The China Threat

**American Patriot** · August 1st, 2005, 14:52

A long, long time ago, in a Galaxy far, far away... wait, that's another story...

Anyway, long ago it was discovered that China was a threat.

Over the course of the last few years many of us have presented evidence based on News Articles, Books and intelligence that has been collected.

The vast majority of that information is located on another web site at the moment and probably will be there for as long as the site exists.

In the mean time, I am posting the link to that thread here, so you can all see it.

It's currently 13 pages long, and has 320 or so messages posted in it. The thread is pretty old, and is actually the second thread based on another.

Here is the link to the first:

http://communities.anomalies.net/cgi...7;t=000004;p=1

The FIRST thread as a reference was called:

Ground War in the US. The link is here:

http://communities.anomalies.net/cgi...;f=57;t=000006

Ok.

That's a start. If you read BOTH those threads, and follow the logic we've laid down, certainly post anything new here, and question things in those old threads as well if you like. (Make sure you reference the quote, the information and check the research of course!)

Post away.

RickD

**Ryan Ruck** · August 5th, 2005, 16:48

A thread for bulk news posts relating to China.

Original thread found here - The China Threat

**Ryan Ruck** · September 20th, 2005, 06:58

Here's a bulk post of news articles on China:

**American Patriot** · September 21st, 2006, 16:10

The China Threat
http://communities.anomalies.net/for...Number/213952/

Ground War in the US
http://communities.anomalies.net/for...Number/214389/

**falcon** · September 22nd, 2006, 01:25

USA File: NORAD security compromised by arrival of Chinese military delegation; US government ignores China's war preparations

The Moscow-Beijing Axis has not abandoned its plans for world revolution. Chinese generals have on several occasions since the 1990s threatened to strike the USA with nuclear warheads if it interferes with Red China's designs on Taiwan. The People's Republic of China continues to build and maintain massive bunkers, as in Shanghai, ostensibly to hide its population in the event of a terrorist attack, even though there has never been any credible terrorist threat against the communist Chinese. In June 2005 the pseudo-capitalist communist regime in Beijing opened its bunkers in central Chongqing with the rather incredible explanation of providing its citizen-slaves shelter from scorching summer temperatures. I think, rather, the Communist Party of China's collective leadership is preparing its people for the day when it launches an attack against the USA or Taiwan.

If you really believe that the CPC no longer believes in communism, then just read their own publication The People's Daily. China's fake market economy is an important means by which the CPC leadership fortifies its hold on the Chinese people, steals Western technology, infiltrates Western corporations based in China and elsewhere, and establishes an economic stranglehold on the West with its cheap consumer products. The report from the Fourth Plenum of the 16th CPC Central Committee, excerpts of which follow, occurred in 2004.

The Communist Party of China (CPC) will adhere to the guiding status of Marxism in the ideological field and constantly improve its capabilities in building advanced socialist culture, says a decision on enhancing the Party's governance capabilities adopted at the recent Fourth Plenum the 16th CPC Central Committee.

The document emphasizes that the Party should greatly develop socialist culture and ceaselessly consolidate the common ideological base on which the whole Party and the whole people unite and fight, in order to lead the people in pushing forward the great cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics . . .

It also calls for deepening the restructuring of cultural undertakings to liberate and develop productivity in the cultural field. "To meet the requirements of the socialist market economy, we must further eliminate structural blockages that have hampered cultural development."

Finally, the CPC pledges itself to "resist the erosion of corruptive ideology and culture of capitalism." Be assured, Chinese communist capitalism is no more substantial than Boris Yeltsin's New Economic Policy Version 2.0, which Comrade Czar Vladimir Putin, following the dictates of his masters in the continuing CPSU, has rolled back by persecuting Russia's business oligarchy. Both Moscow and Beijing are following the communist dialectic of two steps forward, one step back, in order to advance to the place of total supremacy over the "bourgeois" nations.

In spite of these disturbing facts, the US government has no qualms about pulling its permanent staff from the Cheyenne Mountain Operations Center, as we blogged some days ago, and welcoming a smiling Chinese military delegation to the nearby NORAD-USNORTHCOM headquarters. When Missile Day arrives, you and your family will be on your own with your supplies and your faith in God.

Making new friends

Adm. Timothy J. Keating, commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command, greets members of the Chinese Peopleâ€™s Liberation Army Air Force at NORAD-USNORTHCOM headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base, Colo., Sept. 12, 2006. The Chinese officers visited the commands as part of their Command College curriculum to exchange ideas and develop professional relationships with American Air Force officers.

Photo by Sgt. 1st Class Gail Braymen

Link: North American Aerospace Defense Command Official Sit

http://once-upon-a-time-in-the-west.blogspot.com/

**American Patriot** · January 15th, 2007, 18:22

Key legislators threaten funds for nuclear weapons overhaul
Bush administration abandoning effort to consolidate, they say - James Sterngold, Chronicle Staff Writer
Sunday, January 14, 2007

At a critical moment when the government is poised to choose a design for the next generation of nuclear weapons, two influential members of Congress have threatened to eliminate funding for the new warheads due to concerns over the Bush administration's plans for refurbishing the weapons production complex.
In a previously undisclosed letter written to the energy secretary on Nov. 16, Rep. David Hobson, R-Ohio, who was then chairman of the House subcommittee that controls nuclear weapons spending, criticized the department's planning for the new weapons manufacturing facilities. He insisted he would fight to halt all spending for the new warheads if the department did not embrace what he said would be a more efficient, cheaper approach through consolidation of the production operations.
The letter was significant not only for its angry tone but also because Hobson was an architect and perhaps the single most important congressional supporter of the new weapons plan, known as the Reliable Replacement Warhead program, or RRW.
Now that the Democrats control Congress, Hobson has relinquished his chairmanship of the energy and water appropriations subcommittee. But his successor, Rep. Pete Visclosky, D-Ind., said he holds similar views and will also consider eliminating the funding.
Their opposition puts the troubled program in jeopardy just weeks before a secretive government body, the Nuclear Weapons Council, is scheduled to select a blueprint from two competing warhead designs submitted last year by the Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore national laboratories. No development of the designs can take place without renewed congressional appropriations on a year-to-year basis.
Visclosky's spokesman, Justin Kitsch, said Visclosky shares Hobson's views on the need to consolidate the weapons production complex to make it more modern and efficient. Visclosky is disappointed, too, in the Energy Department's approach, Kitsch said, and plans to hold oversight hearings to question department officials and possibly force change.
"It is fair to say that every option is on the table regarding funding" of the Reliable Replacement Warhead program if the department does not change course, Kitsch said.
Julianne Smith, a spokeswoman for the National Nuclear Security Administration, the arm of the Energy Department that manages the weapons complex, said the secretary, Samuel Bodman, "welcomed comments from Chairman Hobson as well as others." She added that it is still possible a consolidated production facility might be considered.
The multibillion-dollar program to design and manufacture the new weapons has been dogged by questions and criticisms from its inception two years ago.
Supporters say that the old weapons, most produced more than 20 years ago, are aging and that a new generation of nuclear warheads would enhance U.S. security and allow the president to maintain a smaller, safer, more reliable stockpile.
Opponents have countered that the current U.S. stockpile of more than 5,000 warheads can, with proper maintenance, continue to serve as a deterrent for decades -- perhaps more than 50 years, according to experts. Bush administration officials have confirmed that the warhead maintenance program, called stockpile stewardship, is working superbly and that there are no uncertainties about weapons reliability.
Opponents also say the program would not only be prohibitively expensive -- probably hundreds of billions of dollars -- but also would send the wrong signal at a time when the United States is struggling to force Iran and North Korea to abandon nuclear programs.
Supporters of the program suffered a blow last year when a government study concluded that the radioactive plutonium that provides much of the devastating explosive force in thermonuclear weapons is effective for 100 years or more, far longer than earlier estimates of 45 to 60 years. The finding undermined earlier arguments that the government needed to replace the old weapons partly because of uncertainty over the useful life of the unstable metal.
A lengthy analysis of the program last month by the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan research body, also raised serious questions: whether the government could meet its stated production schedules, whether there would be any significant cost savings, and whether the new weapons would be as reliable as promised absent underground testing, which has been forbidden by Congress.
Hobson pushed through the legislation supporting the plan, partly with an argument that it would result in a more modern, efficient and smaller complex. Also, the plan is intended to shrink the nuclear stockpile, allowing the United States to demonstrate that it is reducing its weapons arsenal.
Hobson has long suggested that a key part of his plan would consolidate the aging Cold War-era facilities, now spread across the country from South Carolina to New Mexico, into a single large plant, the Consolidated Nuclear Production Complex, or CNPC.
But when the National Nuclear Security Administration released its package of proposals for the new weapons production complex last year, it rejected the consolidated plant and opted instead to maintain facilities in several states.
The plan (called Complex 2030 because it would be completed around the year 2030) infuriated Hobson and Visclosky because, they said, it would not achieve the cost savings or the efficiencies they were seeking.
"Let me make my position clear," Hobson wrote in the letter to Energy Secretary Bodman. "If the department is not willing to conduct a thorough and objective analysis of all reform alternatives including the CNPC, and instead is determined to conduct an obviously prejudicial process aimed at ensuring the department's preferred outcome, then I will not support funding for the Complex 2030 efforts, including the Reliable Replacement Warhead program."
Hobson added, "RRW is a deal with Congress, but the deal requires a serious effort by the department to modernize, consolidate and downsize the weapons complex. Absent that effort, there is no deal."
Visclosky, through his spokesman, also expressed disapproval.
"By simply dismissing a Consolidated Nuclear Production Facility without in-depth analysis or consultation with Congress ... the Department of Energy is sending the message that they intend to approach the issue of modernizing the nuclear weapons complex as an opportunity to rebuild the Cold War complex rather than make the tough calls that will ensure a complex that makes sense 50 years from today," he said.
President Bush came into office in 2001 with an ambitious plan for resuscitating a nuclear weapons complex that had stopped designing or producing new warheads with the end of the Cold War. But proposals for new low-yield warheads and for a specially designed weapon to destroy deeply buried targets -- so-called bunker busters -- were rejected by Congress.
Hobson shaped an alternative, the Reliable Replacement Warhead program, as a way, he told The Chronicle, to allow some new weapons development while also pushing the Bush administration to reduce the U.S. reliance on nuclear forces and cut costs.
His legislation set strict conditions: The new weapons had to be developed without underground testing, which has been banned since 1992, and the warheads had to only replace old ones without being designed for new military missions.
The program has received less than $30 million of funding a year, mostly to start developing designs for the first new warhead, which would be placed on the Navy's submarine-based Trident missiles. Los Alamos and Livermore submitted competing proposals last year.
Several people with knowledge of the process said the Nuclear Weapons Council is likely to combine elements from both designs but designate one lead laboratory with final responsibility for the weapon.
Hobson, however, has expressed growing concern over the Bush administration's claims about the need for new weapons and whether it would adhere to the conditions that there be no testing and no new missions. After the release of the findings that plutonium could last for a century or more, Hobson said the government's credibility had suffered.
"They've been running with RRW like you wouldn't believe," Hobson said, referring to the Reliable Replacement Warhead program. "They see this as a big pot of money to get into. This shows we can take a breather for a while."
Visclosky, through his spokesman, also said he is concerned about government claims and insisted he will not permit the National Nuclear Security Administration to transform the program into an opportunity for developing new weapons.
"RRW stands for Reliable Replacement Warhead, not Reliable New Warhead," Visclosky said.
E-mail James Sterngold at jsterngold@sfchronicle.com.
Page A - 4
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...NGRPNID5U1.DTL

**Jag** · January 19th, 2007, 02:30

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070119/.../us_china_test

U.S. criticizes China over missile test

By KATHERINE SHRADER, Associated Press Writer 45 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The United States criticized China on Thursday for conducting an anti-satellite weapons test in which an old Chinese weather satellite was destroyed by a missile.

The Bush administration has kept a lid on the test for a week as it weighs its significance. Analysts said China's weather satellites would travel at about the same altitude as U.S. spy satellites, so the test represented an indirect threat to U.S. defense systems.

"The United States believes China's development and testing of such weapons is inconsistent with the spirit of cooperation that both countries aspire to in the civil space area," National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said. "We and other countries have expressed our concern to the Chinese."

In his annual threat address to Congress, the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, said last week that China and Russia are the "primary states of concern" regarding military space programs.

"Several countries continue to develop capabilities that have the potential to threaten U.S. space assets, and some have already deployed systems with inherent anti-satellite capabilities, such as satellite-tracking laser range-finding devices and nuclear-armed ballistic missiles," he said in his written testimony on Jan. 11, the same day China's test was conducted.

The test, first reported by Aviation Week, destroyed the satellite by hitting it with a kinetic kill vehicle launched on board a ballistic missile.

In October, President Bush signed an order asserting the United States' right to deny adversaries access to space for hostile purposes. As part of the first revision of U.S. space policy in nearly 10 years, the policy also said the United States would oppose the development of treaties or other restrictions that seek to prohibit or limit U.S. access to or use of space.

"Freedom of action in space is as important to the United States as air power and sea power," the policy said. "In order to increase knowledge, discovery, economic prosperity and to enhance the national security, the United States must have robust, effective and efficient space capabilities."

Precisely what drove China to act now remains a mystery. But the United States has to figure out how to respond, said John Pike, a satellite expert at globalsecurity.org.

Since the mid-1980s, the United States has had the ability to take down satellites, but the Chinese don't have satellites worth attacking, Pike said. The United States may have to develop alternatives to its current spy satellites â€” perhaps stealthy satellites or unmanned aerial vehicles, which are harder to detect than the current well-established U.S. satellite network.
Reconnaissance satellites in low-Earth orbit â€” "eyes in the sky" â€” are essential to how the United States fights wars.

"Our space assets are the first asset on the scene," Pike said. "They are absolutely central to why we are a superpower â€” a signature component to America's style of warfare."

The Defense Department declined to comment on the test.

Adm. William Fallon, the chief of U.S. Pacific Command, has spearheaded a major push to revive exchanges with the Chinese military. Ties soured after a U.S. spy plane collided with a Chinese fighter plane in 2001.
Fallon has pushed ahead with the program, despite criticism inside the Pentagon. He believes that Chinese and U.S. officers need to understand each another better to avoid disastrous miscalculations.

Bush nominated Fallon this month to take over command of troops in the Middle East.

Jag

**American Patriot** · January 19th, 2007, 14:31

I posted similar news articles under the Missile Defense Thread too. Because I feel this is less an issue of China than it is Dems trying to shut down the MDA now.

**American Patriot** · January 19th, 2007, 15:54

Russians say China's reports a LOAD OF HOOEY.....

Russia - Reports that China missile hits satellite are rumors - Ivanov
Interfax.ru ^ | January 19, 2007

MOSCOW. Jan 19 (Interfax) - Reports that a Chinese ballistic missile has hit a satellite are "highly exaggerated rumors," Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said.

"I have heard reports to that effect, and they are quite abstract. I'm afraid they don't have such an anti-satellite basis. The rumors are highly exaggerated," Ivanov told reporters in Moscow.

**American Patriot** · January 19th, 2007, 16:48

Flexing Muscle, China Destroys Satellite in Test
NYT ^ | January 19, 2007 | WILLIAM J. BROAD and DAVID E. SANGER

China successfully carried out its first test of an antisatellite weapon last week, signaling its resolve to play a major role in military space activities and bringing expressions of concern from Washington and other capitals, the Bush administration said yesterday.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...

NYT JUST reporting this???? OMG it must be TRUE. grr

**American Patriot** · January 19th, 2007, 16:52

China Knows How Much America Has To Lose
The Telegraph (UK) ^ | 10-19-2006 | Richard Spencer

China knows how much America has to lose

By Richard Spencer in Beijing
Last Updated: 4:26pm GMT 19/01/2007

There is probably no better way to get China's nationalists to demand a Great Leap Forward in military spending than to tell them they are two decades behind the United States.

Yet that is what happened after Beijing's use of a ground-based missile to take out a redundant weather satellite was revealed to the world on Thursday night. The United States, experts pointed out, carried out this sort of test in the 1980s, and abandoned them because they made too much mess.

When it comes to its strategic interests, Beijing does not care much about making a mess, particularly 530 miles up in space.

The American public may now be lulled into a false sense of security by the "been there, done that" attitude prevalent in some quarters; or it may be sent into a panic that a new communist rival is about to replace it as Top Nation. But China's leaders will not be taken in by either myth, and will instead keep a cool eye on what really matters.

Despite appearances, what really matters to China is not whether its military and its space programme can catch up with America's.

In the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union engaged in a zero-sum, winner-takes-all competition for supremacy. It was conducted across all fronts: military, economic, philosophical, cultural. It was waged, at different points, in every corner of the world.

The real reason, some analysts say, why anti-satellite missile tests were dropped was because they denied the rule of the game. By trying to knock out the other side's advanced warning system, you showed you intended a first strike, and that called into question the argument that mutually assured destruction created a "safe" balance of power.

But in the coming competition for influence between the United States and China, China is neither claiming a "balance" nor trying to challenge America across the board. Economically, it believes in the American dream — more, perhaps, than America itself. Internationally, it does not desire to impose an alternative model to America's on the Middle East, or Europe — or at all.

Instead, it has a set of limited but clear strategic goals, to last it for the next two decades. By that time, it hopes, its economy, society, maybe even politics will have changed so that anything is possible.

One of those goals is to develop the ability to retake Taiwan, which it wants to "reunite" with the Motherland, by force if necessary. That also means deterring Taiwan's ally, America, from intervening to save it.

Another is to ensure no-one interferes with its general "sovereignty", whether in the Muslim west, Tibet, or anywhere else. A third is to ensure its economy cannot be disrupted - say by an oil blockade.

Back in the 1950s, the Chinese held the Americans at bay in the Korean War for three years by relying on manpower and patriotic rallying cries. During America's two wars in the Gulf in 1991 and 2003, Iraq tried the same thing and lasted not years, nor even months, but days. So China's generals read the newly published books on asymmetric warfare and decided they could still get America where it hurts.

America might need 12 aircraft carriers to ensure that every ocean under the world is under its control. But all China had to control was the Taiwan Strait - so it bought nuclear submarines.

They looked up and saw America's single greatest strength — the extraordinary satellite technology that enabled it to know where its enemies were and bomb them. And they realized its greatest strength was also its weakness, because while a human can fight back, a satellite cannot.

A satellite, moreover, has many uses. Knocking out a military satellite can deter an army. Knocking out the civilian satellites on which the west - but not the average Chinese peasant - now relies to function can deter a whole nation. Is Taiwan really worth it, to the average American voter?

So it doesn't matter that America is developing its own space weapons and lasers well in advance of last week's missile. The beauty of China's thinking is that it is based on how much more America has to lose: things like aircraft carriers, and elections.

In recent months, China has scanned an American satellite with a laser beam; surfaced a submarine that was apparently trailing a sea-going American battle group without being noticed; and now shown the world its ability to knock out the communications systems on which we all depend.

It is telling us that even though it can't take over the world, it can't be ignored, either.

**Brian Baldwin** · January 21st, 2007, 15:28

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1771013/posts

NEW DELHI: The Dragon has done it again. China's test of a ballistic missile to knock down a satellite in space, apart from evoking widespread concern around the globe, has sent alarm bells ringing in India's defence and security establishment.
Though it is believed that China's ASAT (anti-satellite) weapon system test on January 11 was meant to be a direct challenge to the overpowering US military dominance of space, it does have some implications for India, which has a robust space programme.
The test comes at a time when the Indian armed forces are slowly moving towards exploitation of space for purposes like "real-time" military communications and reconnaissance missions, apart from dreaming about ballistic missile defences and delivery of precision-guided munitions through satellite signals.
With the launch of Cartosat-2 satellite atop the PSLV on January 10, for instance, India's satellite-based surveillance and reconnaissance (SBS) programme is now finally heading towards completion.
It will allow India to keep closer tabs on troop movements, missile silos, military installations and airbases of neighbouring countries, as well as augment surveillance over Indian airspace.
"Countries like US, Russia, Israel and China are, of course, leagues ahead of us. But in times of war, we too will be highly-dependent on satellites for communications and surveillance," said a senior military officer.
"Though our relations with Beijing are on the upswing, we always have to factor in China as a potential threat. Moreover, there are deep military links between China and Pakistan. If China deploys ASAT weapons, then it's certainly a matter of concern," he added.
Talking about the need for an Aerospace Command some time ago, IAF chief Air Chief Marshal S P Tyagi had told TOI that space would play a major role in all future wars. "If we have assets in space, somebody will try to knock them off through hard kills or soft kills. We must be ready for all this," he had said.
Coupled with China's expanding military infrastructure in Tibet, the rapidly modernising 2.5 million-strong People's Liberation Army more than double the Indian forces has always been a source of worry for India.
"China's ASAT test is definitely a concern for all countries with satellite launch capabilities. Satellites, after all, form an important part of C3I (communications, command, control and intelligence) systems," said K Santhanam, former chief advisor at DRDO.
"But what has to be seen is whether China is sending a political or a military signal (to the US)," he added. With China's ASAT test being conducted against an aging weather satellite orbiting 537-km over earth, the US is obviously worried about its huge dependence on low-orbiting civilian and military satellites. The US, after all, owns around 50% of the estimated 300 dedicated or dual-use military satellites in space for surveillance, electronic intelligence, communication and early warning of missiles.

