World Affairs Brief, February 3, 2017 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World.
Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com).
This Week’s Analysis:
Trump Versus the Deep State
Attack on Trump’s Partial Muslim Travel Ban
Background on Neil Gorsuch
Berkeley Protests Against Free Speech on the Right
Brexit Passes Parliament
Republicans Bypass Democratic Confirmation Boycott
CFR Misinforms about China Nukes
CFR MISINFORMS ABOUT CHINA NUKES
I really get upset when the media keeps quoting US “intelligence agencies” that maintain that China only has 200 nuclear warheads. How can say that when they have zero access to China’s nuclear arsenal? The US had never had access. They are simply taking China’s lying words for truth because our controlled intelligence agencies are following the globalist agenda of downplaying the China nuclear threat.
But it got worse this week when the Council on Foreign Relations put out a propaganda piece in their magazine Foreign Affairs, not only repeating the bogus 200 nukes claim, but inferring that China isn’t in the least interested in joining the arms race. The piece is chock full of disinformation:
While U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin preen and compare the size of their nuclear arsenals, China has been quite modest on the subject. This macho dance doesn’t interest Beijing. Why? Isn’t bigger always better? For decades, when it comes to nuclear weapons, the answer from China has been a resounding no. The rest of the world would do well to consider their reasons why. [Oh, do tell! I can’t wait hear how this ends.]
In his last defense speech of 2016, Putin argued that his country needed to “enhance the combat capability of strategic nuclear forces, primarily by strengthening missile complexes that will be guaranteed to penetrate existing and future missile defense systems.” It wasn’t clear from the speech whether Putin seeks to improve nuclear warhead delivery systems in order to confuse American missile defense, or whether he will seek to increase the number of weapons deployed to overwhelm them, or even deploy cyber-capabilities to weaken the ability to respond. Perhaps it’s a strategy, perhaps it’s just rhetoric. U.S. ballistic missile defense efforts — particularly in Europe and Asia — have been a sore spot for both Russia and China.
The author makes it sound like the Russians are only thinking about it. Nonsense. The Russians are not only in the middle of production of the Topol M, but they are building new 15 warhead mega-missiles–the Satan-2. As with China, we have no inspectors in Russia, and even in the days when we did, our inspectors were never allowed inside the nuclear warhead plant we built for Russia nor into the huge underground factory-bunker city of Yamantau Mountain.
So why hasn’t Chinese leader Xi Jinping stripped off his shirt and flexed his strategic forces? Well, he doesn’t need to and he knows it. Decades of Chinese leaders have known it. The Chinese think about nuclear weapons in a fundamentally different way than their Western counterparts…. China was content to stick with dozens, not thousands, of warheads.
The reason the Chinese don’t flaunt it is because they want to maintain the lie that they only have a couple of hundred warheads—fodder for “useful idiots” and disarmament addicts at the CFR.
Even today, the United States and Russia believe nuclear deterrence requires thousands of warheads each, and at least three ways to deliver them. But the truth of the matter is that you can annihilate your adversary (or the planet) only so many times. In fact, some in the U.S. Air Force have argued that 311 warheads would provide nine-and-a-half times the destructive power needed to incapacitate the Soviet Union by former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara’s count.
More propaganda. In fact, you could throw all of the nukes in the world at Mt. St. Helens and you would not remove as much earth as it did when it blew off half of its top in the 1980s eruption. All these high quantities of nuclear weapons are NOT for simple deterrence, but to successfully win in a nuclear engagement where many of your weapons may be eliminated before you can launch them. Just to eliminate all of the US military and communications facilities around the world would take almost 3000 enemy warheads. As to enemy targets, many deep underground facilities like Yamantau Mountain and the missile tunnels in China would take tens of nuclear weapons to penetrate—and that’s only two targets. There are hundreds of targets.
For China, it’s not the size of the arsenal that counts, it’s how you use it. About 200 nuclear warheads are “enough.” China’s primary goal has always been to prevent the use of nuclear weapons against them. Beijing figured out that you don’t need 30,000 nuclear warheads to achieve that end — you only need enough that the risk of losing a major city in retaliation holds your opponents back. They have enough for escalation control, they have enough for deterrence, and they only need to mate their warheads to delivery vehicles to signal.
So they keep their strategic forces small and agile. With about 200 weapons, you already have increased the cost of nuclear war enough that nobody wants to start one with you. You don’t even have to spend a fortune to keep those weapons ready to go at a moment’s notice, as Russia and the United States do with their arsenals. Instead, China can invest in its conventional and not-so- conventional weapons, including a growing naval force, hyper-glide vehicles, and systems for both cyberspace and outer space. . Last, China is happy to sit back and wait until escalation is called for, so it keeps its warheads separated from the missiles it predominantly relies on as delivery systems.
More nonsense. If the CFR really thinks the Chinese don’t keep warheads on the missiles, they are idiots. The Chinese have thousands of miles of underground bunker tunnels all with rail road tracks to haul out rail mounted missiles into firing position at a moment’s notice. That said, they know their missiles are safe for now, since the US dismantled 2/3rd of the warheads on our remaining 400+ Minuteman missiles. The warheads on our submarines aren’t capable of penetrating hardened targets.
As for conventional weapons, China is in a major armament building spree, but that doesn’t mean she isn’t building new missiles and warheads in secret. This piece is simply meant to keep Americans asleep about the Chinese threat. Lastly, if China is so disinterested in nuclear missiles why does she keep building new DF-41 missiles? Why did China just test her newest DF-5 intercontinental missile with 10 warheads? See the article here.