Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China's New Missile: A Game Changer?
Investor's Business Daily ^ | December 28, 2010 | IBD staff

Posted on 12/28/2010 7:43:01 PM PST by raptor22

China's Challenge: As tensions elevate on the Korean peninsula, Pyongyang's patron deploys a weapon designed to sink the very ships we are sending to protect an ally. This does not bode well.

The prospects that the Korean War, which ended in only an interminable armistice, may resume has become an increasingly real possibility in recent months.

That its patron, China, without which North Korea would collapse of its own rot, now has deployed a missile designed to target and sink U.S. carrier battle groups adds a new and disturbing element to any confrontation in the region.

Admiral Robert Willard, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, told the Japanese newspaper Asahi Shimbun last Sunday that China's touted "carrier-killer," an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) designated the Dong Feng-21D, had reached "initial operational capability."

This version of China's land-based mobile medium-range missile is off the drawing boards and in the field.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: bmd; china; defense; df21d; dongfeng21d; gbi; military; missiledefense; nationaldefense; newstart; obama; start; starttreaty; usnavy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

1 posted on 12/28/2010 7:43:06 PM PST by raptor22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nachum; markomalley; Carlucci; grey_whiskers; meyer; WL-law; Para-Ord.45; 70th Division; ...

Ping


2 posted on 12/28/2010 7:44:18 PM PST by raptor22 (The truth will set us free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

good thing we just signed an arms treaty, otherwise this could have gotten ugly


3 posted on 12/28/2010 7:45:18 PM PST by dsrtsage (One half of all people have below average IQ...In the US the number is 54%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

Pop a carrier and see how the game changes.


4 posted on 12/28/2010 7:47:00 PM PST by mmercier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

I posted this on another thread a couple of days ago you might find it interesting.

US stunned: New Chinese missile capable of sinking every US supercarrier

http://www.helium.com/items/1915068-chinese-dong-feng-missile-capable-of-sinking-every-us-supercarrier


5 posted on 12/28/2010 7:47:02 PM PST by FromLori (FromLori)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

Why is China building carriers if China’s new missile is such a game changer?


6 posted on 12/28/2010 7:48:36 PM PST by hflynn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dsrtsage

Oh China is years away from being a threat. And that Chinese General, the one talking about nuking LA, well he was just joking.


7 posted on 12/28/2010 7:48:59 PM PST by Cisco Nix (Real Conservatives stay sober and focused)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: raptor22
Three Questions Please.

Does anyone know if our carriers typically carry tactical nuclear weapons?
If so are they under local command or require the CINC to authorize release? Does anyone know US policy about an identifiable nation, like China, attacking? Is this automatically considered an act of war requiring (a) A heavy military response? (b) An automatin declaration of war by Congress?

8 posted on 12/28/2010 7:50:57 PM PST by DWar ("The ultimate destination of Political Correctness is totalitarianism.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mmercier

“Pop a carrier and see how the game changes.”

With old Hope and Change in charge?


9 posted on 12/28/2010 7:51:32 PM PST by Cisco Nix (Real Conservatives stay sober and focused)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mmercier

Big talk doesn’t counter big weapons.


10 posted on 12/28/2010 7:52:02 PM PST by Williams (It's the policies, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

Thank you, Krinton.


11 posted on 12/28/2010 7:52:59 PM PST by WorkingClassFilth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FromLori
"The Chinese were floundering in attempts to build effective missiles until the Clinton administration agreed to sell China three Cray supercomputers as part of a trade deal.

The usual suspects. It may be decades before we find out exactly how much damage the Clintons caused. Combined with Obama we may never recover.

12 posted on 12/28/2010 7:54:53 PM PST by WHBates
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

If their missiles work as well as their “General Electric” compact flourescent bulbs who can tell what will happen? We have the despicable first black pResident to that for that, bill krintoon.

Then again, we have an America-hater as pResident of the USA right now.

Maybe he’ll send a division of the Bay Area Rump Rangers to invade China and exact justice that is swift and retribution that is perverted?


13 posted on 12/28/2010 7:55:27 PM PST by 43north (BHO: 50% white, 50% black, 100% red)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mmercier
They pop a carrier, we pop Three Gorges Dam.

Even trade.

Cheers!

14 posted on 12/28/2010 7:55:44 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

The reason we need both space-based and sea-based anti-baalistic missile systems.

Obviously this kind of missile would be very fast from launch to target, but on our drawing boards somewhere certainly are an answer to such a missile. This has not really taken the Pentegon by surprise, if you read btween the lines of the Admiral’s statement to the Japanese paper.


15 posted on 12/28/2010 7:56:36 PM PST by John Leland 1789 (GratefulWhich scriptures were used in "the Apostles' ministries?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DWar

Of course it would be considered an “act of war” but as you lose on the non nuclear level in the Pacific theatre, you lose your abiity to project power there and moving up the escalation chain quickly gets you to a point where nuclear weapons may be taking out our allies or our own cities. You don’t want to get to that point.


16 posted on 12/28/2010 7:57:09 PM PST by Williams (It's the policies, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: FromLori

Can they hit the accompanying missile boats too.?

