What about those bazillion nuclear-tipped missiles (made with good-old US technology, a la Los Alamos) that they keep pointed our way?

------------------
Dane

If you are concerned about nuclear war, look no further than our old pals in Russia. The Chinese nuclear arsenal could barely take out the US major cities, if that. The Russian could destroy this world a few thousand times over. And it'd take less than a minute to re-aim them. The best thing that ever happened to you people was Chechnya. If it wasn't for the patriotic fervor whipped up there, the anti-west politicians - spurred on in popularity by the failure of capitalism and the brutal genocide enacted against Serbia - would've taken power in March. I'd love to see Genady Zyuganov with the ability to nuke this motherfucking planet. It'd be fun just for a laugh.

Anyway, I ask you this. What does all that money spent on the military do to combat the nuclear threat? This reminds me of the moronic idea that you stop terrorism against the US by bombing the Middle East. No, you stop (or at least curb greatly) terrorism by getting the hell out of Isreal.

Let's look at India. Why do they have nuclear weapons? Because China was becoming too much of a power. So they needed to settle it up. If the US gets larger, why wouldn't China want more nukes? If I'm the Chinese premier, I get those without hesitation.

So, please tell me why China is a threat?

If you'd like to refute my thesis that they are not a non-nuclear (conventional) threat, please do. I look forward to hearing your logic.

If you'd like to refute my thesis that they are not as much of a nuclear threat as Russia, please do. I look forward to hearing your logic.

If you'd like to refute my thesis that military spending does not curb a nuclear threat, please do. I am geniunely interested in hearing some opposing thoughts on that matter.

Keep in mind though, this is not a partisan debate. This cannot detiorate into Republicns vs Democrats, Republocrats vs Leftists, etc. This is a strinctly analytical debate. As such, I have Daryus on my side!!! We're unbeatable! :-)

I now leave it to Jay to provide the history lesson regarding the Cuban Missile Crisis.

You are quite correct about Russia being the biggest threat to us right now. If they ever ask us for money again, we should agree to give it to them only if they dismantle a significant portion of their nuclear arsenal. We should have done that in the first place.

Anyway what's wrong with China or any other nation that's fairly responsible (I'll say fairly because they haven't gone around kicking in any heads recently) having nukes. Hell they have as much of a right to them as America.
------------------
Samaritan: "A good hot curry will help heal your wounds. That is, unless your religion forbids it".

Man: (Eyes growing wide) "No religion forbids a good hot curry".

-From some movie.

------------------
"I've never seen anything this beautiful in the entire galaxy. Alright, give me the bomb" -Ultra Magnus, Fight or Flee

Yet, you've brought up an interesting point. Let us examine the relative strengths of the PLAN and USN.

The United States Navy has 8 Nimitz class carriers. The USS Nimitz (CVN-68) is in RCOH right now, but aside from it and the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69), no ship is over 20 years old of this class. The USS Harry S Truman (CVN-75) and the USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74) are both less than 5 years old. The USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) is being built now and will be completed in 2002.

The USN has 1 Kennedy class carrier, USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67), which is the only non-nuclear carrier left.

The USN has 1 Enterprise class carrier, USS Enterprise (CVN-65), which is 39 years old, but was reconstructed 18 years ago and again 5 years ago.

The USN has 2 Kitty Hawk class carriers. However, the USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63), which is forwarded deployed to Yokosuka, will be decommissioned in 2008, and the USS Constellation (CV-64) will be decommissioned in 2003.

The USN has three more carriers in reserve.

The PLAN has control of the hulk of the Melbourne, an Australian light carrier.

(there was rumours of a Chinese carrier being started last year, but those have proven, by sheer scientific fact, to be just that, rumours)

The USN has 22 Ticonderoga class cruisers.

The USN has 5 Ticonderoga class cruisers not of the VLS Group.

The PLAN has no cruisers.

The USN has 3 Arleigh Burke class destroyers being fitted out which will be ready before next year is out. 6 more are being built, which will enter service between 2001 and 2003. Another 13 have been ordered, and 6 more planned.

The USN has 28 Arleigh Burke class destroyers (Flight I/II) and have all come into service in the 1990s.

The USN has 34 Spruance class destroyers.

The PLAN has 2 Russian Sovremennyy class destroyers, both of which are currently being fitted out.

The PLAN has 1 Shenzhen class destroyer. The Shenzhen was completed last year, and one, which will be completed in 2001, is currently being built. The Shenzhen, for those unfamiliar with it, is an enlarged version of the Luhu.

The PLAN has 2 Luha class destroyers. For those unfamiliar with the class, these are the pride of the Chinese fleet, and and extensively use western electronics. They are considered, by western standards, obsolete.

Shall I bother examining subs?

Sufficit to say, the PLA has a mediocre at best navy and is no match for the United States.

I will tackle Taiwan later tonight.

China already have 2 SSBN ("Sai" class), and 5 SSN ("Han" class)! And people, WE KNOW THIS FOR A FACT!!

And there is a fatal flaw with the "Carrier Battle Group", it's called the "Maximum Attack"(not exactly sure of the phrase, but what the heck). Russian theorized that if a great number of missles are fire all at the same time (we're talking 10s of missle here all at the same time), the group simply will be overwhelmed by it. The American have come up with a several ways to counter-act this (one of the more famous example would be the Mk-41 missle delivery system), however, Russian DO have high speed (Mech 3 or above), multi-to-sea cruise missle which can decrease the response time to 10-15 seconds, so good luck when 10 of these missles are heading your way.

What's my point you ask? Severl,

1. Chinese do have more than 3 times of U.S. conventional forces, and no matter what you say, it DOES mean a lot. (the more you have, the more you kill, the kill rate over time graph is a rising curve, as time passes, the one with more will have more surviver, therefore gaining the upper hand)

2. There are presently 25 Su-27 serving in Chinese air force, and people, when Chinese trade with the Russian, it's not only about the products, it's also about the "PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER". Chinese official estimate that Su-27 will be in full production in year 2003, it is SURE that the Chinese air force are going for a one-on-one replacement with the current outdated fighters (guess how many Su-27 they're going to get in the future, and it is a hell of a lot cheaper then F-22 and is only a 10 to 15 years behind of F-22's technology).

And we will be seeing A LOT more of these high tech "production technology transfer" in the future, so the gap of technologies are not going to be as great as you think in the future.

2. Chinese army are well trained, and specialize in gorrila warfare, and we've all seen how the States measured up to that one in the Korean war and Vietname War.

3. Currently, there are not even a close to garranted way to intercept ICBM!! So Chinese ICBM are a treat to the world! (those video of Scud getting shot down by the Patriate are the "BODY" of the missle, usually not the war head)

4. By the way, did you guys check the newspaper about how the Chinese invent the way to detect steath airplane? Not really important, but just to show that technologies are not everything, if some simple settalie dishes can detect a 20 million steath bomber, what's not possible??

The PLAN has 1 Xia class SSBN. It is undergoing refit at the current time. Some sources report it has a turbo-electric drive.

The PLAN has a new SSN project in the works now that should be launching after 2000.

The PLAN has 5 Han class SSNs. These vessels, if you're unfamiliar with them, are horribly noisy and considered primitive in terms of combat systems. Some sources report they have turbo-electric drives.

The PLAN has 2 improved Kilo class subs. Both are new.

The PLAN has 2 Kilo class subs. Both are currently being refitted in Russia because they became inoperable.

The PLAN has 2 Song class subs. They were originally being built at a rate of two per year, but that was cancelled in favor of the Kilos.

The PLAN has 13 Ming class subs. All are considered obsolete, but used for patrol nonetheless. Two are fitting out, and four are being built.

The PLAN has 65 Romeo class subs. 38 are nominally operational. They are all obsolete, but there is talk of overhauling them.

The PLAN has 1 Golf class SSBN. It is not combat capable.

The PLAN has 1 Wuhan sub. It can launch SSMs. It, however, needs to be above water to do that and has no over the horizon targeting. It is not combat capable.

The USN has 18 Ohio SSBNs. These make up the bulk of the US strategic forces. All other SSBNs have been discarded. Even with that, and if the PLAN can get both of their SSBNs combat ready, the USN would outnumber them 9-1 raw, and even more if you take into account the quality of the subs.

The USN has ordered 4 Virginia class SSNs. They will arrive steadily in 2004, and another 26 are planned.

The USN has 2 Seawolf SSNs. These are the cream of the world's naval crop. Both were completed within 3 years of writing this. The USS Jimmy Carter (SSN-23) is to be completed in 2003.

The USN has 50 Los Angeles class SSNs. They are constantly being upgraded, although the Virginias likely will replace them. Earlier ones have been decommissioned to avoid the cost of refueling.

The USN has 1 Sturgeon class SSN. It will be decommissioned in 2001, likewise all other SSNs have been discarded.

Would someone like to dispute that the US has the superior submarine fleet? By far? The US currently has more SSNs pending scrapping than China has in active service. Likewise with CVs.

Conservatives may try and convince you that the US is in grave danger from China, but navally, that is a staunch joke. The United States Navy has more ships and better ships. The same could likely be said about the crews.

How about in the skies? I'll tackle this within the night. And on land, well, let's just wait until I get some more free time.

Such as whether they have MIRV capability, or if they're still at 'one missile, one warhead' stage. And how many missiles. And how many warheads. and how many "Long March" ballistic rockets.

And whether you think that the ability to deal a punishing blow to the US resides entirely on being able to damage the Pacific fleet, or the ability to unleash carnage on the US's nominal allies/protectorates (Korea, Taiwan, Japan, etc).

In other words, would the US sacrifice Taiwan in order to protect, say, Tokyo, Seoul, and Jakarta?

------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson

------------------
"I see you have the ring. And that your Schwartz is as big as mine!
-Dark Helmet, Spaceballs