Military Review

China is capable of delivering a nuclear strike throughout the United States.

58
The PRC is entering a qualitatively new level in world politics. In late October, the Chinese media, apparently with the filing of the authorities, spread the information that the Celestial Empire has sufficient military power to launch a nuclear strike directly on the territory of the United States. For ordinary Americans, this message was a sensation, it is discussed in television programs and in the pages of reputable newspapers. But why did China publicly declare its ability to use nuclear weapon regarding the United States? After all, for American intelligence this is certainly not a secret. And why did the Celestial Empire do it indirectly, through its national media, and not on behalf of the party leadership?


China is capable of delivering a nuclear strike throughout the United States.


Love of numbers

On October 28, a major Chinese publication, the Global Times, published an article under the heading "China," which dealt with China’s nuclear arsenal. The journalistic story was supplemented by photographs of the underwater fleet countries, graphs, charts and even schematic maps where possible places of nuclear strikes on the territory of the USA are marked. Simultaneously, less voluminous articles on the same subject were published by the China Youth Daily, People's Daily and several other publications. In addition, a report on China’s nuclear potential was broadcast on Central Television. The very next day, foreign observers, primarily American ones, duplicated the information provided by the Chinese media.

If you believe the information contained in the Global Times number of 28 in October this year, China currently has the second largest submarine fleet in the world. In service with the Middle Kingdom - 70 submarines, of which 4 can carry JL-2 ballistic missiles with a range of about 14 thousands of kilometers. On one such submarine is 12 missiles; this is enough to kill and injure millions of people from 5 to 12. Nuclear strikes from the Pacific will be inflicted on the largest metropolitan areas of the West Coast, namely Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle and San Diego. If it is necessary to destroy the cities on the East Coast, then China uses for this intercontinental ballistic missiles located on the continent. Launched through the North Pole, they will fall on New York, Baltimore, Boston, Portland, Philadelphia. In total, the horrors of nuclear war will be experienced by 10-12% of US residents.

The question arises about how reliable the information is. Of course, the People's Republic of China has a WMD delivery system capable of reaching the opposite shore of the ocean, but their numbers can be deliberately exaggerated. It is not known for sure what the volume of the Celestial nuclear arsenal is. The US Department of Defense assumes that China has an 50-70 ICBM, which is even smaller than India or Pakistan. It is curious that even in 2012, the Ministry believed that the People's Republic of China has 180-240 ballistic missiles. The very same party leadership of the Celestial Empire in different years made statements that in the arsenal of the country there is from 200 to 400 ICBMs. As observers from the United States, Europe and Asian countries suggest, these figures can be greatly exaggerated.

After all, China's love of overstatement is well known. The most vivid example of this is the artificial “growth” of a country's GDP, when Chinese economists deliberately switched to a new formula for calculating gross domestic product, which made it possible to increase the share of the so-called “services sector” and at the same time raised general indicators. The Chinese Bureau of Statistics overstates the 2ifra in order to strengthen China’s prestige at the global level. Syndrome "second place" does not give rest to the leadership of the PRC.

Why is America silent?

Citizens of the United States, having learned about the opportunities of China, were indignant: why the government is not taking any measures in response to such aggressive statements? The fact is that the Chinese have acted rather cunningly by publishing data on their nuclear arsenal not on behalf of the government or the military. If the party’s or military leadership of the country openly declared in its own name that it could easily destroy the United States, then Washington would have to respond to this diplomatic attack. But the press is impersonal, and no one can guarantee that the article published in the Global Times is true. How stupid Obama would look if he reacted to the provocation and spoke out in open criticism of the Chinese media! There is no doubt that information, in its significance equal to state secrets, got into the print press and television with the knowledge of the authorities of the Middle Kingdom.

On the other hand, the United States has long been aware of the possibilities of China. Foreign intelligence and the United States Department of Defense have long been "digging" under the People's Republic of China as the most likely enemy in the next war in the Pacific. It is naive to believe that America generally has no information about China’s nuclear potential; Most likely, Americans are aware of China’s nuclear weapons quite a lot, and publications in Chinese newspapers for a narrow circle of insiders did not become a sensation at all.

It must be assumed that the measures necessary to contain China were taken several years ago. For example, in 2012, a new US military doctrine was presented, which deals with increasing the military presence at the land and sea borders of the Middle Kingdom. In the Pacific, plans to create several airfields for the home of American UAVs. The volume of purchases of unmanned aerial vehicles will increase: last year alone, the US armed forces purchased about 1400 vehicles. Great attention is paid to the problem of cyberwar. In foreign policy, Washington increasingly relies on its Far Eastern allies.

New "Fulton speech"

If the Chinese media reports can not be considered a threat, then how to interpret the behavior of Beijing? It can be assumed that a huge review article entitled “China” and published in the Global Times is a kind of manifesto that declares the Celestial Empire to stand against the United States. By its historical significance, the published article does not yet reach the level of Churchill's Fulton speech, but in any case, under certain circumstances, it can become the starting point of the Cold War in the Pacific, but not outside the Pacific region.

Why the confrontation will not be global? As opponents would object, lately, not only Eastern, but also Central Asia, as well as Africa and South America, have fallen into the zone of China’s economic interests. At the same time, Washington and its allies want to reformat these regions at their own discretion, returning to the colonial policy of the 19 century. The redivision of the “third world” countries began in 2011, when the south separated from Sudan, and NATO troops invaded Libya. In the 2012 year, with the beginning of the war in Azawad, China’s position in Mali weakened. The destabilization of Kenya and Nigeria is also directly related to the displacement of the PRC from Africa.

As for Asia, China has serious differences with the United States about the political future of Pakistan and Afghanistan. China is seriously concerned about the presence of American military bases in the region. The United States is now actively supporting the Islamists of the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, clumsily trying to disguise the local pan-Islamist groups under the movement of national liberation character.

In the Pacific, China has unresolved territorial disputes with many countries occupying a pro-American position. In addition, we should not forget about the Taiwan problem and the division of Korea into two parts: these two issues were not resolved during the cold war between the Soviet Union and the United States, and at the current stage are of paramount importance for the PRC. After all, precisely because of the unfinished civil wars in Korea and in China itself, Beijing is losing one “battle” after another in Africa, yielding to the Euro-Atlantic neo-colonialists.

A huge island ridge stretches along the Chinese coast from north to south, on which are countries hostile to China - Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines. Yes, South Korea can also be fully considered an island state, because the border with the DPRK isolates it from the rest of the world as well as the seas. The listed countries block the Celestial access to the world ocean, and, if necessary, become transshipment sites for the delivery of foreign troops to the continent. The PRC is faced with the task of ensuring the country's unhindered access to the sea. Russia decided the same problem in the 18 century, when Peter I and Catherine II conquered Sweden and the Ottoman Empire in turn. China will not become a superpower as long as the island nations of East Asia are loyal to the United States. Consequently, the US goal is to maintain stability and preserve the high foreign prestige of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines. Peking will not dare to openly declare Africa and South America zones of its economic interests until it overcomes this geopolitical barrier. It is precisely because of this that China is unable to intervene in African wars, putting an end to the dismemberment and destruction of states.