The Chinese are still a decade behind, and they are well aware of this fact.

Therefrom derives all the bluster about a game changing system, because there are big dogs on their street, and they really can not do anything about it..


17 posted on 12/28/2010 7:57:40 PM PST by mmercier (the suicide solution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: WHBates

Delete “may” replace with “won’t” and you will be correct.


18 posted on 12/28/2010 7:58:06 PM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 43north

That is, we have the despicable first black pResident to THANK for that, bill krintoon.

Too tired after a busy day WORKING unlike most bamster supporters.


19 posted on 12/28/2010 7:58:33 PM PST by 43north (BHO: 50% white, 50% black, 100% red)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Yep! From what I’ve been reading, one 1,000 pound bomb would take down the Three Gorges Dam.


20 posted on 12/28/2010 7:58:52 PM PST by John Leland 1789 (GratefulWhich scriptures were used in "the Apostles' ministries?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Some of us are childishly optimistic. You don’t want to lose the carriers and be forced to consider attacking the Chinese mainland. Loss of the carriers prevents us from achieving our mission in the region, and risking a nuclear exchange is not where you want to be.


21 posted on 12/28/2010 8:01:35 PM PST by Williams (It's the policies, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

The price we’ve paid for handing China our manufacturing technology on a silver platter, just so fat ladies in stretchy pants can buy more chinese made crap at Walmart and Sears.


22 posted on 12/28/2010 8:01:52 PM PST by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Really?

You think obamao has ANY desire to protect this country?

I don’t.

He is decimating our defensive capabilities and he WILL NOT do anything in the face of attack or provocation unless g. soros and the saudis tell him too.

He IS the enemy within and sooner or later the remaining patriots in our military are going to need to figure this out and DO something.

Illegal, non-constitutional orders are STILL illegal, non-constitutional orders.

obamao uber alles? I sure hope not.


23 posted on 12/28/2010 8:04:03 PM PST by 43north (BHO: 50% white, 50% black, 100% red)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

any possibility that the w88 technology has been projected into this missile which is launched into space?


24 posted on 12/28/2010 8:07:57 PM PST by Michigan Bowhunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Williams

We better pack up and get our $hit out of there fast.


25 posted on 12/28/2010 8:10:23 PM PST by mmercier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Williams
risking a nuclear exchange is not where you want to be.

So you agree with the Kenyan Klown on nuclear disarmament?

I personally want our enemies to KNOW that we will nuke their ass if required.

26 posted on 12/28/2010 8:10:41 PM PST by Eaker (In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity. Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789
From what I’ve been reading, one 1,000 pound bomb would take down the Three Gorges Dam.

From what I have read they are keeping butterflies away from the crap-ass dam.

27 posted on 12/28/2010 8:15:49 PM PST by Eaker (In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity. Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Cisco Nix

“Pop a carrier and see how the game changes.”

With old Hope and Change in charge?

............................

Exactly!


28 posted on 12/28/2010 8:18:41 PM PST by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mmercier

Too true. If China actually sank a carrier, which would either require a nuke or multiple strikes, it would be war. Picture more dead than Pearl Harbor or 9/11 and massive nuclear contamination.

I choose not to believe China is that stupid.


29 posted on 12/28/2010 8:21:27 PM PST by oldleft
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
They pop a carrier, we pop Three Gorges Dam.
Even trade.

Not even close. That three Gorges Dam if they are lucky will last 10 years.

30 posted on 12/28/2010 8:27:28 PM PST by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric cartman voice* 'I love you guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Williams
I got all that.

I assume commanders in theater would have some warning that their carrier was about to be incinerated. Do they have local authority to launch tactical nukes under a use'em or lose'em rationale?

31 posted on 12/28/2010 8:27:59 PM PST by DWar ("The ultimate destination of Political Correctness is totalitarianism.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Steve Van Doorn
Thought of casualties?
32 posted on 12/28/2010 8:30:23 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: oldleft
“I choose not to believe China is that stupid.”

They are not.

Those commanding a carrier group however, must assume that they are.

No one is going to surprise our navy with a mass attack again.

Ever.

33 posted on 12/28/2010 8:35:40 PM PST by mmercier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Eaker

I’m sorry but some of you are dangerously ignorant of military reality.

You think I am somehow siding with obama because I don’t want our conventional weaknesses to lead to a nuclear exchange?? Did it ever occur to you that I don’t give a rat’s ass if we could just nuke China without consequences after they defeat us in Asia?

I guess it never occurred to you that a nuclear exchange includes them nuking us. You don’t have to get there if you don’t lose conventionally in the first place. You don’t want to get there. IMHO conventional weakness may eventually lead to a devastating nuclear war with the Chinese, or else a huge loss of our World position.


34 posted on 12/28/2010 9:00:04 PM PST by Williams (It's the policies, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

The main question especially in the realm of End Times, how will China play out in relation to Israel ? The same with North Korea. I know DPRK is going against Israel. Also ook at Venezuela as well with that sulfur smelling fat@$$.


35 posted on 12/28/2010 9:03:06 PM PST by CORedneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

We financed that new Chinese missile with 20 years of off-whoring our manufacturing to the Chinese.

I have said this before and I will say it again.....

If there is any justice in this world, I hope these Benedict Arnold manufacturing execs, that have been cashing fat bonus checks from their “efficiency improving” factories in China, will live long enough to see their grandchildren brought home with American flags draped over their caskets, after they are killed by the Chinese military that has been modernized from profits made at grandpa’s China factory. What goes around COMES AROUND!

And when you sow the wind you will reap the whirlwind.

Now I would like to post some more but I have to pop over to Wally World to buy a piece of crap or two made in China.


36 posted on 12/28/2010 9:05:48 PM PST by NeverForgetBataan (To the German Commander: ..........................NUTS !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

We have those missiles too; would Taiwan, Korea and Japan like some?


37 posted on 12/28/2010 9:08:41 PM PST by Mike Darancette (Democrat Party is shovel ready)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

Thanks goes out to Misters Clinton and Walton. One for giving away the guidance technology that makes this possible and the other for supplying the funds to pay for it.


38 posted on 12/28/2010 9:10:06 PM PST by redangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
They pop a carrier, we pop Three Gorges Dam.

Never happen. Two words: collateral damage. If a snail darter might get hurt, then we will destroy all our weapons in fear of that hypothetical.

We won't even shoot gun wielding terrorists for fear they might step behind a woman and she might get blood splatter.

We aren't even a paper tiger.

39 posted on 12/28/2010 9:10:31 PM PST by The Theophilus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

Don’t we hear about China’s new “carrier-killer” missiles every couple years? I suppose I’m just remembering it as it goes through testing phases, but these latest articles give me a big deja vu.


40 posted on 12/28/2010 9:11:23 PM PST by andyk (Hi, my name's Andy, and I am a BF 1942 / Desert Combat junkie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Not with the Bambster in office he would never allow the collateral damage of taking out the dam. We would just retreat back to Hawaii and send a formal apology for our impertinence.


41 posted on 12/28/2010 9:13:30 PM PST by redangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
Curtis LeMay I wonder what would he think....
42 posted on 12/28/2010 9:22:12 PM PST by traumer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: redangus
With the Bambster not in office we would allow the collateral damage of take ing out the dam and Beijing. Obama would just retreat back to Hawaii Kenya and we would tell China a formal apology for our impertinence to not only forget about our debt, but they owe us the cost of our ICBMs.
43 posted on 12/28/2010 9:39:06 PM PST by Yehuda (Land of the free, THANKS TO THE BRAVE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: raptor22

This particular “new missile” is so old ass frakin’ news it simply amazes the frak out of me that idiots are still writing articles on it. Good frakin’ grief! =.=


44 posted on 12/28/2010 10:07:32 PM PST by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raptor22
My guess right now is that the DF-21 ASBM will use a nuclear warhead in the 50-75 kT range to guarantee a "kill" against a Nimitz-class carrier. Otherwise, with the current Standard missiles launched from US Navy cruisers and destroyers and the surprising maneuverability of modern carriers, such a missile could end up being destroyed in flight or missing the carrier by thousands of feet
45 posted on 12/28/2010 10:52:47 PM PST by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789

Is the 3 gorges dam more valuable than a supercarrier?


46 posted on 12/28/2010 11:40:57 PM PST by ROTB (Sans Christian revival, we are government slaves, or nuked by China/Russia when we finally revolt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Steve Van Doorn; grey_whiskers

Actually:

Nimitz Class carrier : 4.5 billion
3 Gorges Dam : 26 billion

via Wikipedia


47 posted on 12/28/2010 11:46:00 PM PST by ROTB (Sans Christian revival, we are government slaves, or nuked by China/Russia when we finally revolt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: pissant
"The price we’ve paid for handing China our manufacturing technology on a silver platter, just so fat ladies in stretchy pants can buy more chinese made crap at Walmart and Sears."

That's the real topic behind the topic. As for realization of capabilities handed to the PLA by our business, political and academic leaders, that will come. And I'm here on I Told You So Hill to watch the consequences of that vanity and idiocy from afar.


48 posted on 12/29/2010 12:06:20 AM PST by familyop (cbt. engr. (cbt), NG, '89-' 96, Duncan Hunter or no-vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Williams
"IMHO conventional weakness may eventually lead to a devastating nuclear war with the Chinese, or else a huge loss of our World position."

That conventional weakness is already manifest. Oil and fuel will continue to go higher, IMO. We need to rebuild here.


49 posted on 12/29/2010 12:26:28 AM PST by familyop (cbt. engr. (cbt), NG, '89-' 96, Duncan Hunter or no-vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Assuming that the NorKs attack South Korea and the Chinese and U.S. get involved, Obama won't know which of the two — Pyongyang or Beijing — to surrender to.

If such a war were to occur, the Usurper would be very conflicted.

50 posted on 12/29/2010 12:47:37 AM PST by MasterGunner01 (To err is human; to forgive is not our policy. -- SEAL Team SIX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson