SLBM - a credible/reliable MAD?

Originally posted by W4rl0rD

Originally posted by NWguy83
China is utterly desperate for a reliable/credible ICBM & SLBM force because it doesn't have the capability to deliver nuclear bombs and cruise missiles against CONUS (continental US).

What? Lets say 30 ICBMs with an accuracy of 200m (that is extremely poor), all launched at CONUS. How would you call that no capability? There are nuclear silos deep inside the mountain regions in western China which are mostly uninhibited, and the population in concentrated on the eastern side, while for America, their population is evenly spread out.

No, the population is not evenly spread out.

Originally posted by W4rl0rD
Even if China got destroyed, the USA would be in a state similar to Germany when WWII was over. That would be enough deterrent.

not exactly..
Germany LOST at the end of WWII.. Here the US would still be the wounded victor.. But its a deterrent nonetheless..
A similar situation exists between Pakistan and India

Its called a Pyrrhic victory

A victory achieved at great or excessive cost; a ruinous victory

so , by your opinion , CONUS will win , the victory will be bitter and hollow.

Originally posted by W4rl0rD
What? Lets say 30 ICBMs with an accuracy of 200m (that is extremely poor), all launched at CONUS. How would you call that no capability? There are nuclear silos deep inside the mountain regions in western China which are mostly uninhibited, and the population in concentrated on the eastern side, while for America, their population is evenly spread out.

those 30 liquid fueled ICBM has no chance/time of ready itself for launch if US is launching the first strike, the US nukes will be coming by the thousand...

say... the Chinese General decided to launch it at the US, half of it will be downed by missile defence anyway, half of the remaining half will strayed away from their target , so... only about 7 will hit the target, not enough deterrant

I don't see why everyone says the US would be severely wounded. Can any chinese icbm's hit the eastern half of the US? Even if they hit the west coast the fallout and everything would be filtered by the rockies.

ive got a question...ok it maybe ot, if so pls forgive me...but it does concern subs, nukes, war...mad

assuming war breaks out and washington gives the order for a slbm attack.
sub receives the order, launches, and probably dives into deep water to avoid detection/counter-attacks from enemy subs.

lets assume that continental us is devastated (their enemy too) and they arent able to communicate with their subs anymore...the sub surfaces after a few hours/days and tries unsuccessfully to communicate with base.

in this situation...i wonder what the sub is supposed to do...make her way back home to see if its still there?? or does she stay at sea for x number of days/ till food runs out for new orders?? does she make way for an allied port?? i wonder what theyre supposed to do?

i guess my assumptions may be flawed ie. there is very little chance that the us may lose all/prolonged communications with her subs...since the us can still try to transmit from ally nations or from airforce1?

That's what' the E-4 and E-6 flying command posts are for. The E-4 is the USAF bird, and E-6 the USN bird. E-6 was built to communicate with the subs and give orders, etc. THey're hardened against EMP and fly away from any target areas and orbit.

Originally posted by betaiso
those 30 liquid fueled ICBM has no chance/time of ready itself for launch if US is launching the first strike, the US nukes will be coming by the thousand...

say... the Chinese General decided to launch it at the US, half of it will be downed by missile defence anyway, half of the remaining half will strayed away from their target

, so... only about 7 will hit the target, not enough deterrant

chinas ICBMs are stored in underground mountain ranges. more than 1000km of underground tunnels. and this is just one of many

and the DF-31 is moblie.

and what missile defence does the US have?

how will chinese missiles stray away.?

Originally posted by truttseeker
I don't see why everyone says the US would be severely wounded. Can any chinese icbm's hit the eastern half of the US? Even if they hit the west coast the fallout and everything would be filtered by the rockies.

i said this before. the DF-5 can reach anywhere in the US.

AS some one said before it will be pyrrhic victory for the US..
China will lose v badly..
And USA will have to secede its superpower status to Europe/Russia+India..

All in all only REAL victors seem to be Europe..

Russia and esp. India will be cutting it close as they'd be near the action..
Also India will have to worry abt Pakistan..
So any conspiracies..point all fingers at Europe

Originally posted by Daedalus3
AS some one said before it will be pyrrhic victory for the US..
China will lose v badly..
And USA will have to secede its superpower status to Europe/Russia+India..

no the US and every living thing in the world will die. the radiaction after launching over 500 nukes willl be intense.

The US doesn't need a "planet killing" exchange to screw china over..
But I'll confirm that nonetheless..

If other countries were to feel that the demise off china would mean thier own demise then they'd obv. try and screw the country over who DOES NOT have the ability to "kill" the planet.. You know who that is.. tough luck..
Its a matter of survival.. Nothing to do with sides..

Originally posted by Daedalus3

If other countries were to feel that the demise off china would mean thier own demise then they'd obv. try and screw the country over who DOES NOT have the ability to "kill" the planet.. You know who that is..

tough luck..
Its a matter of survival.. Nothing to do with sides..

nope. china has 500+ warheads. thats enough to screw anyone over.

any country trying to attack chian will face missile attacks. ANY

Yeah but we're talking about delivery mechanisms right??
Now how many of those china has??
Actually the main question is can china "kill" the planet with its 500+ warheads
even if it doesn't have those many delivery systems?.

That only a nuke expert can answer

china has over 120missiles of the DF-3 DF-4 DF-5 and DF-21.

120 H-6 bombers. free fall bombs.

16 SLBM

and a lot more short range missiles

[edit on 18-7-2005 by chinawhite]

Yeah so china will use ALL that in a war against the US??
Remember we're talking abt the US here..

Originally posted by chinawhite



china has over 120missiles of the DF-3 DF-4 DF-5 and DF-21.

120 H-6 bombers. free fall bombs.

16 SLBM

and a lot more short range missiles

[edit on 18-7-2005 by chinawhite]

The freefall bombs wouldnt do anything. The US would shoot any bombers out of the air. Bombers would be a pointless suicide mission. Plus the subs would be taken out and the ICBM's might not all work. The only reliable missiles are the mobile ones.

Yes China has many warheads, but the ones that concern the US right now are the ones that can hit the CONUS. China can build more as needed however.

But if the US got a first strike from SLBM in the Pacific, like 5-10 minute warning time, Chinas ICBM's that could hit the CONUS would be taken out.

Now Japan may be screwed in that scenario. This is exactly why President Bush is correct in pushing the ABM system. Now you understand why the Chinese are so upset by it. If you could knock down even 50% of the ICBM's heading towards North America, you could put a damper on any ideas they might have.

Originally posted by Daedalus3
Yeah so china will use ALL that in a war against the US??
Remember we're talking abt the US here..

ok china laucnhes all her bombs american lauchs 500. 1000bombs together not including other countries.

now can you say radiaction

Originally posted by truttseeker

The freefall bombs wouldnt do anything. The US would shoot any bombers out of the air. Bombers would be a pointless suicide mission. Plus the subs would be taken out and the ICBM's might not all work. The only reliable missiles are the mobile ones.

the ICBMs have been in chiense service since the 80s. they wouldn't be kept if they were considered unreliable