Apparently, the leadership of the Celestial Empire understands that an open war with the United States will not lead to the final deblocking of the coast, and therefore is seeking alternative ways of access to the world's oceans. One of them could be Pakistan, if it were not for the difficult mountainous terrain, the lack of suitable infrastructure, potential problems with India and Islamism cultivated by America.

Thus, the latest publications in the Chinese press should not be taken as a signal to the global confrontation, but as a warning that US intervention in the conflict between China and one of the regional countries hostile to Beijing could lead to unpredictable consequences. China will not go on the attack on other continents until it wins at home. Moreover, taking into account the neo-colonial policy of the West, China wants to win the “battle under the fence” as quickly as possible, and nuclear weapons will be an excellent argument in a dispute with the United States over the possession of Pacific island countries.
Author:
58 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Guun
    Guun 18 November 2013 08: 22
    15
    Americans themselves provoke China and other countries to build up military force and the first thing to get WMD. The first about the blockade of China, the capture of China and simply its destruction began by the Americans themselves. Fear of someone makes either destroy the source of fear or obey him - here it is the logic of the West. The encirclement of China’s military bases is already in full swing - they are peaceful Americans, they plant flowers there and feed children chocolate.
    1. Orel
      Orel 18 November 2013 09: 14
      +6
      Americans themselves provoke China


      I disagree here, since China has long ago declared the Pacific Ocean "its own" and here the United States is reacting to the change in China's priorities. The geopolitical game is not always a war; there can be a confrontation for the loyalty of regimes and governments of different countries. As in chess, only the pieces are military bases. Open war will not come as long as the US and China are in the same economic boat. China is getting richer thanks to money from the United States, and the United States has economic growth thanks to cheap goods from China and invests only in R&D, the military-industrial complex and high technologies. In fact, China is the "cheap" working hands of American business, which invents, and China simply produces. Until production is returned to the United States, there will be no war for sure.
      1. Onyx
        Onyx 18 November 2013 13: 00
        0
        Quote: Orel
        Until production is returned to the US, war will not be for sure.

        And what do they produce there? Electronics and rags. I think the United States will be able to sacrifice this in order to maintain its status.
        1. Orel
          Orel 19 November 2013 06: 13
          -1
          And what do they produce there? Electronics and rags. I think the United States will be able to sacrifice this in order to maintain its status.


          It is electronics) If Chinese chips are on American Tomahawks) So do not underestimate the importance of production in China and exaggerate the production capabilities of the United States ...
          1. Onyx
            Onyx 19 November 2013 12: 18
            +1
            American Tomahawks do not have Chinese chips. The US defense is not dependent on China.
    2. yurii p
      yurii p 18 November 2013 18: 24
      +2
      in fact, the answer is simple, if a neighbor has a club and it threatens everyone with it, he wants to have such a club in defense, and show everyone that this club is no less than that of a neighbor.
    3. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 18 November 2013 22: 33
      +2
      Quote: Guun
      Americans themselves provoke China and other countries to build up military force and the first thing to get WMD. The first about the blockade of China, the capture of China and simply its destruction began by the Americans themselves. Fear of someone makes either destroy the source of fear or obey him - here it is the logic of the West. The encirclement of China’s military bases is already in full swing - they are peaceful Americans, they plant flowers there and feed children chocolate.


      Everything is extremely simple (I already wrote this in other articles). The PRC is the main holder of the US foreign debt. Yusovtsy are considering a military option to write off debts, for this all new ships and other equipment. A missile defense system about which so many disputes are being built against China and not Russia, as many people think (against Russia it would be deployed in Canada - along the launch path, and the Russian arsenal will not hold back quantitatively, but the Chinese one is quite likely). The Chinese understand that it smells like fried and arming themselves like victims - many new weapons enter the troops without full-scale tests, they are in a hurry - but apparently do not have time. This press drain is an attempt to influence American politics and plans through public opinion. And by the way, for this main goal, the Yusovtsy have been drafting their army in real combat conditions for the last 20 years, they are preparing it for a big and difficult war, during these 20 years millions of retirees and reservists with military experience have accumulated in the USA - which can always be called up forcibly declaring martial law. The main question is, on whose side will Russia take, officially - everything seems to be clear, but there are moments that make you think - is this all behind the curtains? (Too timely, Putin bailed Obama to resolve the issue on Syria, rejected the fabulously generous offer of the Saudis looking for an opportunity to change camp, and the attempts, very productive to reconcile the West with Iran, suggest that Saudov, the second largest holder of US debt, will be spent together with China and Iran is preparing to replace the Saudis as a clean slate. Russia can get considerable benefits from such a reformatting of the world, and is essentially the key to the success of such a plan.
      they know this, Russia knows this, but the wheel is spinning - and this is a sign that their cards are folding.) Personally, in all this plan, one moment annoys me. They shook the Middle East so that Israel could guard it without much effort, while the main forces of the United States (as well as possibly Russia) will muddle the PRC. In the end, in the bipolar world - the third superfluous, may well unite, there is experience.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 19 November 2013 01: 00
        +3
        Quote: And Us Rat
        Everything is extremely simple ... China is the main holder of US foreign debt. Yusovtsy are considering a military option to write off debts,

        I liked the way you think. But a number of questions arose.
        1.If EuroPRO is directed against the PRC, then why is it deployed in Poland, Romania? Why don't USAA give written guarantees of the Russian Federation about its non-directionality against the Russian Federation? This is how the Chinese ICBM routes should run so that they can be shot down by Patriots from European position areas? It may be easier in a straight line - through maintenance: both closer and the flight time is less. Therefore, it seems to me that they are covering up their Middle Eastern partners, but are directed against our ICBMs.
        2: The military doctrine of the Russian Federation calls NATO, the core of which is the United States.
        "On January 5, 2012 at the Pentagon, Obama announced a new US defense strategy. America must:
        - remain the strongest military power in the world
        - reduce its role in Europe ...
        - to direct military resources mainly towards Asia
        ... we are talking about China. The United States needs to strengthen military alliances in Asia before China gathers too much strength. With the exception of a few islands in the South China Sea, Beijing has no territorial claims to its neighbors. Washington will need to convince Asians that China is a threat to them. Unlike the USA.
        The core of the implementation of this new policy will be carrier strike groups (AUG). Relying on allied bases and reserve formations (such as 2500 marines in Australia), the US will focus on the Asian region. ”
        http://inosmi.ru/usa
        Therefore, the rapprochement of the Russian Federation and the PRC is quite logical. Naturally they are friends against the United States.
        3. China, like the Russian Federation, understands that, in a straight line, the United States cannot be overtaken militarily. Therefore, they are preparing an asymmetric response in the form of anti-ship ICBMs, fleet reinforcement, and counteraction in cyberspace.
        4. The states are preparing the army for a great war. This is contrary to the spirit of the Anglo-Saxons: raking in heat with the wrong hands. Most likely, they will provoke a conflict of their ally, which will be supported by high-tech weapons: the KRBD, PLA, AB, UAV, trying to continue the tradition of contactless war.
        5. Which side will the Russian Federation take? I think, as in the Caribbean crisis, there will be a statement of the unwavering determination of the Russian Federation and China to resist the aggressive USA course ... Everything will return to normal, but all countries will rush to rearm themselves urgently. In any case, we cannot allow nuclear weapons at our borders: this directly affects our national interests.
        1. Onyx
          Onyx 19 November 2013 01: 17
          +1
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          If Euro missile defense is directed against the PRC, then why is it deployed in Poland, Romania?

          Hello KAA! It seems to me that the Americans put there not anti-aircraft (or not only anti-aircraft), but cruise or ballistic missiles that can hit targets deep in the territory of the Russian Federation. This is even closer than Pershing in Germany once.
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 19 November 2013 21: 43
            +1
            Quote: Onyx
            Americans put there not anti-aircraft (or not only anti-aircraft), but cruise or ballistic missiles that can hit targets deep in the territory of the Russian Federation.

            Good evening, Onyx! Your doubts, apparently, are not groundless, since such views are often found in reviews of military analysts. While the Patriots are standing, the level of threat is one. How they will install silos-PRO - that's all. In the container, you can drag into the mine everything that the aggressor wants. Then for sure ... OPA! Such a threat can only be neutralized by proactive action.
            1. Onyx
              Onyx 20 November 2013 00: 14
              +1
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              Good evening, Onyx! Your doubts, apparently, are not groundless, since such views are often found in reviews of military analysts.

              That’s why I think what our leadership is worried about about this missile defense, despite the fact that our new ICBMs and SLBMs are very perfect in terms of overcoming the missile defense, including the promising one.
              Such a threat can only be neutralized by proactive action.

              Yes, apparently, in this case, including the creation of a new RSD
        2. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 19 November 2013 03: 17
          0
          I will answer in 3 parts (it does not fit into one), on which my (and not only) analysis of the situation is based.

          -1-

          1.If EuroPRO is directed against the PRC, then why is it deployed in Poland, Romania? Why don't USAA give written guarantees of the Russian Federation about its non-directionality against the Russian Federation?


          To protect the allies in Europe, they will take part, along the Pacific trajectory of sea-based missile defense (SM-3), let me remind you that Russian missiles fly across the pole. As for the contract - who guarantees that the secret agreement has not been signed? By the way, the hasty development of the S-500 and the new Voronezh-M radar station in Irkutsk aimed at the PRC is a missile defense system for Russia in this picture.

          2: The military doctrine of the Russian Federation calls NATO, the core of which is the United States.


          A doctrine is a philosophical, political, religious concept, theory, doctrine, a system of views, a guiding theoretical or political principle. The doctrine can be changed per day by order from above. The doctrine is not a weapon, but a weapon universally and can be turned against anyone at any time. And the reorganization of the Russian army into mobile rapid reaction groups only confirms this.

          ... we are talking about China.


          exactly
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 19 November 2013 22: 15
            +1
            Quote: And Us Rat
            Let me remind you - Russian missiles fly across the pole.

            Only Strategic Missile Forces rockets! RPK SN can attack the target from any direction, from a short distance, flat (quasi-ballistic) trajectory, all of a sudden. Why are they so dangerous!
            Quote: And Us Rat
            who guarantees that the secret agreement has not been signed? By the way, the hasty development of the S-500 and the new Voronezh-M radar station in Irkutsk aimed at the PRC is a missile defense system for Russia in this picture.

            I naively believed that secret diplomacy ended in the 1917 year. Is not it? Or again, recall the Molotov-Ribbintrop Pact? If there are facts, please bring.
            But are American Tridents unable to fly through the territory of China? In addition, we remember about 1969. So why do not we strengthen the Far East borders?
            Quote: And Us Rat
            The doctrine can be changed per day by order from above. Doctrine is not a weapon

            Doctrine is a compass needle indicating whom to "be friends" against, to which war, with which enemy to train troops. By the way, weapons are also being developed for it, the tactics of using it against a specific enemy.
            Quote: And Us Rat
            reorganization of the Russian army into mobile rapid reaction groups

            The correct direction of the reform of the Army in conditions of a drastic reduction in its strength These units can also quickly be on the western (northern, southern) borders of the country. Why not?
            Some of our military people share your views, but no one speaks openly about the rapprochement of the Russian Federation and the PRC in the face of the threat of the peddlers of democracy, controlled chaos and organizers of color revolutions, and the instability belt along the borders of the Russian Federation. Go ahead.
        3. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 19 November 2013 03: 34
          -1
          -2-

          Beijing has no territorial claims against its neighbors.


          Wrong.
          Territorial issues of the PRC
          China had territorial claims against all its neighbors - the USSR, Japan, Pakistan, Vietnam and India, etc. This was due to the fact that the leadership of China, which was part of the Qing Empire, made claims on the entire territory of this empire after its collapse and on all lands dominated by emperors according to the ancient Chinese geopolitical concept.
          Mao put forward a global goal: "We must conquer the globe ... In my opinion, the most important thing is our globe, where we will create a powerful power." Here is a list of “lost territories”: Burma, Laos, Vietnam, Nepal, Bhutan, northern India, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Korea, the Ryukyu Islands, 300 islands of the South China, East China and Yellow Seas, Kyrgyzstan, South Kazakhstan, and Afghan Badakhshan province, Mongolia, Transbaikalia and the south of the Far East up to Okhotsk.
          No other state in the world makes such claims. Nowadays, these claims are not declared on the foreign policy arena, but are voiced within the PRC, and this approach to history has been preserved.

