If China can make a credible threat of mutually assured destruction, our ability to stage foreign invasions is rendered moot in places that China chooses to occupy. In the face of NATO attempts to establish ABM systems, weapons such as this seem quite relevant.Ahh.
You can launch a missle.
Cute, now get a whole division of your military far behind our lines and then we can talk.
Because we have the most powerful logistical train in the world.
The Register said:The nation investigated 1.83 million apps to ensure they don't infringe users' rights. Some 4,200 illegal apps found to require "rectification".
On top of that, 73,000 websites were "investigated and dealt with in accordance with the law" according to machine translation of Xiao's speech. Roughly 51,900 companies with "bad lists" were also told to straighten up.
The July 2021 order requiring an end to use of pop-up ads that can't be closed appears to have worked: the minister said 69 per cent of such ads could not be closed in July, and that number is now down to "basically zero".
The minister also talked up initiatives aimed at helping smaller tech companies. Xiao said those plans have created 4,700 "little giants" and helped 40,000 provincial-level companies focussed on innovation as part of China's plan to encourage development of "healthy" tech companies.
Not really.If China can make a credible threat of mutually assured destruction, our ability to stage foreign invasions is rendered moot in places that China chooses to occupy. In the face of NATO attempts to establish ABM systems, weapons such as this seem quite relevant.
Nuclear weapons do not need to be perfectly accurate to inflict terrible damage and mass fatalities. Again, the significance of such weapons is not to fight our military, but to threaten our empire as a whole with MAD nuclear exchange if we were to attempt to employ our superior conventional force projection against China.Not really.
The weapons we are talking about are not good for attacking aircraft in the sky, because, if it can miss by 2 miles, a small target is noensense
They will not nuke us if we try to defend Taiwan.Nuclear weapons do not need to be perfectly accurate to inflict terrible damage and mass fatalities. Again, the significance of such weapons is not to fight our military, but to threaten our empire as a whole with MAD nuclear exchange if we were to attempt to employ our superior conventional force projection against China.
The threat would be credible; CCP officials would feel no remorse for nuking a bunch of uppity gweilo, and they would immediately lie to their population and claim we launched first.
A partially successful test of an orbital weapon is not mere propaganda.They will not nuke us if we try to defend Taiwan.
That would cause MAD and they arnt willing to lose everything for Taiwan.
Also, the hypersonic glider missing by two miles is a huge issue, because it may seem like they are ahead of us, but they arnt.
What this is is called Propaganda to try and show they are better then the US.
Besides the fact we have also been working on the same things and ways to counter.
They wouldn't even have a population of they caused MAD.A partially successful test of an orbital weapon is not mere propaganda.
Telling ourselves "they won't do it" is not a deterrent. They absolutely would do it if they convinced themselves of a favorable outcome. Whether the CCP rules a nation of 1500 million or 500 million matters less to them than their security in power.
Oh of course.Yeah, if you look at the radius of damage for nuclear weapon effects, you need the bigger nukes to have any serious effects from a 2-mile miss. A W-83 warhead in a Minuteman missile, f'rex, only has a 10psi overpressure of 1.8 miles (8-10 is where buildings are destroyed). So a 2-mile miss is pretty significant as it won't likely destroy the target it's aimed at though it will still do significant damage.
That said, 2 miles is the maximum if I read things right, not the average, and resting on our laurels and presuming China won't be working to get that number down post-haste would be a grave mistake.
The US isn't behind, however it is always easier for somebody behind to catch up than the person ahead to keep ahead, just by the nature of espionage, copying, and not following the same dead ends that the leader did.Oh of course.
But ot seems people think we are behind.
We were working on this shit since 2011. That is what I got a quick Google search
Yep.The US isn't behind, however it is always easier for somebody behind to catch up than the person ahead to keep ahead, just by the nature of espionage, copying, and not following the same dead ends that the leader did.
I would say Eagle guided, but those are precious to us. Definently Crow guided. We put the enemy face to be there to act like they hut the crow so for generations we can have them be used to guide the bombsYes, we've advanced well past pigeon-guided missiles and today the US military may have seagull, even crow-guided missiles which are far more intelligent than pigeons.
It missed by 2 dozen miles, not 2 miles...Yeah, if you look at the radius of damage for nuclear weapon effects, you need the bigger nukes to have any serious effects from a 2-mile miss. A W-83 warhead in a Minuteman missile, f'rex, only has a 10psi overpressure of 1.8 miles (8-10 is where buildings are destroyed). So a 2-mile miss is pretty significant as it won't likely destroy the target it's aimed at though it will still do significant damage.
That said, 2 miles is the maximum if I read things right, not the average, and resting on our laurels and presuming China won't be working to get that number down post-haste would be a grave mistake.
A partially successful test of an orbital weapon is not mere propaganda.
Telling ourselves "they won't do it" is not a deterrent. They absolutely would do it if they convinced themselves of a favorable outcome. Whether the CCP rules a nation of 1500 million or 500 million matters less to them than their security in power.
This is some of the purest, uncut copium I have encountered this year.You are demonstrating that you really do not understand how MAD works.
First off, if one nation can do whatever it wants because the other nation is afraid of its nuclear arsenal, that's not MAD, that's global dominance.
Second, the fact that we can launch back, launch more, and can intercept a meaningful percentage of what they launch, while they can't intercept anything of what we launch, means that MAD favors us, not them.
Third, if the US launches on the CCP, there will not be a 'nation of 500 million' left for them to rule afterwards. There will be total anarchy and collapse, because every single major military and governmental center will be destroyed, the Three Gorges Dam will be destroyed, their entire economy will be smashed, the Chinese won't even be able to feed themselves.
I'm sure that some of their elite leadership cabal would initially survive in some deep bunker somewhere, but odds are very good that they would be killed by their own people in the aftermath for what they caused, and even if they weren't, follow-up strikes both conventional and nuclear by the US would be pretty much guaranteed to take them out.
The best case for China is that the US is equally wrecked, but under no condition whatsoever does a nuclear exchange result in the CCP ruling anything, except for maybe the irradiated wreckage of Beijing itself.
This is some of the purest, uncut copium I have encountered this year.
The entire point of the hypersonic weapons China just tested is to evade our existing interception methods. As for MAD, every nation with nuclear capability chooses where it draws its lines, and when it pulls the trigger, there is no fairness and equality clause. If the CCP occupies Taiwan and claims "Taiwan is part of China, touch it and we nuke you", globohomo could choose to call their bluff.. but the choice of whether it is or is not a bluff is entirely up to the CCP.
Expecting the Chinese people to rise up against their own leaders when what they see around them is the ruin caused by a foreign attack? Expecting a US nuclear arsenal maintained by political hires to be fully effective?
Come on.
This is some of the purest, uncut copium I have encountered this year.
The entire point of the hypersonic weapons China just tested is to evade our existing interception methods. As for MAD, every nation with nuclear capability chooses where it draws its lines, and when it pulls the trigger, there is no fairness and equality clause. If the CCP occupies Taiwan and claims "Taiwan is part of China, touch it and we nuke you", globohomo could choose to call their bluff.. but the choice of whether it is or is not a bluff is entirely up to the CCP.
Expecting the Chinese people to rise up against their own leaders when what they see around them is the ruin caused by a foreign attack? Expecting a US nuclear arsenal maintained by political hires to be fully effective?
Come on.
If China can make a credible threat of mutually assured destruction, our ability to stage foreign invasions is rendered moot in places that China chooses to occupy. In the face of NATO attempts to establish ABM systems, weapons such as this seem quite relevant.