Posted on 08/07/2006 11:49:46 AM PDT by Paul Ross
More like counter attack them....Taiwan.
Because they intend to hit us asymmetrically...likely with proxies such as their sock-puppet North Korea and Iran.
They expect to hit us HARD and know we might go after them as the actual puppet-master.
They hope to deter us from our resorting to our nuclear retaliatory capability...which was meant to deter their attacks in the first place.
But such deterrence is clearly breaking down, and we refuse to engage in counter-asymmetrical warfare against them. After all, we can't be "protectionist." Nope, nope, nope, nope.
Agreed. Surprised that the Administration's "adults" don't recognize this.
Well, that's how I see it.
But enough about the Democratic Party...
Here's a good link on the subject:
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060301faessay85204/keir-a-lieber-daryl-g-press/the-rise-of-u-s-nuclear-primacy.html
Please save the tailored facts for someone who is not well versed in the totality of what the US already has in its arsenal.
We still have peacemaker and minuteman III silos throughout the upper midwest...and the last time I looked we hadnt retired all our ballistic missile submarines or our strategic bombers.
the last report I read, and you can google it, if you are so inclined...basically assessed China's strategic nuclear weapons stockpile pretty far south of a 1000 nukes...whereas, even with reduction limits, we will still have several thousand.
U r also being a bit disengenuine with our current NMDS, it's geared toward rouge state aggression-Yes, but...it would also be affective against a limited strike by a nation state such as China...100% affective-No...but China would be on the looseing end.
Yes- China is a threat.
Yes- They gained advancements from Clinton.
Yes- They hid their defense expenditure.
but...
Their arsenal is still no where near as advanced as ours, nor as numerous, even with all the help Clintoon gave to them...even with our "reduction" efforts. Their ballistic missile subs...all two of them...are so noisy that the SOSUS net built up in the seventies has to turn down the gain not to hear them...easy targets for our attack boats, which 60% of are being deployed to the pacific area under new orders...for that "massive" Chinese navy...
Let's all take a collective breath from alarmism and appreciate the strength of the US Navy, and our Strategic Forces (i.e. the triad)...sometimes what's old is new...if we have to paly MAD again...we still have plenty of missiles and bombs to do it with.
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=5&art_id=17925&sid=7789179&con_type=1
Copy and past the above link...u will breath easier.
The DOD has recognized the threat China is emerging into, and I have watched plenty of testimonials on C-SPAN to know...no one has "rosey" glasses on it.
Thanks.
In Hoc.
"The capitalist will sell us the rope we will hang them with"
..and at a good rate!
Our economy has grown in the past TWO years, a larger amount that the entire chicom economy of today. I'd say the chicoms are off to a bad start!
LLS
I guess they are buying our country from the Japanese, as the media told us a decade ago that the Japanese now owned America?
LLS
Counterfactual in some ways as we explore your position below:
We still have peacemaker and minuteman III silos throughout the upper midwest...
False with regard to the MX "Peacekeeper" missile. Silos, maybe, but deployed Missiles? Guess again.
We used to have 100 deployed. Now? Zero.
And Bush isn't content to stop with dismantling the MX, but where we once had 1,000 Minutemen IIIs, Xlinton retired approx. 300 and W retired 150 Minutemen, and is seriously planning to retire yet another 100 Minuteman III missiles.
and the last time I looked we hadnt retired all our ballistic missile submarines
So dismantling over a quarter of them and converting them to tactical SLCM use only doesn't count I guess.
or our strategic bombers.
All B-1Bs converted to tactical usage only by Xlinton back in 1997. And then W had half decommissioned outright.
As for this point you make, Please save the tailored facts for someone who is not well versed in the totality of what the US already has in its arsenal.
It looks like you are not so well-versed after all.
You could use a refresher course. And you prove it when you cite as evidence anything from these anti-defense knuckle-heads:
Robert Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council and Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists in a study published in the latest issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
Let's hear from the Nuclear Freeze and MoveOn.org crowd's ideological parents. That's who these self-appointed experts really are...that's who you are giving credence to. Richard Fisher effectively just debunked them if you had been reading. Along with their buddies in the Xlinton-appointed DOD Panda-Hugging moles and fellow-travellers that have been allowed to "burrow-in".
A'hem. Ever heard of Ronald Montaperto?
Instead you show you likely didn't when you said this:
The DOD has recognized the threat China is emerging into, and I have watched plenty of testimonials on C-SPAN to know...no one has "rosey" glasses on it.
The DOD is huge. Some get it, some don't. It's all a matter of actual position. There are some who don't have the rose-colored glasses on, but they are not getting past the those who do...and are filtering out the bad news. It isn't getting up the chain of command. Evidence? Just look at W's policies. They reflect that failure to get the bad news. China is not standing still.
And as for the Chinese subs...I'm afraid you are seriously dated, and your out-of-date prejudices lead you to misunderstand the dynamics of the situations, and you are clearly unaware of their great strides in making quieting improvements.
As James Hackett reported:
A newer domestic-built submarine is the Song. The first prototype failed and had to be redesigned, but the bugs seem to have been worked out. Song-class submarines reportedly are equipped with Air Independent Propulsion, enabling them to be very quiet and remain underwater for weeks. And they carry modern anti-ship cruise missiles. Song-class submarines are in production, with seven currently in service.Last year, The Washington Times reported the appearance of yet another new non-nuclear Chinese submarine, the Yuan-class, which appears to be a completely new design combining elements of China's Song and Russia's Kilo submarines. Two Yuan-class boats have been launched to date. Over the last three years, China has launched 13 new submarines from three different shipyards.
But most notable was Beijing's purchase from Russia of four Kilo-class diesel-electric submarines, two of which are Project 636 type. These are excellent submarines, quieter than most, and have modern sensors and torpedoes. China has ordered eight more advanced Kilos, described by the Russians as "state-of-the-art Russian submarines." They will carry modern long-range anti-ship missiles, and are to be delivered by 2007.
Beijing also is improving its nuclear-powered submarines. For years China had six nuclear-powered subs, five Han-class attack submarines and one Xia-class ballistic missile submarine, which were very noisy and leaked radiation, among other problems. But the nuclear reactors have been rebuilt and French electronics and sonar equipment added. They now carry submarine-launched cruise missiles.
The first of China's newest nuclear attack submarine, Type 093, is nearing completion and the second is under construction, with two more planned. Built with Russian help, Type 093 is a major technological advance over the Han-class and will carry China's new HN-3 land-attack cruise missile.
Based largely on Russian technology, China last year launched a new Type 094 nuclear-powered missile submarine that will carry 16 JL-2 underwater-launched missiles, versions of China's DF-31 intercontinental ballistic missile. China plans to extend the JL-2's range beyond 8,000 miles and is expected to equip it with multiple warheads and penetration aids. This missile will be able to reach the U.S. mainland from China's coastal waters.
Time to take off your rose-colored glasses, and stop berating those you differ with as "alarmists". Remember, Neville Chamberlain, and Stanley Baldwin all said the same thing about Winston Churchill.
DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING!!!!
ANYONE NOT a traitor and awake in DC?
Oh, really? Maybe they figured out that it really matters of precisely which sectors your economy is comprised? Manufacturing versus financial services or housing construction.
Who makes more steel?
They are entirely suitable for a first strike.
Forget Korea did we?
The Seawolf production...which was to have been the replacement for the aging Los Angeles Class was instead terminated...at only three boats. End of the line. The newer, smaller, more up-to-date Virginia class is being forcibly limited to one boat per year...and the administration wants to end the two-shipyard capability to build them...and put all our eggs in one basket. At one per year...the US attack sub fleet will collapse to only 28 submarines, most in port at any one time. Sitting ducks.
We (US) can detect and retaliate with a vastly larger strategic nuclear sub force which I would bet moves quietly and undetected off the Chinese coast.
The vast majority of that force is in-harbor. Part of Xlinton's campaign to reassure the ex-Soviets.
The DF31, DF5, and its various incarnations will be of little use against the National Missile Defense system, a system that will continually evolve over the next few decades.
First, as with the cancellation of THEL, this presumes we have decades to piss away our need to commence deployments. As Israel discovered to its cost, it needed THEL right now. Not in two or three years. Now.
Secondwe won't have an "evolving" NMD. Not at the current rate. The RATs oppose it outright, and W is stifling it by either benign or worse neglect. Perhaps he merely intended to pander with it, never actually believeing in it and certainly not intending on deploying a NATIONAL defense. Just a "limited" one. As the IWG reported, a major robust NMD could have already been fully deployed for less than he has spent just twiddling his thumbs with slow-walking testing and limited R&D.
As for the current land-based system (Xlinton's design architecture btw) , such as it is, which is intended to barely be able to block North Korea's direct attack...it is useless against the Seaborne variants which can come from all vantage points. And let's not forget that the Chinese have also been given the blueprints to the Topol-M...designed to beat kinetic interceptors.
Now, I admit that there is some danger that if the midterm election becomes a sentinel election ushering in a large number of liberal and moderate congressmen and senator the NMD could be in danger.
No kidding. This is one of my major fears. And that's why we can't be half-hearted at the top about national missile defense. It is the one thing the GOP was supposed to be solid on. So we need to get through to the leadership. Stop the pussy-fighting around. Start showing some focus. And real Resolve. Get down to business. Deploy. Other wise the conservative base will simply give up in despair over being betrayed yet again by the RINOs.
However, this is the conservative "Chicken Little" way of looking at things. Most midterm election produce very little change in the makeup the both houses.
I hope you're right, but there is reason to worry. There appears to be a perfect storm brewing...Dennis Hastert thinks so...and the Administration is practically making no secret that its hostile to the pro-border enforcement majority of the House...and would like to see them lose. Apparently heedless of all other considerations.
The next presidential election will in my opinion bring many surprises to those believe that Hillary is going to be president.
Again, I wish you were right. But she still has those 900 FBI raw files. And the ruthlessness to use them. W had the chance to demand they be returned. He never did.
I believe there might many dark horse on both sides of the isle that could knock off the front runners and so I think the NMD system will be funded well into the future because whomever is elected president in 2008 they will be only varying degrees of right of center, and not left of center.
I really think this is possible...but it won't happen if we just let this White House tell us who our candidates should be.
The country in is more conservative than anyone in the Washington punditry thinks.
On that we fully agree. But we need to get past the filters. And we need someone solid and strong to rally around to clean out the dead wood that has accumulated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.