          China, like the Russian Federation, understands that, in a straight line, the United States cannot be overtaken militarily. Therefore they prepare an asymmetric answer


          Only goals can be different. It is much more profitable and safer for Russia to let the United States let off steam than to corner them in a pair with China, a thermonuclear apocalypse is not the most profitable prize.
          The benefits of the Russian Federation on the US side (the largest) are the elimination of the Chinese threat, the destruction of OPEC (see below) - which makes Russia the sole legislator of oil prices. Destruction of giant markets of cheap products and transferring new ones under their control in the territory of fragmented China (after sharing).
        4. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 19 November 2013 03: 58
          0
          -3-

          This is contrary to the spirit of the Anglo-Saxons: raking in heat with the wrong hands. Most likely, they will provoke a conflict of their ally, which will be supported by high-tech weapons: the KRBD, PLA, AB, UAV, trying to continue the tradition of contactless war.


          Exactly! India will play the role of a battering ram on the "Chinese gate" - it is not for nothing that it is armed with tens of billions, and everyone competes in the sale of weapons to it, whoever will supply India with more of their systems will get more leverage over this "battering ram" for the post-war carve-up. Pakistan (practically having quarreled with the US) buys Chinese weapons with Saudi money - here's a ready-made coalition. (I can list the satellites separately) Packs + Saud + China. Against them - USA + Europe + Russia + India. Iran will most likely act as a gasket between the Pak and Saud, and Israel will be obliged to guard the BV countries from gestures in the "wrong" direction.

          there will be a statement on the unwavering determination of the Russian Federation and China to oppose the aggressive USA course


          This is an ideological cliché for the people, at that time it met the interests, today it is a different alignment. The countries do not have ideologies and friends - they have purely pragmatic interests and temporary allies in these interests. Russia and the United States are "accustomed" to each other and the repetition of the already worked out twice the same the scenario of the World War (only now, instead of Russia, India will take the brunt) - including a new cold war after sharing, they will be more comfortable than the unpredictable China with a billion people. In the bipolar world - the third superfluous.
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 19 November 2013 23: 15
            +1
            Quote: And Us Rat
            India will play the role of a battering ram on the "Chinese Gate"

            Yes, such an option is quite possible. But, it seems to me, first China will solve the problem of unification: reunification with Taiwan. This action is ideologically ensured, recognized by the people as fair and historically determined. Well, digesting Taiwan, you can deal with other problems. IMHO. For the rest, in principle, I agree. Such a configuration of alliances of states may well develop.
            Quote: And Us Rat
            ideological cliche for the people

            This "cliché" determines the mentality of the masses, the moral and political unity of the people, the morale of the troops. It is possible to wage an unpopular war among the people, but it is extremely costly and not to see victory. Remember 1973, the anti-war actions of the Americans. And what did all this lead to?
            Quote: And Us Rat
            Countries do not have ideologies and friends

            This is for corrupt Yankees and Saxons. And all our life we ​​have been proud of our loyalty to union duty, the fraternal friendship of the peoples of the Union. With this, Hitler was defeated. Today? Today we are painfully looking for a Nationwide idea, we are striving to unite the Slavic union, to integrate our allies.
            Quote: And Us Rat
            In the bipolar world - the third superfluous.

            So then in the 2's polar world! Read the report of B. Obama (2008 g), where he talks about a multipolar world and the formation of new centers of influence (power). And you still pull us into the 2's polar world.
            Come on.
        5. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 19 November 2013 04: 22
          0
          Py.Sy

          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          In any case, we cannot allow nuclear weapons at our borders


          JV will not be allowed to get old, except for China, India and Pakami, and the main goals are closer to the Indian and Pacific Oceans, and from the borders of the Russian Federation no closer than a couple of thousand kilometers, in addition, I suspect that one of the goals is the depopulation of these 3 countries, and given their mutual "love", the victims of this war can exceed a billion. One of the reasons why they do not give the Bomb to Iran is that he would not insert his five kopecks at the wrong time and ruin the picture. And the Saudis, by the way, feeling that they smell fried - they are trying to flirt with Israel behind the scenes in the hope of staying away from the carnage, and in parallel are weighing to receive nuclear weapons from Pakistan - already essentially paid for. All players do not like both options, with the intercession of Israel, the Saudis will not have to be touched, the Yusovites will not be able to afford to quarrel with the nuclear watchman of their rear, well, and the Saudi Bomb is of no use to anyone - since while India is fighting with its neighbors, the Yusovites are planning "Storm in the desert 2.0 "against NON-NUCLEAR Saudi. The role of Russia will most likely be - a supply corridor from Europe to India and attacks on the rear of the PRC for strategic support to India. I start somewhere between 2017 and 2022 year.
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 19 November 2013 23: 31
            +1
            Quote: And Us Rat
            They will try to prevent nuclear weapons, except between China, India and Pakami, and the main goals are closer to the Indian and Pacific Ocean, and from the borders of the Russian Federation no closer than a couple of thousand kilometers,

            That is, the jab between the PRC, RI, Pakistan - is it possible, maybe this is so, toys? Well, you can’t! If China and India empty their nuclear arsenals, that's enough for all of us, the states, and Israel. Remember Chernobyl, Hiroshima, Nagasaki ... I think it will be even worse.
            Quote: And Us Rat
            The role of Russia is likely to be ...

            Self! The role of the USAA assistant does not suit us fundamentally.
            Although I repeat: the course of your thoughts is extremely interesting to me. With the victory of the pro-American party in our Fatherland, this option is quite possible.
            PS Thank you for the interesting conversation.
            1. And Us Rat
              And Us Rat 20 November 2013 03: 15
              0
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              such an option is quite possible.


              I hope that it won’t reach military options at all, none. Everything is decided peacefully (except religious fanaticism).

              Personally, I am more impressed with the development of peaceful technologies - alternative energy, space conquest, nanotechnology medicine. Let's hope for the best.

              hi
  2. makarov
    makarov 18 November 2013 08: 30
    +1
    Eka- found something to surprise!
    As he told us in class back in 1979. political officer of the unit: "..when a nuclear charge explodes, then this one falls on the ground, well, how is it .. a nucleus in one word ..". And this is in the troops of the Strategic Missile Forces. So that's what I mean. In the US, the Chinese are not measured. And if everyone is given a NUCLEAR (?), Then naturally the US will be completely covered.
    P, C,
    There was a rumor among conscripts that our political officer had been graduating a long time ago from the Tbilisi Artillery School of Horse / Horse Draw.
  3. aszzz888
    aszzz888 18 November 2013 08: 35
    0
    Once again, to remind the United States of its vigorous reserves and their capabilities, this is not superfluous.
  4. ivshubarin
    ivshubarin 18 November 2013 08: 40
    +6
    Accustomed to fight on foreign territory, the United States is terrified of fear of retaliation
    1. Bosk
      Bosk 18 November 2013 10: 30
      0
      It would be more accurate to say not "to fight", but to iron ... because the last time they went into a high-quality bayonet attack ... probably in the First World War. In WWII, Korea and Vietnam, of course, they also fought, but it was a war with overwhelming air superiority, and this is a completely different "crankshaft", it seems to me if they would have had the 41st 42nd like on the eastern front. ..it would be a defeat for them.
    2. nickname 1 and 2
      nickname 1 and 2 18 November 2013 12: 36
      0
      Quote: ivshubarin
      The USA is terribly afraid


      let them be afraid!
      not a secret. And why did the Celestial Empire do this indirectly, through its national media, and not on behalf of the party leadership?


      In revenge and edification! So that henceforth it was not uncommon to frighten everyone with crap!
    3. nickname 1 and 2
      nickname 1 and 2 18 November 2013 14: 44
      0
      Quote: ivshubarin
      The USA is terribly afraid


      let them be afraid!
      not a secret. And why did the Celestial Empire do this indirectly, through its national media, and not on behalf of the party leadership?


      In revenge and edification! So that henceforth it was not uncommon to frighten everyone with crap!
    4. alone
      alone 18 November 2013 20: 11
      +1
      Quote: ivshubarin
      Accustomed to fight on foreign territory, the United States is terrified of fear of retaliation


      and you show me a country that is not afraid to get a retaliatory strike from nuclear weapons?))
  5. Maximus-xnumx
    Maximus-xnumx 18 November 2013 09: 02
    +3
    recent publications in the Chinese press should not be perceived as a signal for a global confrontation, but as a warning that US intervention in China’s conflict with one of Beijing’s hostile regional states could lead to unpredictable consequences. For nefig.
  6. Andrey57
    Andrey57 18 November 2013 09: 23
    12
    The author of the article made a blunder when talking about the possibility of China to launch a ballistic missile through the North Pole. China does not have such an opportunity, since otherwise it will immediately receive a retaliatory nuclear strike from the Russian Federation, since "across the pole" it is in our direction.
    1. Guun
      Guun 18 November 2013 09: 33
      0
      Why do they need submarines?
      1. Onyx
        Onyx 18 November 2013 13: 02
        +1
        Something I doubt that China has submarines with missiles with a range of 14 tons. Km
        1. Lord of the Sith
          Lord of the Sith 18 November 2013 16: 23
          +1
          There are 6 units of such boats.
          SSBN Project 092 "Xia"- 1 strategic missile carrier with SLBM JL-1, built in 1981, modernized

          SSBN Project 094 "Jin" - 4 strategic missile carrier with 12 SLBMs JL-2built in 1999-2010.

          SSBN Project 096 "Teng" - 1 strategic missile carrier with 24 SLBMs JL-2.


          Characteristics SLBM JL-2

          Range: 8000-12000 km
          Mass: 20 t
          Length: 11 m
          Diameter: 2 m
          The apogee of the trajectory: 1000 km
          Payload: 700 kg
          Amount of BB: 3-4
          BB power: 90 ct
          Accuracy (CVO): 500 m
          1. dv-v
            dv-v 21 November 2013 06: 59
            0
            I beg you - well, at least purely arithmetically compare the performance characteristics with our "blue" and American "trident-2", liquid and solid propellant, and it immediately becomes obvious that the Chinese are once again not blushing.))) and this is us have not yet considered their pepelats, which for some reason they call submarines.
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 18 November 2013 22: 39
      +2
      Quote: Andrey57
      The author of the article made a blunder when talking about the possibility of China to launch a ballistic missile through the North Pole. China does not have such an opportunity, since otherwise it will immediately receive a retaliatory nuclear strike from the Russian Federation, since "across the pole" it is in our direction.

      Andrei, you're right about land-based ICBMs. But China now has T.NNMX SSBNs with SLBMs capable of reaching USA across the SL ocean.
      "... The future Type 096 is a very advanced nuclear strategic submarine. It is believed that construction of this submarine has already begun, it should be equipped with 24 new JL-3 SLBMs with a firing range of over 10000 km, which will allow nuclear strikes on a significant part The drawings of an unknown SSBN with 24 SLBMs were first shown on the central Chinese television channel CCTV in 2008. Chinese Navy officer Hu Jia said that these SSBNs can patrol under the ice of the Arctic to launch strategic missiles. http://www.militaryparitet.com
      1. dv-v
        dv-v 21 November 2013 07: 03
        0
        and this is finally - to have fun. for ours, a serious test was the passage between Chukotka and Alaska when driving from the north to Kamchu, and the whales gathered there as to their homes ... like all adults, and they believe in fairy tales ...
  7. dmitry21
    dmitry21 18 November 2013 09: 39
    +2
    it's called "catch in the opposite direction"!
    guys, think, why China, for example, the western coast of the USA? practically near huge reserves of land, space, there are minerals, a fairly developed infrastructure ?!
    1. MVS
      MVS 18 November 2013 09: 50
      +3
      Quote: dmitry21
      it's called "catch in the opposite direction"!
      guys, think, why China, for example, the western coast of the USA? practically near huge reserves of land, space, there are minerals, a fairly developed infrastructure ?!

      If this is about Russia, then in vain do you think the Chinese are suicides. They are well aware that in the event of an attack on us from China, and, unfortunately, only the nuclear desert (if any) will remain from the Far East. Such a war is meaningless for China.
      1. Bongo
        Bongo 18 November 2013 10: 51
        +3
        In China, there are not many ICBMs, and they are all monoblock. But there are a significant number of RSD, which in relation to Russia are strategic, as they cover most of the territory of our country. It’s not at all the fact that in the event of a conflict in the Far East, our leadership will decide to use nuclear weapons. Maybe in response to fly to Moscow.
        At the same time, apart from nuclear weapons, there is nothing to defend the Far East.
        1. MVS
          MVS 18 November 2013 11: 46
          +1
          Quote: Bongo
          It is not at all a fact that in the event of a conflict in the Far East, our leadership will decide to use nuclear weapons.

          And where is the guarantee that you can’t decide? Nuclear weapons will have to be used, if only because the Far East seems to China to be too easy a prey and he wants more. In a nuclear war, both parties with a probability of 99,9% are not residents. If China will fight, then not with the Russian Federation or the United States.
          1. Bongo
            Bongo 18 November 2013 11: 53
            +2
            With whom? Why are the armed forces of the PRC modernized at such a pace? Why are the most combat-ready units stationed along the border with Russia and Kazakhstan?
            1. MVS
              MVS 18 November 2013 12: 03
              +2
              Quote: Bongo
              With whom?

              With a country that does not have nuclear weapons.
              Quote: Bongo
              Why are the armed forces of China modernized at such a pace

              So that the same States do not have the temptation to climb.
              Quote: Bongo
              Why are the most combat-ready units located along the border with Russia and Kazakhstan?

