China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[FriedRiceNSpice]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

Maybe they are thinking of replacing the bombs with air-fuel explosives, which are just as destructive but without the radiation contamination.

The most powerful thermobaric devices are capable of perhaps destroying everything within a half-mile radius, while a multi-megaton thermonuclear device would be capable of destroying everything within the tens of miles.

 

[Ryz05]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

Two things: The US, nuke-owning Western European nations and sometimes even Russia issue statements like this all the time too. That doesn't mean its true. None of them intend to get rid of their nukes anytime soon. It's just nice sounding talk. If anything China will be increasing its nuke stockpile soon, modernizing it and increasing the overall numbers (especially to equip the Type 094 with missiles.)

The only thing I've heard from the US about nuclear weapons stockpile is from the Cold War against the "Soviet threat," and that's increasing their numbers. Maybe warheads have been reduced since the '90s, but never heard anything about total disarmament.

Second thing: An FAE doesn't even come close to the capabilities of a nuke. Not in terms of range and versatility, not in terms of destructivness.

I introduce you guys to the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. Of course it could only replace small-sized nuclear weapons, but maybe that's all it's needed for deterrence.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

Its yield is equivalent to 44 tons of TNT. For comparison, the device used in Hiroshima had a yield equivalent to 15,000 tons of TNT, while a modern H-bomb can have yields up to 5,000,000 tons of TNT. The most powerful bomb, a Soviet device, exploded at a yield equal to 50,000,000 tons of TNT during a test but was capable of 100,000,000 tons of TNT. Also at a weight of 7 tons, an ICBM will only be able to carry one of two of these devices compared with up to ten thermonuclear warheads.

 

[Ryz05]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

Very interesting information, and China just wants to do away with that power? I guess they've found a good reason. China has been striving for total nuclear disarmament for the last few years is a total surprise for me, especially with the new type of missiles coming out. Thinking about it, the new missiles like DF-21C all use conventional warheads, except maybe the JL-2 and DF-31A, but those could be fitted with HE warheads (or retired) if total disarmament is achieved in the next twenty years.

 

[Mightypeon]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

Actually, if nuclear weapons cease to exist, then large scale conventional wars become "possible" again.
Although I dont think that China will be the nation to start such things (my bet is on North Korea, they may go for the south if Nuclear devastation is off the table, Israel or the Arabs could make a move too), of the major powers today, China (or maybe India, although India is not a Major power yet) has the most pronouced history of non intervention.
Right now, Taiwan seems to be peacefully going the way of Hongkong, relations with most neighbours (especially Russia) are fine, and the only real estate that would significantly improve Chinas territorial situation, Siberia, is not feasable to be conquered anyway.
Russia is strong enough to ensure that everyone trades for their gas and does not fight for it.

 

[pla101prc]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

Actually, if nuclear weapons cease to exist, then large scale conventional wars become "possible" again.
Although I dont think that China will be the nation to start such things (my bet is on North Korea, they may go for the south if Nuclear devastation is off the table, Israel or the Arabs could make a move too), of the major powers today, China (or maybe India, although India is not a Major power yet) has the most pronouced history of non intervention.
Right now, Taiwan seems to be peacefully going the way of Hongkong, relations with most neighbours (especially Russia) are fine, and the only real estate that would significantly improve Chinas territorial situation, Siberia, is not feasable to be conquered anyway.
Russia is strong enough to ensure that everyone trades for their gas and does not fight for it.

lol the biggest land threat to China is still russia in the long term. Japan will have to conquer korea first in order to be a threat to China. the US has many bases but too fragmented. some of China's best units such as 38th and 39th GA are stationed in the north. i would have been better if China regain mongolia or something, at least there is more of a cushion for Beijing

 

[AssassinsMace]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

There will always be nuclear weapons. China shouldn't come out with such statements and just say as long as there are nuclear weapons in the hands of other countries, China will have them to counter. This is just like when China conducted its ASAT test. Afterwards Beijing came out with a statement calling a treaty on no weapons in space. The Western media jumped on it as hypocrisy. But of course they don't acknowledge their own long history of hypocrisy in regards to everything from ASAT weapons, nuclear arms, espionage, supporting dictatorships, to who can have an aircraft carrier. Which is why there will always be nuclear weapons.

 

[pla101prc]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

being military fans, we should all be extremely familiar with the prisoner's dilemma...so i guess its safe for us to first reach a consensus that total disarmament will never happen unless nukes are somehow proven to be obsolete. the US would embrace some kind of limitation just to take away China and India's premise to develop more advanced nukes

 

[Ryz05]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

There will always be nuclear weapons. China shouldn't come out with such statements and just say as long as there are nuclear weapons in the hands of other countries, China will have them to counter. This is just like when China conducted its ASAT test. Afterwards Beijing came out with a statement calling a treaty on no weapons in space. The Western media jumped on it as hypocrisy. But of course they don't acknowledge their own long history of hypocrisy in regards to everything from ASAT weapons, nuclear arms, espionage, supporting dictatorships, to who can have an aircraft carrier. Which is why there will always be nuclear weapons.

About the ASAT test, the Chinese and Russians wanted to sign a treaty with the United States about banning weapons in space. Unfortunately, the US refuses to sign, since they are ahead in the space race, which prompted the ASAT test. So it's basically a show of force that didn't solve anything; a treaty still is not signed.

The banning of nuclear arms is another matter, something the United States strongly opposes. I don't know about Russians, but the Chinese seems eager to support disarmament. Not that they can't compete in the nuclear field, it's probably because they realized the destructive potential of such weapons and decided it's best to ban them.

Without nuclear weapons, it does not mean there will be more conventional wars, just that the threat of nuclear armageddon is removed. There needs to be more trust and mutual understanding in the world, without which an international ban is unlikely. I don't see how the US will ever agree to a ban, at least in the short term.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Re: A China Without Nuclear Weapons?

Yes which is my point about the hypocrisy of the media trying to make China out to be a hypocrite.

Trust is the key. And the West refuses to understand that many people in the world don't trust them. So there will always be nuclear weapons because it's the great equalizer. Look at how many times in the past the US government has actually considered using nukes on China. None of them out of defense or retalition but for strategic geo-political purposes. And each one of those times it was threat of nuclear retaliation from the Soviets and then the Chinese, when they produced their own, turned those desires away.