Japanese have a plan to deal with Chinese new 094 nuclear sub

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
But there's a difference. If a nuclear nation gets a missile-shield, there is a concern that it will then be able to hide behind it and use its own nuclear weapons with impunity. If a non-nuclear nation gets a missile-shield, it can only be used for defensive purposes (unless it has an overwhelming conventional military, but that isn't Japan).

I can understand what you are saying, but I disagree with it most strongly as being an acceptable argument. Every country has a right, I believe, to protect itself from weapons of mass destruction. Now there are only two ways to do that - build your own or try to have something to stop incoming missiles. I cannot see taking the defensive option as being provocative. Someone may decide it is provocation, but that doesn't mean they should view it as such in all reason.
You are continuing with the same argument. You are continually saying what's reasonable and what a country should be allowed to do. But that doesn't change the fact that other country will be bothered. There is nothing wrong with any country selling any weapon to Taiwan, but China still looks at that as provocation.
 
D

Deleted member 675

Guest
But that doesn't change the fact that other country will be bothered. There is nothing wrong with any country selling any weapon to Taiwan, but China still looks at that as provocation.

Provocation can be defined by a group, not just an individual. Of course a country can take provocation at something, but that doesn't mean it should. I was talking in the context of what a group might see as provocation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
It's easy for us to say "all nations have right to defend itself", but when defense equates to nuclear deterrent, things will get out of hand. Tanks and planes don't irradiate entire cities, but imagine if battlefield nukes become acceptable to use by any 3rd world despot?

The 5 members of the UN security council had a good opportunity to make certain that they're the only members to the nuclear club. This means, only China-France-Russia-UK-US can have nuclear weapons, and if anyone else attempt to build them, their nuclear facilities will be bombed flat immediately.

It's crude, rude, and thuggish. But it works, and the fewer nations have nukes, the better off we'll all be on this planet. Unfortunately, cold war and post-cold war politics have left the 5 members squabbling as they cannot agree to anything.

If you want to be nice about it, you can offer a carrot, but still use the big stick when needed. If the nation choose not to build nuclear arms, the wealthier, first world nations can all chip in and subsidize civilian nuclear power plant construction and reduce overall dependency on petrol. But if you choose to build nukes, then we come and bomb your nuclear facilities. There is nothing to discuss, no "6 party talks" -- only an ultimatum backed by immediate force.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 675

Guest
It's easy for us to say "all nations have right to defend itself", but when defense equates to nuclear deterrent, things will get out of hand.

Imagine what the world would be like if everyone had nukes. Some morons believe we would be at peace because no one would dare attack the other. That's obviously not true, as it would take one nutter to think he could get an advantage over his enemy if he could just take out their launch capability first. Then you also get people who believe they're invincible or something so don't care about a response.

It will be impossible to disarm the world if proliferation continues. It's a shame the Big-5 also can't get their heads around the premise that if they don't co-operate to stop it, soon their nuclear advantage will be mostly lost.
 

kca90

New Member
dear Kongo please do not try to open history's numerous boxes of pandora!:coffee:

Of course we could elaborately discuss about how aggressive the Tang (唐朝 618-907) dynasty was in her drive to expand the empire into central asia and during the early reign of the Qing (清朝 1644-1912) China could even be called an ´imperialist´power similarly to Russia at least.

Nevertheless any discussion about Asian history would not be complete without mentioning the disastrous Imjin war (壬辰倭亂 1592-98) Japan brought over Korea. Japan's military dictator Toyotomi Hideyoshi invaded Korea for six years and killed around a million people there and only after Ming China intervened repeatedly with several armies on behalf of the attacked koreans Japan was forced to withdraw form a completely destroyed country.

Nitpicking about the history of each other is pointless and great nations have done good and bad things in their long history (China and Japan look indeed back on several millenia of civilization in contrast to some country considering herself the indispensable nation). :)

This kind of distortion of history is also often employed by hegemonic powers intent to legitimize their power and delegitimize former and current rivals. Just look at how the US government and US media are portraying the history of Germany, Russia and Japan: the average US citizen knows only about Hitler, Stalin, Nazism, Communism, Holocaust, Gulag, Tojo, Pearl Harbour and he obviously thinks that the history of these great countries consists of continuous crimes against humanity. Correspondingly he knows almost nothing about black spots in the history of the US and infers from this fact that the US is morally superior and has a implicit right (yes: might is right!) to pursue world hegemony. Additionally the US corporate media industry works tirelessly to disseminate this kind of propaganda myths around the globe to convince more and more people about ´true lies´as historical facts.

My hope is that asian people shape their views about history without interference from outside powers only intent to further their narrow interests. China needs more scientific provocative thinking about her own history and that of their neighbours and japanese scholars are playing an important role in this process. Although provocative thinking does not equal provocation and that goes for both!

VERY WELL SAID VIOLET. ALTHOUGH ARGUING WITH PEOPLE WHOSE HISTORY IS DISTORTED OR REFUSING TO SEE THE TRUTH IS HOPELESS.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
VERY WELL SAID VIOLET. ALTHOUGH ARGUING WITH PEOPLE WHOSE HISTORY IS DISTORTED OR REFUSING TO SEE THE TRUTH IS HOPELESS.
Hmmm...interesting. Your words are true, but they are also a great two edged sword. Every nation, every people has good and bad amongst them...past, present, and future.