              Our most combat-ready units are on the western and southern borders. And it turns out, our rulers decided to attack Georgia or Azerbaijan (with the western border and so everything is clear)?
            2. ivshubarin
              ivshubarin 18 November 2013 13: 01
              +1
              China has territorial claims against Japan, India, and Vietnam. Taiwan as a thorn
        2. Onyx
          Onyx 18 November 2013 13: 05
          0
          Quote: Bongo
          It is not at all a fact that in the event of a conflict in the Far East, our leadership will decide to use nuclear weapons. Maybe in response to fly to Moscow.

          Do not forget that Russia has the largest arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons.
      2. Revolver
        Revolver 18 November 2013 12: 34
        +1
        Quote: MVS
        If this is about Russia, then in vain do you think the Chinese are suicides.
        Well, with whom, in this case, do the Chinese mean to fight? With America? So in this case, China will remain only in history textbooks - they say there was once such a country where there is now a radioactive desert. And America is far away, while the Chinese have a fleet of one pre-carrier against 5-6 Nimits.
        Philippines, Taiwan, Japan? Firstly, it will not solve the needs of China in agricultural or even just habitable lands. And secondly, America will not allow it, i.e. see above.
        Vietnam? If they could resist against America, then the Chinese can be piled on the most I can not; however, once already heaped in 1979.
        India? The border goes through the mountains, it’s damn convenient to defend there, and only the madman will attack. In the sense of farmland and minerals there is not a lot. Well, again, to hit the main centers of population of China, enough of those missiles that India has.
        1. MVS
          MVS 18 November 2013 12: 40
          +1
          Quote: Nagan
          With America?

          Quote: MVS
          If China will fight, then not with the Russian Federation or the United States.

          I hope the answer to this question is found.
          Quote: Nagan
          Well, with whom, in this case, do the Chinese mean to fight? With America? So in this case, China will remain only in history textbooks - they say there was once such a country where there is now a radioactive desert. And America is far away, while the Chinese have a fleet of one pre-carrier against 5-6 Nimits.
          Philippines, Taiwan, Japan? Firstly, it will not solve the needs of China in agricultural or even just habitable lands. And secondly, America will not allow it, i.e. see above.
          Vietnam? If they could resist against America, then the Chinese can be piled on the most I can not; however, once already heaped in 1979.
          India? The border goes through the mountains, it’s damn convenient to defend there, and only the madman will attack. In the sense of farmland and minerals there is not a lot. Well, again, to hit the main centers of population of China, enough of those missiles that India has.

          I agree with everything written about neighboring countries, but why if, in your opinion, Vietnam should stand up to China, then the Russian Federation should not stand up? After all, Russia, too, can leave only memories from the PRC.
          1. Revolver
            Revolver 18 November 2013 20: 45
            +1
            Quote: MVS
            why if in your opinion Vietnam should stand up against China, then the Russian Federation should not stand up?

            Look at the cards (no, not playing and not tarot). Vietnam and China have a relatively short border, and more troops are concentrated there. If the Vietnamese are not complete eccentrics with the letter M, but they do not seem like such, then the border should be equipped to a considerable depth with all sorts of good things that help a lot to hold the defenses and hinder the advance about as much. Well, you can be sure that in a couple of days of fighting for Vietnam, both Russia and America will join, because neither of these reinforces China at the expense of Vietnam.
            The Russian Federation and China have a border - you yourself know. Plus Central Asia, which the Russian Federation does not control as the USSR could and did. There are few troops at the Chinese border in the Russian Federation, there is no control over the entire length of the border, plus the Chinese are marching back and forth, and some have already settled on the Russian side, and it is not known how many of them have military personnel besides the specialty of a small trader. And in Russia, troops are mainly in the European part and cover the western direction from particularly aggressive Baltic states and countries of the Caucasus. Throwing them east is not a matter of days or even weeks. And how much increased the capacity of the Trans-Siberian Railway in comparison with the Russo-Japanese War?
            Yes, there are strategic missiles. But how long will it take to retarget the same Topol from Washington to Beijing? And plus to the fact that if the strategic potential in China is exhausted, what will remain of the balance with America? It is America that can leave the sea with "axes" with a nuclear warhead and cover most of the population of China, and the Russian Federation will have to spend its strategic potential. Again, China may respond. America has at least some rudiments of missile defense, even though the same destroyers Arleigh Burke with Aegis. This is not enough to intercept the strike of Russia, but against China it may well. And the Russian Federation has only Moscow covered.
            Well and the main thing. There is nothing to take in Vietnam, there is little land, and besides, it is densely populated, so that the Chinese can be resettled there, you must first arrange a small genocide. And in the Asian part of the Russian Federation - open space, farmland, forests are not really cut down, minerals are not dug up. And all this is practically not populated and not mastered. The main thing is that everything is at hand; there is no need to transfer troops by sea. In general, compared with Vietnam, the risk / reward ratio looks much better.
            1. MVS
              MVS 18 November 2013 23: 31
              0
              Quote: Nagan
              In general, compared with Vietnam, the risk / reward ratio looks much better.

              Your arguments are very convincing, but nevertheless, I cannot agree with the last point. One risk of a nuclear strike against the PRC negates all of the above. The CPC Central Committee understands perfectly well that there will be no winner with a high degree of probability, and if someone in the Russia-China-USA-China pair survives, then a third party will finish him off. And how long it takes to retarget the "poplars" to Beijing from Washington, I do not know. But nevertheless, if it is needed - China will be left with a nuclear desert, because I cannot believe that even a couple of "poplars" do not look at our southern "friend".
              PS The fact that the States will shower China with "axes" from the sea is understandable. Yes, only if we consider the scenario of the PRC's aggression against the Russian Federation or the United States and the destruction of the first nuclear weapons - what difference will it make for China whether its adversary who is on the verge of destruction or in full force will blow it apart? And if there is no benefit, is there any point in fighting?
              1. alex86
                alex86 19 November 2013 00: 02
                0
                I then see the development of events on the Russian-Chinese border as follows: Chinese columns, possibly unarmed, without firing, move deep into Russian territory. Border troops either do not open fire or are trampled. Management tosses between the desire to hit and fear to get an answer, and ultimately decides that it is better to sacrifice a part (the territory south of BAM) than to have a nuclear conflict. China eats off a piece, which he has enough for 30 years. Then he repeats the script, moving northwest ...
                Sadly, for China, with its design for centuries, this is a very realistic scenario.
              2. Revolver
                Revolver 19 November 2013 06: 32
                0
                Quote: MVS
                And if there is no gain, is it worth fighting?
                Nevertheless, China is actively purchasing and / or developing (copying) strike aircraft, armored vehicles, ships of all classes, from a mosquito fleet to aircraft carriers. These are all offensive weapons. If they had in mind to defend themselves, the emphasis would be on border fortifications, air defense, and ballistic missiles as a means of containing / retaliating. The question is, how and against whom are they planning to use these offensive weapons, and especially armored vehicles and front-line strike aircraft? Tanks will not go across the sea, and planes will not reach America - the radius is not the same. And helicopters will not reach Taiwan.
                And against internal enemies, if they appear (Uyghurs, Tibetans, dissatisfied workers and / or peasants), soldiers (policemen) with batons and water cannons are needed, in the extreme case light armored personnel carriers, but not the latest MBT, and especially aviation.
                The Chinese are not the people who will spend money without benefit. If they are armed, they mean to use these weapons.
                1. MVS
                  MVS 19 November 2013 07: 05
                  +1
                  Quote: Nagan
                  If they are armed, they mean to use these weapons.

