It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Analyst Believes China’s Missiles Near Russian Borders Target USA

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2017 @ 10:10 PM
link   
It would seem that this move by China might be a counter move to the US's approach to the South China Sea Islands .



By TASS MOSCOW, January 24. /TASS/. China has deployed inter-continental ballistic missiles near Russia with the aim to be able to reach targets in the United States, Canada and Europe, the president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Doctor of Military Science Konstantin Sivkov, has said. Earlier, the daily Global Times said China had deployed inter-continental ballistic missiles of its own design (DF-41) in northeastern Heilongjiang province bordering Russia.
www.informationclearinghouse.info...

The first thing that came to my mind was that the US can guard against this but reading further it might not be the case .



Selecting this area for deploying the missiles targeted against Russian territory would be not expedient from the military point of view. "If that were the purpose, the missiles should have been stationed deep inside mainland China or on its southern border," Sivkov explained. In his opinion missiles of that class stationed where they are will have the capability to reach targets in the United States, Canada and Europe. "This is China’s response to threats pronounced by the new US president, Donald Trump. Also, Chinese missiles would be able to use a more advantageous northern strategic route for approaching targets in the United States, thus bypassing the US missile defense," Sivkov said. The three-stage solid propellant ICBM DF-41 (Dongfeng-41, also known by its NATO reporting name CSS-X-10), was designed by China’s Academy of Rocket Motor Technology. It is presumably armed with a multiple warhead consisting of ten to twelve independently targetable reentry vehicles.


So wat say you ATS ...up for a little doom porn




posted on Jan, 24 2017 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1


...up for a little doom porn


Nah.

I've given up watching the History channel. It was my new years resolution.



posted on Jan, 24 2017 @ 10:18 PM
link   
Great.... I just started thinking about spring, and now, nuclear winter might be coming...
Super.



posted on Jan, 24 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   
It is probably too simple but is China not even a little worried about the idea of Russia/US relations? I mean, China's whole military expansion program would still ride in Russia being their alley. China can't take on the whole world. Are the BRIC's going to end up being the BIC's?



posted on Jan, 24 2017 @ 10:25 PM
link   
As one who spent a great deal of my early life on military bases, or near them...

I find that my angst concerning nukes is rather limited. Don't particularly care for the idea of nuclear catastrophy, but it doesn't keep me awake nights, either...

...and there's really nothing new here. Nukes have been pointed our way since before I was born.



posted on Jan, 24 2017 @ 10:59 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

I think that both Russia and China know that a one world power will not work and so working pragmatically with a multi-polar world is the only logical way to go . For that ,you have to bot be respected and respect your neighbors . The US see's things a little differently and like the world Hegemonic model . The BRICS model fits well as it counters a hegemon ...But like any system you have to have the guns to either protect or to enforce .

A defensive posture is easier to maintain as it does not require projection .The Islands China is building are to be protective measures against the US navy's ability to project . I think a US battle ship is almost as big as some of those Islands but is also much more powerful .



posted on Jan, 24 2017 @ 11:07 PM
link   
I dont believe russia will tell china to knock it off however they might just tell china to not start something because they might not back them. Pointing nukes at america isn't a good idea for anybody russia included because america also have the ability to wipe the chinese off the face of the planet. Chinese aircraft is based off russian designs however the chinese version isnt on par or even close to the russians plane. The chinese tanks would get f-ed up quick once we have air supremacy and a boat battle isnt going to be in their favor as japan would side with usa a f- them up. We should of never traded with them because they would have never been an issue now.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 05:11 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

Just more evidence the a missile shield is not directed, nor effective, against Russian or Chinese nukes. Its designed to deal with threats from n. Korea / Iran. Even Russia has stated the missile shield would not work against their nukes.

If China / Russia doesnt want a THAAD system in S. Korea then they should help reign in N. Korea. Or end the N. Korean regime once and for all.
edit on 25-1-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

But like its been said that NK other then barking has no bite .A kind of a nuisance like protesters .



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

Except for their ICBM testing, their nuke testing, their push to miniaturize nukes for sub launches and their constant threat to use nukes.

THAAD is justified.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




their push to miniaturize nukes for sub launches and their constant threat to use nukes.
Its hard to imagine that they have the were with all to do this as that involves a better history of their Nuke progress . As far as for subs well we just have to look at the failed Trident launch by the UK to speculate that its not a easy task to make them go where you want . But as far as saying that they would be willing to use them well some things go without saying for anyone who has them .Having Nukes is first and for most a deterrent . Weather USA Russia India Israel or anyone else that has them they will use them . NK is very vocal about it but they may want to project that even if they dont have the capabilities to do so .



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
Its hard to imagine that they have the were with all to do this as that involves a better history of their Nuke progress .

Yet they have done testing in this area to enable the ability to sub launch.



originally posted by: the2ofusr1
As far as for subs well we just have to look at the failed Trident launch by the UK to speculate that its not a easy task to make them go where you want .

An errant missile test and what N. Korea is pushing for is not the same thing. Secondly the UK and N. Korea dont have the same relations with the US.



originally posted by: the2ofusr1
But as far as saying that they would be willing to use them well some things go without saying for anyone who has them .Having Nukes is first and for most a deterrent .

That deterrent revolves the concept of AMD though and the nations who have nukes understand that concept. North Korea does not.



originally posted by: the2ofusr1
Weather USA Russia India Israel or anyone else that has them they will use them . NK is very vocal about it but they may want to project that even if they dont have the capabilities to do so .

the countries who have nukes understand the concept of MAD and know full well the consequences should they be deployed.

I do not believe, based on N. Koreas actions, that they understand that. The regime does not care about the well being of its citizens and views them as expendable. N. Korean mindset can best be coupled with that of ISIS. If ISIS gets their hands on a nuke they would use it and not care about the repercussions.

Finally, and people tend to overlook this important fact, is the Korean war is still ongoing. The war never officially ended and their is currently only a cease fire keeping the peace.

Given how unstable the north korean regime is and the insanity of Kim Fat the 3rd THAAD is justified. Any country has a right to defend themselves (N. Korea included). S. Korea / Japan have a right to employ systems to defend against N. Korea.

Russia caused this mess by building N. Korea the nuclear reactor they use for their nuke program and China prolonged it by supporting the Kim regime.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




Russia caused this mess by building N. Korea the nuclear reactor they use for their nuke program and China prolonged it by supporting the Kim regime.
Mastering the Nuke program was always going to make for a slippery slope slope . It was the USA that let that gene out of the bottle so before picking someone to blame for it you should start where it all began .Oh and its creation was not for deterrent but for use and they did that .



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

What genie did the US let out of the bottle?

and no, they misused the nuclear reactor to make nuclear weapons.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




they misused the nuclear reactor to make nuclear weapons
And so it began and now we have thousands of them all around the world pointing at each other .And now every one has to build a defense against them .And find ways to get past the defenses . Why not just create a defense system which can be placed anywhere someone who feels threatened but a system that can be used offensively . Oh wait that is the claim against THAAD . And so the games begin .



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

What genie did the US let out of the bottle?



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Christina Aquilera - we rubbed her the right way. In return, she gave us mutually assured destruction. Come on and let her out, China. But there's a price to pay...



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

The two dropped on Japan .



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: Xcathdra

The two dropped on Japan .


Japan should not have attacked the US. Secondly both Japan and Germany had their own nuke programs.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I have read the wiki entry on its history .There is also alt-history of the war against Japan that to me makes Main stream history a little fuzzy and in question . But the OP was not to go into that but about the Nukes China placed on the Russian border .Does the analysis make sense and if it does then what might the US do to counter it .




top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join