Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China Is Building a Second Nuclear Missile Silo Field

fas.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 27 posts

Re: China Is Building a Second Nuclear Missile Silo Field

#11

Post by nix23 »

throwaway4good wrote: post #10
zthrowaway wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it questionable? Because it might turn up dirty laundry? The solution of reducing arms is moot. Pandora’s box has already been opened. Plus you don’t defend yourself by looking weak. I argue the nuclear arsenals around the world have kept everyone in line. WW1 was horrifying enough to deter any further war, then WW2 happened. You can’t eradicate human conquest, but you can deter it with enough counterforce tha…

A kid hired by some questionable think tank, sitting in an office a thousands miles away, analyzing a piece of land, he has never seen in real life, solely through a sattelite photo, driven by whatever politics and incentives ... well ... he just might be wrong.

>politics and incentives ... well ... he just might be wrong.

Very well said.

Re: China Is Building a Second Nuclear Missile Silo Field

#12

Post by baybal2 »

nabla9 wrote: post #7
baybal2 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A simpler explanation is them simply expanding their offensive arsenal. Why wouldn't they.

It's only simpler for you to think about. "Missile sponge" is simpler plan to execute and operate. ICBM's are expensive to build and maintain. Chinese are expected to moderately expand their arsenal, but they don't need significantly more silo-based warheads for credible deterrence, they just need to increase survivability from decapitation attack. Missile sponge is very cost effective way to do that. Their road-mobi…

> ICBM's are expensive to build and maintain.

Not a problem for China with its industrial capacity larger than both USA, and Russia together.

The biggest gun you can afford is almost always the most efficient spend of your money.

> they don't need significantly more silo-based warheads for credible deterrence

Who said they need it for deterrence? If their goal would be just deterrence, they wouldn't be trying so hard to undermine it.

It's very clear they want to have enough missiles to perform a first strike on the two likeliest (now possibly three) enemies.

It's the most clear, and logical explanation standing any military theory test.

Re: China Is Building a Second Nuclear Missile Silo Field

#13

Post by uCantCauseUCant »

zthrowaway wrote: post #6
throwaway4good wrote: post #3

Honestly I find this use of Google maps to find military sites or concentration camps questionable. However it is fairly obvious to me that the Chinese are going to expand their nuclear weapons arsenal until it matches that of the Americans. The solution for this is for the Americans to have a smaller arsenal.

Why is it questionable? Because it might turn up dirty laundry? The solution of reducing arms is moot. Pandora’s box has already been opened. Plus you don’t defend yourself by looking weak. I argue the nuclear arsenals around the world have kept everyone in line. WW1 was horrifying enough to deter any further war, then WW2 happened. You can’t eradicate human conquest, but you can deter it with enough counterforce tha…

Turns out our leaders worry about their own asses, exclusively.

Re: China Is Building a Second Nuclear Missile Silo Field

#14

Post by CryptoPunk »

baybal2 wrote: post #12
nabla9 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only simpler for you to think about. "Missile sponge" is simpler plan to execute and operate. ICBM's are expensive to build and maintain. Chinese are expected to moderately expand their arsenal, but they don't need significantly more silo-based warheads for credible deterrence, they just need to increase survivability from decapitation attack. Missile sponge is very cost effective way to do that. Their road-mobi…

> ICBM's are expensive to build and maintain. Not a problem for China with its industrial capacity larger than both USA, and Russia together. The biggest gun you can afford is almost always the most efficient spend of your money. > they don't need significantly more silo-based warheads for credible deterrence Who said they need it for deterrence? If their goal would be just deterrence, they wouldn't be trying so hard…

>>It's the most clear, and logical explanation standing any military theory test.

Nuclear proliferation is extremely dangerous, for every one in the world including the proliferater, so it's not clear that a country maximally expanding its nuclear arsenal is the most logical move to advance its self-interest.

Re: China Is Building a Second Nuclear Missile Silo Field

#15

Post by baybal2 »

CryptoPunk wrote: post #14
baybal2 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ICBM's are expensive to build and maintain. Not a problem for China with its industrial capacity larger than both USA, and Russia together. The biggest gun you can afford is almost always the most efficient spend of your money. > they don't need significantly more silo-based warheads for credible deterrence Who said they need it for deterrence? If their goal would be just deterrence, they wouldn't be trying so hard…

>>It's the most clear, and logical explanation standing any military theory test. Nuclear proliferation is extremely dangerous, for every one in the world including the proliferater, so it's not clear that a country maximally expanding its nuclear arsenal is the most logical move to advance its self-interest.

> Nuclear proliferation is extremely dangerous, for every one in the world including the proliferater

It's outright stupid to think that the person doing something something as big as this is not conscious of this.

On the opposite, this big scare factor very much must be a part of the strategy.

Re: China Is Building a Second Nuclear Missile Silo Field

#16

Post by mytailorisrich »

moistly wrote: post #5

A similar photo hit the web a month or so ago. Turned out to be windmills. It makes no sense to put missile silos close together. I’ll reserve judgment for now, but I doubt the headline’s claim.

We'll see when the climate-controlled domes are removed. I'm no expert and so a little surprised that building the base of a windmill requires such dome.

Re: China Is Building a Second Nuclear Missile Silo Field

#18

Post by minikites »

moistly wrote: post #5

A similar photo hit the web a month or so ago. Turned out to be windmills. It makes no sense to put missile silos close together. I’ll reserve judgment for now, but I doubt the headline’s claim.

Sinophobia is the new Islamophobia, which was the replacement for Russophobia when the USSR collapsed. The USA seems to need an enemy at all times so we don't focus on how bad things are in the domestic sphere.

Re: China Is Building a Second Nuclear Missile Silo Field

#19

Post by Proven »

minikites wrote: post #18
moistly wrote: post #5

A similar photo hit the web a month or so ago. Turned out to be windmills. It makes no sense to put missile silos close together. I’ll reserve judgment for now, but I doubt the headline’s claim.

Sinophobia is the new Islamophobia, which was the replacement for Russophobia when the USSR collapsed. The USA seems to need an enemy at all times so we don't focus on how bad things are in the domestic sphere.

[dead]

Re: China Is Building a Second Nuclear Missile Silo Field

#20

Post by tharne »

minikites wrote: post #18
moistly wrote: post #5

A similar photo hit the web a month or so ago. Turned out to be windmills. It makes no sense to put missile silos close together. I’ll reserve judgment for now, but I doubt the headline’s claim.

Sinophobia is the new Islamophobia, which was the replacement for Russophobia when the USSR collapsed. The USA seems to need an enemy at all times so we don't focus on how bad things are in the domestic sphere.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN