It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


US first strike on China, PLA nuclear subs doctrine of MAD

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 06:20 PM
In terms of a potential US first strike on China, what effective deterrents does the PLA have against America in general and what repercussions would there be?

For example, if the US military believes it can successfully launch a nuclear or thermonuclear first strike on mainland China, would it get away with it with nearly absolute impunity or would it calculate and accept "acceptable" loss and causality rates?

With everything that is going on in the world today (Peak Oil, EROEI, population overshoot, resource depletion, petrodollar hegemony, quantitative easing and the currency and trade wars, demand destruction and pricing out of other nations, etc..) certainty it would appear to the superpowers that we are living in an era where mutual "cooperation" may not be feasible anymore (despite the hype of globalization, just in time logistics, etc) and it could be a "winner takes all" proposition..

If that is the case, naturally America may feel that it has the most to gain and least to loss (probabilistically) than any other nation by attempting a first strike on China. Even though Russia has publicly avowed to be China's strategic partner and Allie, we can't forget the fact that America may have cut a deal with Russia to carve up China and reap the benefits.. So therefore China may not be able to "count on Russia" to help deter it against a potential US first strike that could decapitate the Chinese government and informational, economical, transportation, and military infrastructure.

So I would like to know, what options does China have to deter against this?

* Could it build a doomsday device in the form of a HUGE underground thermonuclear weapon that could go off and blow up the entire earth into bits and pieces, and use this as leverage against any plans of US to devastate China in a nuclear first strike..

* Is it still true that nuclear submarines capable of launching thermonuclear missiles/warheads remain unpreventable deterrent? If America was to launch an surprise all out first strike on China today, what options would the Chinese have? I have read that Chinese nuclear subs are much more louder than US/USSR subs, and that although China MAY have the range to strike US from their own waters, Chinese continental l shelf waters are so lacking in depth that American spy satellites can spot the subs when those subs are in territorial waters. Can Chinese nuclear subs do substantial damage in an retaliation strike against the US? Does the US have Star Wars systems that can shoot down those nuke missiles? Maybe the US already know where each and every China sub are in real time?

* Or conversely, since Chinese since ancient times have historically show to be appeasers and pacifiers, would Chinese government "accept" a US first strike on China given that they know that "revenge" is not in their genes and attacking America out of vengeance is not in the Chinese leader's blood? What I mean is, perhaps Chinese doctrine is to deter American first strike, but when push comes to shove the PLA may take the "soft" side of the MAD doctrine and be psychologically defeated which leads to being physically annihilated. If America were to do first strike against China, obviously they will implant some kind of false flag and decoy strategy whereby perhaps Obama calls Hu and tells him the USA had a glitch and "accidentally" set off a couple of nukes and that for China not to worry and don't attack and those nukes will be recalled in short order.. Hu would not want to start WWIII and if he launched a counteract and it proved that US wasn't doing a first strike then of course America will obliterate China.. So I mean US may use these psychological tricks to get Chinese to stand off for so long until the last minute and it is too late.

posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 06:36 PM
i thought it was obvious... China would simply let North Korea off the leash and say "Sickem Rex"

posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 06:41 PM
If the US would launch a first strike against China, they would need to launch one against Russia and North Korea too... even if North Korea is really no threat in a US-first strike scenario.

And probably the US would have to do it with NATO to do that... and since so many people would be informed... it would be very hard to pull this off without Russia or China knowing it...

And then THEY could launch a first strike against NATO....

As for the submarines... good luck finding them all and taking them all out.

The missile shield is for that though... carry out a first strike against land based nukes + a few submarines... then let's say the hundreds nukes left are stopped by the missile shield.
edit on 5-1-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 06:46 PM
reply to post by defcon54321

china will likely launch a first strike, with or without russian missiles, on the continental US.

just peruse ATS for some of the latest chinese military advances - not too mention google -

that include much improved submarine stealth tech (2007 Kitty Hawk battle group incident),

a 'carrier-killer' ballistic mirv-ed missile, increased air force units (from Su-27's, 33's to a new

bomber design), and a new rush to bring their navy up to carrier capability (old soviet Varyag test-bed).

They have a mission - and its not to be on the defensive.

I didn't even mention cyberwar, or the insidious rumor they have hardware 'backdoors' built into intel/other fab

chips that can turn 'off' our sensitive equipment. Aren't our business leaders so so proud of themselves

for making a king's fortune by exporting our high tech manufacturing base to mainland china now?

edit on 1/5/2011 by drphilxr because: spelling @#$%

posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 07:43 PM
reply to post by defcon54321

Your thread in my opinion appears to be created by an alramist who is trying to start a war with all your hypothetical questions and statements. Posting a thread like this in my opinion is the same as starting a preemptive war.

posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 07:47 PM
I cannot even believe you people are replying to this post with statements that reflect war asking replys. Why would we even consider such a human genocide thread? I came into this thread because the title pissed me off enough to voice my opinion on how wrong this thread is. shame on you people for playing this hypothetical game

new topics

top topics

log in