Since we can always draw on and point to the bad...and sometimes must do so when it threatens our person, our families, and particularly our freedom (which, IMHO, represents a threat to everyhting else)...still, we would all be much better off in the long run short of that, if we to try and find and focus on the positive.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Let's keep the discussion on how the JMSDF would defend against the PLAN type 094

Thank you


bd popeye super moderator
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Here is what ONI said about the progress of China 094 SSBN.Contrary to what some skeptic here that said about the fail attempt to build modern SSBN. ONI should know better They have the tool and training to monitor Chinese Sub



China's military is engaged in a major buildup of submarines that includes five new strategic nuclear-missile boats and several advanced nuclear-powered attack submarines, according to the Office of Naval Intelligence.
The new nuclear-powered missile submarines (SSBNs), identified as Type 094s, will be outfitted with new 5,000-mile range JL-2 missiles that "will provide China with a modern and robust sea-based nuclear deterrent force," the ONI stated in report made up of written answers to questions on the Chinese submarine buildup.
The ONI report was first disclosed to Sea Power magazine, and a copy was obtained by The Washington Times. It was the first time the Pentagon has identified the number of new Chinese strategic submarines under construction.
The five new missile submarines will "provide more redundancy and capacity for a near-continuous at-sea SSBN presence," the ONI said, which noted that sea trials for some of the submarines are under way and the first deployments could begin as early as next year. The buildup is raising new concerns among senior Pentagon planners already worried by Beijing's broader strategic nuclear-forces buildup, which also includes several new long-range land-based nuclear missiles and a land-attack cruise missile similar to the Tomahawk.
"This is a troubling development," Richard Fisher, a specialist on the Chinese military with the private International Assessment and Strategy Center, said of the submarine buildup.
The five missile submarines, each equipped with 12 JL-2 missiles, shows that China is working to achieve a force of 120 long-range nuclear missiles over the next decade, about half of them to be carried on the submarines, Mr. Fisher said. The other half would be the 60 land-based DF-31 missiles that current deployment rates will give China by then, he said.
The 120 missiles also could have multiple-warheads, since China is known to have acquired all the needed technology from the U.S. during the 1990s.
Retired Vice Adm. Michael McConnell, commenting at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Tuesday, said China's nuclear missiles pose a threat.
"It's a matter of they're building their military, in my view, to reach some state of parity with the United States," said Mr. McConnell, the new director of national intelligence. "So they're a threat today, they would become an increasing threat over time."
Little is known about China's nuclear forces and efforts by Pentagon officials to engage Chinese military leaders about their strategic weapons and forces has not been successful. China's government has insisted its current modernization is part of a peaceful development, but the contrasting strategic nuclear-forces buildup is worrying, defense officials said.
Chinese Gen. Zhu Chenghu told reporters in 2005 that China would attack U.S. cities with nuclear weapons in response to any conventionally armed U.S. missile strikes against China during a conflict over Taiwan. Years earlier, Gen. Xiong Guangkai threatened to use nuclear weapons against Los Angeles if the U.S. helped Taiwan
The missile-submarine buildup would provide Beijing with a major upgrade on current capabilities. In 1983, China built one Xia-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine, reportedly with 12 1,000-mile range JL-1 missiles. But that solitary submarine has only twice test-fired its missiles and never ventured beyond China's regional waters.
"Although the range of the JL-1 limits the Xia's utility as a deterrent platform, targets throughout the region, including U.S. military facilities, could be targeted with the JL-1 from launch points inside traditional Chinese navy operating areas," the ONI said.
On China's new attack submarine, the ONI stated that China already has launched and is performing sea trials on an unspecified number of Type 093 nuclear-powered attack submarines. Published reports in China have said two Type 093 attack submarines are deployed and use "foreign technologies" and advanced anti-ship missiles and torpedoes.
The new advances are part of China's efforts to bolster its anti-ship weapons to permit strikes at greater ranges from the Chinese coast than its current diesel-powered submarine force offers, the ONI said. China currently is upgrading its current force of about 55 attack submarines -- most of them easy-to-track diesel boats -- with more-advanced and harder-to-track vessels, including Russian-made Kilos, and its own Song- and Yuan-class submarines.
"Each of these submarine classes, which are quiet platforms with anti-ship cruise missiles, is an integral part of China's regional anti-access strategy," ONI said. "The quieting incorporated into these submarines is required for successful operations in the open ocean operating areas which could facilitate the [Chinese navy's] wartime mission of keeping enemy combatants outside of strike range of the theater of operation."
A Song-class submarine surfaced undetected within five miles, well within firing range, of the aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk in October.
The ONI stated that China's maritime strategy is focused on blocking U.S. or Japanese intervention in a future conflict over Taiwan. To that end, Beijing has begun equipping its medium- and short-range ballistic missiles based on shore, hundreds of which are deployed across the Taiwan Strait from the island that the communist regime views as a renegade province, with maneuvering warheads.
These radar-guided or heat-seeking weapons "provide the accuracy necessary to attack a ship at sea," ONI said.
But China's rise in international trade and commerce, plus its growing dependence on imported foreign oil, also has expanded Beijing's maritime strategy from a mostly submarine force to one of building surface ships to "defend sea lines of communication" (SLOCs), because protecting sea-lanes with submarines is difficult.
ONI also said that in addition to new destroyers, "by 2020, China is likely to operate an aircraft carrier, the initial unit of which may be the refurbished ex-Varyag, acquired from Ukraine in 2000, to further support SLOC protection."
 

eecsmaster

Junior Member
Someone here obviously isn't well doctrined in the structures of MAD...

Considering that Japan is under the US nuclear umbrella, a foward posturing of ABM system is justifiably perceived as threatening. If North Korea is the sole target, then a couple of SM3 based AEGIS platforms would surfice.
 

jinpei

New Member
Right to the point, currently F22 are being deployed in Okinawa. To use it against North Korea's aging Mig 21 :confused: Beside South Korea got the F-15K, go figure:coffee:
 
Top