with nuclear weapons.
-----
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
See also
https://fas.org/nuke/guide/china/nuke/
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-big-china-nuclear-threat-no-one-talking-about-20983

US DoD is one institution that has reason to OVERSTATE the Chinese inventory, wouldn't you say?

 

[UKBengali]

And you think China has as many as e.g. US or Russia?

----
From a production standpoint, China probably does not have enough fissile material to produce 3,000 nuclear weapons. Such an arsenal would require 9–12 tons of plutonium as well as 45–75 tons of enriched uranium and a substantial amount of tritium. The Chinese are estimated to have only 2 tons of weapons-grade plutonium, which limits their arsenal to 450–600 weapons, despite a 16-ton disposable supply of uranium, theoretically enough for 1,000 warheads.

The U.S. Department of Defense 2013 report to Congress on China's military developments stated that the Chinese nuclear arsenal consists of 50–75 ICBMs, located in both land-based silos and Ballistic missile submarine platforms. In addition to the ICBMs, the report stated that China has approximately 1,100 short-range ballistic missiles, although it does not have the warhead capacity to equip them all with nuclear weapons.
-----
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
See also
https://fas.org/nuke/guide/china/nuke/
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-big-china-nuclear-threat-no-one-talking-about-20983

US DoD is one institution that has reason to OVERSTATE the Chinese inventory, wouldn't you say?

https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat

US DOD 2013 report says 50-75 ICBMs.
How many do they think now in 2017?

No-one really knows for sure. We do know that China has the means(technological and financial) to have produced many hundreds of ICBMs by now.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

US DOD 2013 report says 5-75 ICBMs.
How many do they think now in 2017?

No-one really knows for sure. We do know that China has the means(technological and financial) to have produced many hundreds of ICBMs by now.

By 2013, the DF-41 was not deployed, but China still got many variants from the DF-5 and DF-31 families, also the newly deployed JL-2.

So I doubt the 75 ICBMs figure was even true for 2013.