USAF drills a Chinese mainland bombing run

[HongWu]

Nukes have an expiration date, and are costly to maintain. It's better to have a small but high quality arsenal, along with robust manufacturing capability. Usually you are not on hair trigger alert for a total nuclear war. Instead, when it looks like a war will break out (like now, over South China Sea), you rapidly crank out the nukes and race to ~10,000 warhead level.

 

[GR!FF!N]

Yes, we do have it.



We have much more nukes than France+UK combined, but we don't need the Cold War USA/USSR sized stockpile, this is simply a waste of money.

you are right...huge amount of nukes are just waste of money,nothing else.but i don't think china has 3000 (it was speculated by group of students)nukes.actual figure is much lower than that.

No, China Does Not Have 3,000 Nuclear Weapons » FAS Strategic Security Blog

Chinese Nuclear Weapons Capability Lags Far Behind U.S.; Will Remain That Way for Foreseeable Future, Report Finds | Union of Concerned Scientists

read these articles.they stated about China's capability and objective of nuclear missiles and nukes.

 

[Don777]

Nukes have an expiration date, and are costly to maintain. It's better to have a small but high quality arsenal, along with robust manufacturing capability. Usually you are not on hair trigger alert for a total nuclear war. Instead, when it looks like a war will break out (like now, over South China Sea), you rapidly crank out the nukes and race to ~10,000 warhead level.

10,000 Warhead, O my god, after exploding this many warheads, if there will be any serviving species, then it will be cockroches. By the way, please make sure make a colony for your countrymen i space, because after exploding these nuke, world will not be left as livin place for atleast another 10,000 yrs

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

you are right...huge amount of nukes are just waste of money,nothing else.but i don't think china has 3000 (it was speculated by group of students)nukes.actual figure is much lower than that.

No, China Does Not Have 3,000 Nuclear Weapons » FAS Strategic Security Blog

Chinese Nuclear Weapons Capability Lags Far Behind U.S.; Will Remain That Way for Foreseeable Future, Report Finds | Union of Concerned Scientists

read these articles.they stated about China's capability and objective of nuclear missiles and nukes.

This Kristensen guy is a joke, according to him China has zero nuclear warhead being deployed.

Of course, a group of college students make more sense than him.

China’s total arsenal includes about 240 warheads, none of which are deployed.

Nuclear Studies and Republican Disarmers » FAS Strategic Security Blog

 

[GR!FF!N]

This Kristensen guy is a joke, according to him China has zero nuclear warhead being deployed.

Of course, a group of college students make more sense than him.

China’s total arsenal includes about 240 warheads, none of which are deployed.

Nuclear Studies and Republican Disarmers » FAS Strategic Security Blog

he may be right..."Deployed" means missiles armed with nukes,ready to launch..i don't think except USA (and Russia may be),none other countries maintain such state now-a-days...

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

he may be right..."Deployed" means ready to launch..i don't think except USA (and Russia may be),none other countries maintain such state now-a-days...

Ok, then feel free to believe that none of the Chinese warhead has been deployed.

And furthermore he has better to convince the decision makers in both White House and Pentagon that China has zero warhead being deployed.

 

[GR!FF!N]

Ok, then feel free to believe that none of the Chinese warhead has been deployed.

And furthermore he has better to convince the decision makers in both White House and Pentagon that China has zero warhead being deployed.

i think thats why china built underground tunnel to hide its (limited) nukes(to survive 1st strike,and for an effective 2nd strike capability,just like SSBN).if anybody has 3000 nukes,nobody would be bother to hide them in a maze like that.

 

[Mav3rick]

Are you sure?

Federation of American Scientists :: Status of World Nuclear Forces


Description of the image: data for: Satellite photos show the two 094 submarines are moored at Naval Base pier

Here is another:

Flight path over Russia is not an irrelevant factor. It can trigger Russian response.

Therefore, my point that SLBM is the best platform to strike these US cities.


Those missiles are ICBM. China knows that its strategic assets are highly vulnerable to US strikes in the open. Therefore, this underground facility have been developed to protect Chinese ground based strategic assets like ICBM arsenal and nukes. China is even developing missile silos in these underground facilities.

However, US 'currently' possesses firepower and technology to render even such underground facilities useless.

Just look at the size of US defence budget:

Imagine the possibilities with such a budget.


US ABM capability is much more advanced then it used to be during 1990s. The days of incompetency and inadequacy in this aspect of defence are gone.


My friend, China does not have 3000+ nuclear weapons.

Speaking strictly on budgets, don't you think its unwise to compare military spending every year based on spending in US$? I mean if you consider the salaries, perks and benefits alone of the US Military you will take out a big chunk of that budget. Then how much of that is spent on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq every year? On the other hand anything you buy in US can be purchased for 1/3 or 1/4th the cost in China.

When you consider the salaries, labor costs, utilities costs, raw material costs etc. in China and compare them to US the difference would be 3:1 or more. When you take these economic factors in to account the actual Chinese budget rises to 70-75% of the US budget. Not a huge gap by any means today especially when increase in US defense budget decreases every year and increase in defense budget in China actually increases every year.

Still, China has a lot of catching up to do but she is fast, she is getting there quicker then anybody would have imagined. 2 factors that need to be taken in to account are 1) the appearance of Chinese Qing class subs at a highly sophisticated US Naval exercise in 2007 & 2) Flight test of JX-20, the Chinese 5th gen stealth fighter. These are indications that China is taking her defense very very seriously and that she intends to flex her muscles slowly and steadily. She is allowing the US to destroy herself through economic strains while China continues to grow.

If this trend continues, in 50 odd years we will witness China as a power with no equal.

 

[King Solomon]

Any brainwashed individual who thinks China has only 400 nuclear warheads is living in cuckoo-land. If a country like Pakistan is predicted to surpass UK in the no. of nuclear warhead, I think it is reasonable to believe the Chinese have got at least 1000 strategic nukes and several thousands of tactical nukes. Of course, their officials may not want to divulge the exact number but anyone who believes in the "official" figure of Chinese nukes is a severely brainwashed individual and needs psychiatric treatment as soon as possible.

 

[Mav3rick]

This Kristensen guy is a joke, according to him China has zero nuclear warhead being deployed.

Of course, a group of college students make more sense than him.

China’s total arsenal includes about 240 warheads, none of which are deployed.

Nuclear Studies and Republican Disarmers » FAS Strategic Security Blog

Even Pakistan is supposed to have over 120 Nuclear Weapons. And even if China only has 240 Nuclear Weapons, how many are needed to bring any war to an abrupt conclusion? I would say 2 are more then enough, 1 to use and the other to threaten with after use of the first one.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

i think thats why china built underground tunnel to hide its (limited) nukes(to survive 1st strike,and for an effective 2nd strike capability,just like SSBN).if anybody has 3000 nukes,nobody would be bother to hide them in a maze like that.

The survival rate of the landbased nuclear arsenal is about 30% with the road-mobility, both China and Russia has much larger number of landbased nukes compared to its seabased counterpart.

However, Russia does have something like 10,000 nukes, so about 3000 of these could survive against a preemptive strike, but China has much fewer, let's say 3000, so only 1000 would remain after a preemptive strike, so it is a good reason to hide them within the underground tunnel.

Seriously, you should worry about your own nuclear capability rather than China's.

What Are the Real Yields of India's Tests?

 

[GR!FF!N]

The survival rate of the landbased nuclear arsenal is about 30% with the road-mobility, both China and Russia has much larger number of landbased nukes compared to its seabased counterpart.

However, Russia does have something like 10,000 nukes, so about 3000 of these could survive against a preemptive strike, but China has much fewer, let's say 3000, so only 1000 would remain after a preemptive strike, so it is a good reason to hide them within the underground tunnel.

Seriously, you should worry about your own nuclear capability rather than China's.

What Are the Real Yields of India's Tests?

personally i think smaller yield nukes are fine,as our missiles has lower cep.we don't need any czar bomb.
as you are concerned about indian nukes,india tested their nukes (and one hydrogen bomb) twice.what those western scientists claimed and what ever the yields are,india have enough materials and can build more powerful nukes than tested ones.but i don't think it'll ever going to be used again..

 

[faithfulguy]

personally i think smaller yield nukes are fine,as our missiles has lower cep.we don't need any czar bomb.
as you are concerned about indian nukes,india tested their nukes (and one hydrogen bomb) twice.what those western scientists claimed and what ever the yields are,india have enough materials and can build more powerful nukes than tested ones.but i don't think it'll ever going to be used again..

I think Indian thermonuclear bombs are regular WWII type bombs. And regular bombs are dirty bombs.

As for why I even answer this post, its because you had successfully derail the thread and change the topic to be about India.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Any brainwashed individual who thinks China has only 400 nuclear warheads is living in cuckoo-land. If a country like Pakistan is predicted to surpass UK in the no. of nuclear warhead, I think it is reasonable to believe the Chinese have got at least 1000 strategic nukes and several thousands of tactical nukes. Of course, their officials may not want to divulge the exact number but anyone who believes in the "official" figure of Chinese nukes is a severely brainwashed individual and needs psychiatric treatment as soon as possible.

It's more like we have 400 missiles.

Anyone that thinks we only have 12 ICBMs is delusional. We showed 12 ICBMs at the military parade. Who thinks we're going to take our whole country's strategic defense offline just for a parade?

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Any brainwashed individual who thinks China has only 400 nuclear warheads is living in cuckoo-land. If a country like Pakistan is predicted to surpass UK in the no. of nuclear warhead, I think it is reasonable to believe the Chinese have got at least 1000 strategic nukes and several thousands of tactical nukes. Of course, their officials may not want to divulge the exact number but anyone who believes in the "official" figure of Chinese nukes is a severely brainwashed individual and needs psychiatric treatment as soon as possible.

The number of China's nuclear stockpile is inbetween that of the Cold War USA/USSR (maximum deterrence) and UK/France(minimum deterrence). This is the most realistic scenario.

Anyone with a slight common sense should stop questioning that, unless he/she wants to convince his/her government to invade China.