Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

China's nuclear arsenal could be up to FORTY times bigger than thought

page: 2
62
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   
This is not a suprise at all, The Chinese have been spending billions on their defense capabilities, like the new Stealth fighter they have built, probably using stolen American technology "Again", I'd bet that the Chinese have a lot more than just 3,000 Nukes, and probably different types and yeilds. But then again the US, UK, Russia, India, Israel, probably are not telling the world exactly how many nukes those countries have either, If I was a leader of a country, I sure the hell wouldnt be telling anyone how many, and what kinds of nuclear weapons are at my disposal. that would be idiotic.




posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChachiArcola

Originally posted by boymonkey74
300 / 3000 /300000 doesn't really matter does it, if any of the major super powers fire just one in anger at the others we are all dead.....
But a good find fella

Great post here! Seriously, I have never understood the continued production of warheads, when there are so many world wide that we could destroy the earth a few times over. Has there ever been an official reason why having so many is better than having enough?


Assuming there were enough to destroy the world even once (which there aren't), it could be destroyed only once, not "a few times over".

That's just hyperbole for the purpose of fear mongering.



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by ChachiArcola
 

Thanks and I agree with you, it seems to me that when the production of weapons went silly and they all made enough bombs to blow up the planet 100 times over it was like school yard stuff IE "Well my country has 500 nuclear bombs" "yeah well mine has 1000 so ner ner ner ner nerrrrr".
Also don't forget that the companys making and selling the bombs make a whole lot of money from them.


See what I mean? see how the ignorance grows and spreads? Now it's grown from "a few times over" to "100 times over", when NEITHER assertion is factual.

There are not enough nukes in ALL arsenals to destroy the Earth even once. There were not enough at the height of the cold war, and there are not enough now.



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Glassbender777
 


I've always suspected they were hiding more than they would admit. I've known about how the Chinese can be about secrets. Sun Tzu and all Chinese history is full of historical examples. Not to mention the Surprise they pulled on MacArthur during the Korean war etc. What gets me though is/was the often hypocritical undertones when they would speak out and against the Wests/Soviet-Russian Nuclear programs {over the last few decades} as being too large or unneeded etc.

Meanwhile a program such as theirs is/was just as bad and would have taken a long time to develop etc

Just pointing out the obvious here....
edit on 30-11-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 
This hasn't been mentioned yet (forgive if it has) but what's stopping them (China) from selling all these extra nukes to whomever wants them?

China having them doesn't scare me as much as some "Blofeld" (forgive the 007 reference) from buying them.



S&F just for scaring the fur off my little tail!



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
So wheres the UN? Should they not be pressing to check and control? IAEA not looking into it?



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


With whats going on over in China's Western province lately?

I highly doubt China would be selling their Nukes to anybody outside their borders. Not even to North Korea for the simple fact that they as well as the West and Russia wouldn't want them to fall into the wrong hands and being used by certain groups of "Extremists" on their own soil...

Dont worry, your fury little tail is safe for now but may get a bit singed
edit on 30-11-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Saltarello
So wheres the UN? Should they not be pressing to check and control? IAEA not looking into it?



Fair enough but

China has at least admitted to their program and have been known for decades for having Nukes.

The only difference here are the numbers. Which if true, puts them actually on Par with both the Russians and Americans as far as warheads not necessarily delivery systems/platform and accuracy etc.
edit on 30-11-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


You're right, lets not forget about that. And you can pretty much put down the entire current Chinese boom as a free gift from Uncle Sam as well... at our own expense. Let's hope we don't get on any worse terms with them.



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Look that was just a saying ok? but Iam sure that if every nuclear bomb was fired around the world it would mean the end of the world, because we wouldn't be here.
Yes It wouldnt blow up like this www.youtube.com... I didn't mean it like that and you know it.
But we wouldn't be here, it would be the end of our civilization and many many other species on the planet.
And if it wasn't the end well would you really want to live in it.
But I don't think it will happen I do have faith in humanity I think no is so stupid to fire one even though so many religious types seem to want the "End of Days" to happen.
Heres a good link
news.softpedia.com...
So according to these guy's even a regional nuclear war would destroy the planet.
So your statement that I quote "There are not enough nukes in ALL arsenals to destroy the Earth even once" is wrong. Who is showing their ignorance now?
edit on 30-11-2011 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I trust the Chinese as much as I would Charlie Sheen at an open bar.

I wish I had your confidence.



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Not really a surprise if you ask me. The United States and Russia have always relied on MAD to keep the peace during the cold war. Keep in mind China and Russia used to be mortal enemies, which China preferring the US as the lesser of 2 evils.

If we look at the big picture -
Russia - Back in the day before they broke apart their borders were secure and there was a clear idea of who was enemy and who was friend.

China - Same boat as the Russians
USA - again same boat.

In todays world Russia no longer has control over the republics, placing unknowns on chinas borders.
The US has always had the luxury of sharing only 2 physical borders, both of which are allies / friendly. If Mexico had been swayed to China or Russia's side back in the day, our nuclear deterrent strategy would be completely different than what we have now.

The closest we ever came was the Cuban missile crisis, and if we remember the US went bonkers over stationing nukes that close to the US. Why would China's view be any different?

With your background in the military you know the base for any strategy is based on knowledge. If your enemies don't know, its to your advantage.

With Chinas attitudes towards other countries, which essentially views them as barbarians, coupled with there military upgrades and territorial claims all over the place, China has put themselves into an awkward position. China could go one on one with their surrounding neighbors and probably could pull it off. However, when your actions piss off almost all your neighbors, a certain victory is no longer plausible.

What China has done is created a military doctrine that lets them hold countries at bay with the sheer size and technical advancements of their regular military. The nukes, being the unknown, has reinforced that first image while at the same time, knowing that their military right now is no match for Russian or American, and to a lesser extent India's, military has the nuke issue as added insurance.

The flaw in Chinas strategy is they have never taken into account internal stability of their own country. Pakistan's actions of playing both sides of the fence is another interesting twist because it just showed China that a country they relied on as an ally might not be that good of an ally.

That leads to a view that the countries who currently align themselves with China might be doing so as a matter of survival and nothing more. If hostilities were to break out, and at the first sign of China getting a nosebleed, I can see those "allies" quickly switching sides.

"Keep your friends close and your enemies closer"

If the report is accurate, it also opens the door to see what exactly could China be exporting? Could this explain the reasons China was dead set against the IAEA report and further sanctions / investigations in Iran and Syria? North Korea has also announced new building agendas for the nuke programs.

All the above aside, its a disconcerting revelation and makes one wonder what their goal is by going down this road?

Either or, just my 2 cents..



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Time to Start dusting off the old manuals?




Or....................

Time to create "New" ones.




posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Whats that second photo about?



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


Suitcase Nukes.................




posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Wouldnt like to drop it



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
One thing that works to the rest of the worlds advantage is China's crappy record on safety protocols. They are running the risk of screwing up their environment, with all their people concentrated in small areas where their cities are, one bad accident could severely cripple them. Not in terms of people but in feeding said people. This info does put their stance on N. Korea and Iran into a different perspective.



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Wouldnt like to drop it


Easy solution to suitcase nukes. Just fly American Airlines. You'll never see them again!
edit on 30-11-2011 by beezzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Does anybody reading this remember this little bit of excitement?

Maybe it needs to be investigated?
Mysterious Missile Launch Over California . The prevailing theory at the time was that China had brought one of it's Nuclear missile sub in close and fired a missile away from the US out over the Pacific. There was even a follow up thread posted by Skeptic Overlord on the topic here The California Missile Was A "Message" From China (update: possible hoax)



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by ChachiArcola

Originally posted by boymonkey74
300 / 3000 /300000 doesn't really matter does it, if any of the major super powers fire just one in anger at the others we are all dead.....
But a good find fella

Great post here! Seriously, I have never understood the continued production of warheads, when there are so many world wide that we could destroy the earth a few times over. Has there ever been an official reason why having so many is better than having enough?


Assuming there were enough to destroy the world even once (which there aren't), it could be destroyed only once, not "a few times over".

That's just hyperbole for the purpose of fear mongering.


No hyperbole for fear mongering at all, but thanks for your assumption. Maybe I should have used different phrasing so you could understand. My point was, why have more than needed.....forget I used the term "a few times over", as it was just a figure of speech. Again, thanks for taking my post so literally. But, the question still stands. Why have more than you need? I think the answer of throwing as many as you can at the shield in hopes a few get through would be the best explanation here so far.

And you really don't think there are enough nukes world wide to destroy the planet? I really think there is.....or at least enough to destroy all life on the planet. But, this is just a thought or theory from me, not proof or evidence. But your comment you state as fact. Any facts or proof on that comment since you are so sure?
edit on 11/30/2011 by ChachiArcola because: Added info....





new topics

top topics



 
62
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join