posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 10:40 PM
reply to post by Zaphod58
I completely disagree in a few respects.
If China is willing to go to war with Japan, for example, then they have decided they are willing to go to war with the US. It won't make a tinker's
damn of difference how they do it. Backfire or IRBM. Why purchase and maintain a TU-22M fleet for operations against Japan when you already have one
of, if not the
, biggest inventories of theatre ballistic missiles, most of them on TEL's? And you already have (older, less effective, but
still capable) bombtrucks/cruise missile carriers in your inventory to strike Japan.
The same argument could be made for operations against Guam or (less so) a CVBG. The real upgrade would be in the maritime role because a ASBM cannot
perform a long-endurance armed patrol and reconnaissance flight.
It's not that I think the Backfire wouldn't give you increased capability. It's simply very expensive capabilities that are in large part provided
by other systems already in their inventory. When you factor in SU-27 and -32 clones nearing carrier operations in the near-term, it makes even less
sense. Unless they're hell-bent on waging war in the next half-decade. Or again, if they simply want them because so few world powers possess a
strategic bomber fleet.