November 02, 2013
It seems that they just, out of the blue, felt the need to remind us that their small fleet of ballistic missile submarines can wreak all sorts of nuclear devastation on US cities.
This is not news...so why bring it up?
China state media also included this fallout map which doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
Also: Why are they wasting a nuke on Rutland Vermont?
The Blaze suggests that this might be welcome news, indicating a loosening on secrecy and censorship, but this flies in the face of recent trends which have been even farther in the other direction.
We mentioned back in August that FAS had gotten wind of China doing a lot of nuclear attack simulations and had been putting together their own.
Hot on the heels of this helpful reminder...Today we had China announce that they intend to "silence" the Dali Lama. This is part of a larger internal crackdown fully in keeping with the disturbingly Maoist tendencies of Xi Jinpang.
Nuking the people who owe you money and buy your stuff is a poor business model (as wise people have pointed out) but if it looks like said people (the US) is never going to pay you back and are going completely broke it becomes less so...especially if the perceived deadbeat is the only thing standing in the way of regional hegemony.
Furthermore, if one thinks Mao was a swell guy and his attitude towards human life is laudable, then the huge population of China and the individual low yields of most of the warheads in the US arsenal might make it appear that China could "take the hit" of a US retaliatory strike.
In the long run...which is how China looks at things... they might even be right.
This still seems unlikely. No one "wins" a nuclear exchange.
However, stupider decisions have been made. The decisions that led to World War One all seemed like good ideas at the time. It's also important to remember that other societies and values systems can produce decisionary calculus with regard to acceptable trade offs is likely far different from ours.
On an equally upbeat and somewhat related note: There is an interesting report here on dealing with a low yield nuclear blast (about 1/2 a Fat Man) in a nuclear terrorist attack.
To be fair, I wouldn't want to be subtle with Obama and his crew because they might not get it.
Posted by: Suburbanbanshee at Sat Nov 2 21:49:41 2013 (cvXSV)
Posted by: Suburbanbanshee at Sat Nov 2 21:51:25 2013 (cvXSV)
Posted by: Suburbanbanshee at Sat Nov 2 21:53:08 2013 (cvXSV)
There's also been a huge wave of killer hornet sting deaths, and that Tiananmen Square Muslim thing, and possibly Chinese people being reminded/finding out about Tank Man because of the new Square incident.
Mandate of Heaven, anybody? Or at least, the regime deciding a distraction is needed from the internal problems?
Posted by: Suburbanbanshee at Sat Nov 2 22:03:14 2013 (cvXSV)
I did not know that about the rice crop.
Although he doubled his rice planting area this year to 13.3 hectares, Sun estimated that his farm's output will be 15 to 20 percent lower.[/quote]
15 to 20 percent....and that's a guy who doubled his crop...this is going to be a long winter for the middle kingdom.
Posted by: The Brickmuppet at Sat Nov 2 22:58:31 2013 (DnAJl)
On the bright side, they don't have to live off of just rice these days. China grows a buttload of corn now, for example; even if the drought brought that down somewhat, they planted record amounts of corn this year so they must have gotten something.And they've got a fair amount of money saved up that they can spend on food imports.
(I have a very bad memory of eating authentic Chinese creamed corn at a Chinese-student-patronized Chinese restaurant while visiting Ann Arbor. They had added some kind of weird flavor to it, like plum, and my stomach was Not Expecting It. I can eat just about anything new, but apparently I want familiar-looking things to taste like what I'm expecting. OTOH, I did get some awesome books at the Dawn Treader bookstore that day, so perhaps weird creamed corn is sent to try us.)
Posted by: Suburbanbanshee at Sat Nov 2 23:09:06 2013 (cvXSV)
Posted by: The Brickmuppet at Sat Nov 2 23:21:53 2013 (DnAJl)
So there's that. I mean, that new JSDF ship made the Chinese throw a hissy, all by itself.
Posted by: Suburbanbanshee at Sun Nov 3 12:40:53 2013 (cvXSV)
Definitely a list compiled by a navy without consulting other departments...
Posted by: Avatar_exADV at Mon Nov 4 15:09:09 2013 (pWQz4)
Posted by: Suburbanbanshee at Mon Nov 4 20:51:20 2013 (cvXSV)
Posted by: Suburbanbanshee at Mon Nov 4 20:52:19 2013 (cvXSV)
Posted by: J Greely at Mon Nov 4 21:34:24 2013 (fpXGN)
Posted by: Suburbanbanshee at Mon Nov 4 21:43:17 2013 (cvXSV)
There are two spots for the Portland area, and I'm not sure what the eastern one is targeting. The airport, maybe? (There's an Air National Guard unit based there, but that seems pretty small potatoes for a nuke target.)
It looks like it's shooting at Gresham, but there isn't anything in Gresham.
I would assume that all of the 50 largest metro areas would be targeted, which is why Portland is on the list. The metro area is very spread out, and maybe the second nuke is just to catch areas outside the flash zone of the first one. But in that case, there ought to be a third one, aimed at Hillsboro to get Beaverton and Forest Grove.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at Mon Nov 4 22:03:26 2013 (+rSRq)
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at Mon Nov 4 22:18:36 2013 (+rSRq)
OH The animated .gif!
No the .gif is an old animation of likely SOVIET Targets during the cold war. The color picture is what the Chinese papers went with. Its a fallout map with targets and it just seems odd to me.
Posted by: The Brickmuppet at Tue Nov 5 06:26:16 2013 (DnAJl)
Posted by: Wonderduck at Tue Nov 5 20:41:04 2013 (GE6XS)
Actually, that's an interesting question of military history. I wonder if we've done any analyses of our own Cold War-era strike targeting priority lists versus the historical presence or absence of strategic targets? I mean, we're making fun of the Chinese here sorta, but did we actually do a better job?
Posted by: Avatar_exADV at Tue Nov 5 23:20:09 2013 (pWQz4)
65 queries taking 0.2275 seconds, 208 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.