                  Of course. But why exactly against the Russian Federation? The United States is also actively arming itself with the latest weapons and actively intervening with it in regional conflicts. China, too, may want to get into some Angola, and this is in case of a very possible indignation of the United States, as a stopping argument.
                  PS Well, let's go from the other side. Here is a link to an article that provides for the Russo-Chinese war. But pay attention to what should be before this. The scenario of events in all 6 wars is, to put it mildly, very conditional. But you yourself will figure it out.
                  http://topwar.ru/34758-shest-voyn-v-kotoryh-kitay-dolzhen-uchastvovat-v-sleduyus
                  chie-50-let.html
        2. ivshubarin
          ivshubarin 18 November 2013 13: 06
          0
          China will not fight, not a suicide. Especially since it can be economically occupied
  8. marder4
    marder4 18 November 2013 09: 50
    0
    what is it that turns out - is it yet another big outlook?
  9. patriot2
    patriot2 18 November 2013 10: 03
    0
    Omitting all the "shoals" in the article, noticed by the people on the forum, it must be said that the Yankes have long been concerned about the possibilities of the Celestial Empire that are growing by leaps and bounds.
    1. ivshubarin
      ivshubarin 18 November 2013 10: 22
      +1
      To some extent, the United States is deliberately inflating the capabilities of China, Iran, and S-Korea, so that more defense finance could be knocked out.
    2. Ascetic
      Ascetic 18 November 2013 11: 32
      +4
      Quote: patriot2
      Omitting all the "shoals" in the article, noticed by the people on the forum, it must be said that the Yankes have long been concerned about the possibilities of the Celestial Empire that are growing by leaps and bounds.


      For the first time in the country's history, China’s offshore strategic nuclear deterrence forces are approaching initial combat readiness, according to a forthcoming report by the US Congress Commission on China, Defense News reported on November 11.
      At the end of this year, operational deployment of new JL-2 solid-propelled SLBMs with a range of 4000 miles (7400 km), which will allow China to deliver nuclear strikes on the continental US, is expected. The missiles will be deployed on two of the three built-in SSBNs Type 094 "Jin". By 2020, the PLA Navy can adopt two more strategic submarines of this class. China also is deploying two new types of submarines - the multipurpose Type 095 and the strategic Type 096. It is noted that US military facilities on about. Guam is already within the reach of Chinese conventional missiles.
      In June of this year, the PLA Air Force adopted 15 new N-6K bombers with an increased flight range, capable of carrying long-range missiles. In addition, China is working to increase the range of anti-ship missiles of the DF-21D type from 810 miles (1500 km) to 1600 miles (3000 km). These missiles can threaten US warships throughout the western Pacific.
      According to the position of specialists expressed in this report, in over the next 5-10 years, China’s military preparations will significantly change the strategic balance in Asia. Along with the strengthening of Sino-US relations, China builds up its ability to strike at bases and ships of the United States and its allies in the Asia-Pacific region
      In the near future, China will create an ICBM to launch from submarines
      1. Onyx
        Onyx 18 November 2013 13: 09
        +1
        Quote: Ascetic
        In addition, China is working to increase the range of anti-ship missiles of the DF-21D type from 810 miles (1500 km) to 1600 miles (3000 km).

        So we need to resume work on such missiles.
  10. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 18 November 2013 10: 59
    +4
    Interestingly, the range of 14000 km for marine missiles, is it bullshit? If so, then Chinese missiles are the most advanced in the world.
    1. Onyx
      Onyx 18 November 2013 13: 10
      0
      Quote: 1c-inform-city
      Interestingly, the range of 14000 km for marine missiles, is it bullshit? If so, then Chinese missiles are the most advanced in the world.

      Looks like bullshit
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 18 November 2013 21: 49
        +1
        Quote: Onyx
        Looks like bullshit

        I would like, but that's what our press gives.
        The three-stage SLBM "JL-2" (NATO code "SS-N-9") is a missile, unified in elements with a land-based mobile ICBM of the "DF-31" type, with a firing range of 8-10 thousand km, and can carry from one MHC with a capacity of 1,0 Mt up to three MHCs with a capacity of 90 kt. The estimated launch weight is more than 20 tons. In the open literature, there are practically no descriptions of the JL-2 SLBM.
        But according to the latest data, in July 2004 China launched the JL-2 SLBM. The same source claims that the firing range of the JL-2 is somewhat longer - about 13 thousand km. http://lemur59.ru/node/8686
        And confirms the photo:
        1. Onyx
          Onyx 18 November 2013 21: 58
          -1
          Perhaps, but then she will have a small castable mass. I do not believe that someone was able to create SLBMs that can throw at least a ton on 14000 km
        2. dv-v
          dv-v 21 November 2013 07: 07
          0
          "blue", liquid, 39 tons - 7800, mh, 3,7, 1.8x14 - do the Chinese have some other physics with chemistry, Chinese? well, yes, on paper.)))
  11. Valery Neonov
    Valery Neonov 18 November 2013 11: 11
    +3
    In the 80s, China’s foreign policy was (figuratively speaking) constructed as follows: A smart Chinese monkey should not allow the battle between the Russian bear and the American dragon, now everything is much more complicated ...DO NOT ALLOW - THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING. THE WINNERS WILL NOT BE.
  12. atalef
    atalef 18 November 2013 11: 24
    +1
    The article is bullshit, if you write that China is able to hit the whole territory of the United States, why not write that the states are able to wipe China into dust and so on between things, that I can sleep with the Dutch queen, like anecdote, what is the difference between practically and theoretically Dad, what is theoretically and practically?
    - Well, look sonny, go to mom, grandparents and ask "they would
    I slept with a black man for a million? "
    Over time.
    - Dad they all said "YES!"
    - Here is the son !!! Theoretically, we have a million, and proctically one gay and
    two prostitutes
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 18 November 2013 22: 11
      +3
      Quote: atalef
      Article bullshit, if you write that China is able to hit the entire territory of the United States, why not write that the states are able to wipe China into dust

      The article is informative. And everyone knows that the states can erase China. After publishing information on China’s ability to strike at major American cities, USA will think about the degree of threat of a retaliatory nuclear strike IN HIS TERRITORY, and not on cannon fodder sent by the government to the territory of another country for slaughter. It’s time for states to understand that the times of serene transatlantic existence are irrevocably a thing of the past. Soon Iran will be able to declare a similar neighbor ...
  13. Bongo
    Bongo 18 November 2013 12: 08
    +2
    Quote: MVS
    With a country that does not have nuclear weapons.

    With Mongolia or what?
    Quote: MVS
    So that the same States do not have the temptation to climb.

    If the States wanted to draw, they would not wait for China to get stronger
    Quote: MVS
    Our most combat-ready units are on the western and southern borders. And it turns out, our rulers decided to attack Georgia or Azerbaijan (with the western border and so everything is clear)?

    The comparison is not quite correct, especially in numbers.
    1. MVS
      MVS 18 November 2013 12: 14
      -1
      Quote: Bongo
      With Mongolia or what?

      As an option.
      Quote: Bongo
      If the States wanted to draw, they would not wait for China to get stronger

      Previously, it could have been simply unnecessary, but nobody knows what will happen tomorrow.
      Quote: Bongo
      The comparison is not quite correct, especially in numbers.

      So be it. Then, on the other hand, why is the Russian Federation arming itself?
      1. Bongo
        Bongo 18 November 2013 12: 38
        +2
        The Russian Federation, in contrast to the PRC, has no territorial claims to its neighbors.
        1. MVS
          MVS 18 November 2013 12: 47
          -1
          Quote: Bongo
          The Russian Federation, in contrast to the PRC, has no territorial claims to its neighbors.

          The fact that China is arming itself is an obligatory sign that aggression will be precisely against the Russian Federation?
          1. Bongo
            Bongo 18 November 2013 13: 03
            +3
            And you exclude such an option 100%? Personally, I - no. Moreover, as a resident of the Far East and a person related to power structures, I can not help but see that this territory has now become virtually defenseless. All fortified areas were destroyed, most of the military units and formations were reduced.
            1. MVS
              MVS 18 November 2013 13: 10
              0
              Quote: Bongo
              Do you exclude this option 100%?

              In the near future - by 90%, and then 10% - in case of world war.
              Quote: Bongo
              Moreover, as a resident of the Far East and a person related to law enforcement agencies, I cannot help but see that this territory has now become virtually defenseless. All fortified areas are destroyed, most of the military units and formations are reduced.

              Since you live there, you know better. However, the Russian Federation (in my opinion) in any case will not have enough conventional weapons to confront the PLA. There is no way to do without nuclear weapons. But on this issue I wrote above.
        2. Onyx
          Onyx 18 November 2013 13: 14
          -1
          Quote: Bongo
          The Russian Federation, in contrast to the PRC, has no territorial claims to its neighbors.

          China has no territorial claims against Russia
    2. Onyx
      Onyx 18 November 2013 13: 14
      -1
      Quote: Bongo
      With Mongolia or what?

      With Japan, for example
      Quote: Bongo
      If the States wanted to draw, they would not wait for China to get stronger

      The crisis began not so long ago
      Quote: Bongo
      The comparison is not quite correct, especially in numbers.

      How do you know where and what parts are located in China?
  14. Sasha 19871987
    Sasha 19871987 18 November 2013 12: 11
    +2
    nothing, Russia-Mother will also let everyone crap if necessary ...
  15. capskup
    capskup 18 November 2013 13: 05
    +2
    Quote: MVS
    Quote: dmitry21
    it's called "catch in the opposite direction"!
    guys, think, why China, for example, the western coast of the USA? practically near huge reserves of land, space, there are minerals, a fairly developed infrastructure ?!

    If this is about Russia, then in vain do you think the Chinese are suicides. They are well aware that in the event of an attack on us from China, and, unfortunately, only the nuclear desert (if any) will remain from the Far East. Such a war is meaningless for China.

    Maybe, but China also knows that if it clings to Russia, then the 3rd side of the USA will surely finish off the winner and the remnants of the defeated, in the event of a conflict between China and the USA, the question of Russia's participation remains open. The Chinese are not stupid - they learn very well from the mistakes of others and they know the history of World War 2 ....
    1. MVS
      MVS 18 November 2013 13: 17
      +1
      Quote: capskup
      Quote: MVS
      Quote: dmitry21
      it's called "catch in the opposite direction"!
      guys, think, why China, for example, the western coast of the USA? practically near huge reserves of land, space, there are minerals, a fairly developed infrastructure ?!

      If this is about Russia, then in vain do you think the Chinese are suicides. They are well aware that in the event of an attack on us from China, and, unfortunately, only the nuclear desert (if any) will remain from the Far East. Such a war is meaningless for China.

      Maybe, but China also knows that if it clings to Russia, then the 3rd side of the USA will surely finish off the winner and the remnants of the defeated, in the event of a conflict between China and the USA, the question of Russia's participation remains open. The Chinese are not stupid - they learn very well from the mistakes of others and they know the history of World War 2 ....

      I agree, but here it is still necessary to take into account that the consequences of such large-scale wars for the planet can be fatal and there simply will not be a winner.
  16. Horla
    Horla 18 November 2013 14: 20
    +2
    I think that everything is much simpler. Now the United States will not have any problems with the budget. Articles in the Chinese press appeared very on time.
  17. ZU-23
    ZU-23 18 November 2013 19: 35
    +1
    China in all states does not need to hammer, purely for the Masons and the Pentagon)))
  18. alone
    alone 18 November 2013 20: 12
    +1
    Bullshit. Everyone knows what a nuclear strike is and how it will end for everyone. Everyone wants to live on
    in this white light. And the Americans and the Chinese are no exception
  19. Centaurus
    Centaurus 18 November 2013 23: 29
    +2
    The main Schaub China has not changed its vectors now. Let rushing to the United States. Washington will not have to skip then ...
    Well, the time has come! Twenty-five years ago, we still kept the United States in fear, and the PRC, from behind our backs, gazed with enthusiasm and horror at the Yankees with their aircraft carrier formations, they rusted through the Schaub!
    And now they are a whole US geopolitical rival and a potential adversary in World War III, and we are ... like allies. And then not for sure. Stay awake, in time ... 4th I really am happy in my time, so this is the Internet)
  20. Mitrich
    Mitrich 20 November 2013 12: 02
    0
    Well, everything hits the suit. It can be seen that pirates and terrorists were not enough, they began to scare the Chinese nuclear threat. Here’s the topic of the article about how the United States uses pirates to squeeze China out of Africa http://pakgauz.com/blog/news/89.html