China threatens to nuke hundreds of cities

[GePap]

Well, that's obviously nonsense from the general, and taking his statements seriously is silly.

[Lancer]

No, it indicates that there is a few nuts in the Chinese military leadership. It is possible that one of them might someday get control of the nuke button, and that we should hit them while they are still weak.

[Shi Huangdi]

This is BS. China isn't going to nuke the USA. The Chinese government is not going to take an action that would lead to them losing power(which would be a byproduct of China facing Nuclear Annihilation.

If you do that the American economy will tank because China will stop financing the U.S. government deficit. Inflation will shoot up. Interest rates will climb.

That works both ways, Tingkai. What do you think happens if they stop financing our trade deficit? The dollar likely falls quite a bit, Chinese goods become more expensive, and if there is a recession as you say the USA is now buying much less Chinese goods. China's rapid economic growth is now threatened, and China faces the possibilty of a severe recession. The Chinese government, which is tolerated by the Chinese people on the grounds that it lets people get rich, now loses the basis of it's legitimacy. Now the stability of the Chinese regime is threatened.

[Dracon II]

Shi is quite right. China would not play that card unless it was absolutely necessary; maintaining the US trade deficit is in its interests.

Wrt the General, I wouldn't be considering the Ecthelion option just yet (if he was the President of the USA in October 1962 we'd all have been annihilated 40 years ago - nice suggestion buddy).

The General was completely out of order, yes, but I think he's bluffing. China's path of least resistance to great power status is economic (for the time being), which means its interests lie in the maintenance of the status quo (from which it is currently benefiting greatly).

It is also currently in the interests of both parties to maintian the status quo wrt to Taiwan. But if in the future sacrificing Taiwan is the best option to safeguarding the peaceful transition of China to great power status... I would say that we should take the pragmatic and utilitarian option. Can anyone say Taiwan SAR?

We have to make room in the International system for these rising powers. This will mean sacrifices... but better to make tolerable concessions than the ultimate sacrifice.

[Ecthy]

There was a status of MAD in 1962 between the USA and the USSR, but isn't today with USA and China.

[Dracon II]

Declaring a pre-emptive war against China based on the wayward words of a hawkish general strikes me as a little bit "mad", don't you think?

[Ecthy]

Are you sure you know what you're talking about? 10,000 vs. 400 is not mutual assured destruytion.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by GePap
Well, that's obviously nonsense from the general, and taking his statements seriously is silly.

Which is why you asked about them, right?

Where the hell did the general ever say China would consider a nuclear attack if it's ships were attacked?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ecthelion
Are you sure you know what you're talking about? 10,000 vs. 400 is not mutual assured destruytion.

Especially when that 400 is actually 20 or so.

[Lancer]

We should call their bluff and openly support Tiawanese independance.

[Commy]

Considering the American population alone (not including the military, national guard, or police forces) has enough fire power to destroy the entire Chinese military (except air force, nukes, and missiles), China doesn't stand a chance...the fact is, in the face of nuclear warfare, enough Americans have bomb shelters and extensive water and food supplies to still preserve the nation...

If China is hit with nukes, on the other hand, almost all of its population would die, as there are so many people in China...in short, after nuclear war, the US and China would end up having the same amount of people...

Even with equal populations, the US still has nuclear submarines and the largest navy and airforce (that need not be on the US mainland) and, unlike China, many Americans own weapons, and not just six shooters, fully automatic weapons, shotguns, high-powerd rifles with scopes...

What was it, 4 or 5 years ago a kid in Michigan killed 9 people with 8 shots...the Chinese couldn't even hit a Panda for crying out loud...

[Agathon]

Soon those evil Chinese will be invading our countries and starting opium dens in which good white protestant women will become prosituted to their filthy yellow desires.... the Terror of the Tongs!! Help!!!

This frankly racist Sinophobia on Apolyton is becoming ridiculous....

[Kuciwalker]

[Dr Strangelove]

Doesn't the US have better than 10 times the number of nukes that China has? Isn't it true that only a few Chinese nukes are mounted on missles capable of reaching the US?

[GePap]

What is sad is that any of you think the US can actually strategically threaten China in this situation. Its does show an utter and complete lack of reason or cognitive capabilities.

Lets spell it out for all of you, specially Ecthelion.

1. The US is a democracy-the American people would NEVER accept the use of strategic nuclear weapons by the US without the US homeland having been attacked first. Any government that launched a pre-emptive nuclear strike would fall. Any members of such a government would also probably face (rightfully) war crimes charges, as well as charges of crimes against humanity and attempted genocide.

2. This reality is compounded when you realize the populace would be even more sanguine for the blood of any leader that tried if a single Chinese ballistic missile hit a US city. A million dead Americans purely as a result of the actions (unwarranted and undemocratic) of a US leader would end with the prompt outing of such a government.

3. For all the bluster, Taiwan is not a critical component of US interest- ie. war for Taiwan and its democracy would never warrant any escalation that placed American cities in danger-the US public, the voters, don;t care about Taiwan, certainly not enough to risk any US city getting nuked for it. On the other hand the authoritarian Chinese regime might, just might, be willing to lose a few cities to do it. Probably not, but they care about the issue far more than the US.

4. Any US regime that carried out suich a strike would be world paraih. Besides the fact that if the US launched its missiles, the Russians might not know it wasn;t headed their way and launch just to be on the safe side.

5. Even if the Russians did not, no state would ever trust or deal with a US regime that had attacked China strategically without China having gone first. So again, any US regime that acted as such would have to fall for the US to have a chance of repairing its international relations.

So, can we please stop talking utter nonsense about the US doing anything to China, because its just plain utterly moronic.

There are some plausible nuclear scenerios here, but a US strategic first strike is not one of them.