**American Patriot** · January 23rd, 2007, 19:05

China Says Major Shift on Dollar Policy Coming
MoneyNews.com email (Newsmax) | January 22, 2007 | John Browne

Some very worrisome news came out of China this Saturday â€” but it got a little more than a blip in the U.S. press.

At a high-level financial conference this past weekend, Chinaâ€™s Premier Wen Jiabao said, â€œChina would actively explore and expand the channels and methods for using [its] foreign exchange reserves.â€

Considering that the bulk of Chinaâ€™s reserves are in U.S. dollars, it should send tremors about the future of the greenback.

The dollar has been reeling in recent years. A shift by China out of dollars â€” as Wen is hinting â€” could be catastrophic.

Chinaâ€™s reserves recently surpassed Japanâ€™s â€” now exceeding $1 trillion. Some 70% of these reserves â€”â€“ more than $700 million â€” are in dollars.

Interestingly, The Wall Street Journal carried this critical story on page A7 of Mondayâ€™s editions with this pleasant spin headline: â€œChina Shift on Reserves Isnâ€™t Likely to Hit Dollar.â€

Perhaps I am missing something. China keeps most of its reserves in dollars â€” and its leader just announced they plan on diversifying their portfolio. This means it wonâ€™t affect the dollar?

It is of note that the Financial Times placed its report on the China development smack in the center of Monday page one. Why would U.S. media wish to play down such an important item?

While we believe that in the short-term the dollar may not be hurt â€” the item should send tremors down the backs of U.S. dollar investors planning to hold the greenback over the long-term.

The Journal reported that Wenâ€™s statement was the â€œhighest-level confirmation yet that China is thinking actively how it can use its reserves, which have increased by more that six times since 2000 and made China one of the worlds largest holders of U.S. Treasury bonds.â€

Later the article observed that, ". . . currency traders are hypersensitive to any signs Beijing is losing its appetite for the U.S. currency.â€

The FT went on to observe, â€œThis policy switch opens the way for China, which has been largely passive in managing its money to establish an agency akin to Singaporeâ€™s government."

As I wrote in my Financial Intelligence email in December and in our sister publication, Financial Intelligence Report, as the U.S. dollar depreciates, China is actively reviewing its holdings of gold.

When China resumes, or even announces its intention to resume, its purchases of gold, expect the price of gold to respond, as we have constantly warned, possibly in a major manner.

Of course, we believe it is not in Chinaâ€™s short-term interests to disrupt the currency markets or the U.S. dollar, of which it holds some $700 billion.

But, in the longer-term, we believe China will use all its strengths, including economic and military to further its path towards super power status.

In this respect, we note last weekâ€™s news (given a low profile in our mainstream media) that China had shot down one of its own defunct satellites, 500 miles out into space, at the same height as U.S. military satellites. What sort of message does that send to any observant investor or military strategist throughout the world?

To us it means that China is already on the march to super power status and is our main challenge, even in times of peace.

We urge our readers and investors to pay great heed to the recent announcements and especially actions of the Chinese, even if buried deeply in our news media.

We believe that Chinaâ€™s actions are set to influence such key items as the U.S. dollar (and therefore U.S. interest rates), world commodity prices, gold, and U.S. defense strategy and spending.

If you want to protect your portfolio and wealth in the coming years ahead, I suggest you read some of our recent Financial Intelligence Report issues, including:

* How Stealth Inflation Is Wrecking the Dollar

* Profit From the Baby Boomer Crisis That Is Underway

* Investing Globally Is Smart â€” Just Like Harvard Does

**American Patriot** · January 24th, 2007, 17:31

Good news: Chinese satellite killer might have been rogue operation posted at 8:42 pm on January 22, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend | printer-friendly

I saw this story at the Times this morning and didnâ€™t give it a second thought. An authoritarian regime with less than complete oversight of its most sensitive weapons? It smelled like undistilled spin cooked up by the U.S. to defuse the tension by absolving the Chinese government of responsibility.

Defense Tech and Global Security think it might be true, though, which presumably means we now find ourselves facing a nuclear power whose ballistic missile experts are firing rockets into space unbeknownst to the nationâ€™s leaders.

What could go wrong?

Eh, Iâ€™m still skeptical. Knowing what the consequences are in China for disobedience, would the leaders of the missile program really be willing to take the initiative? Particularly when there appears to be less to the test than first met the eye? Via DT, former NASA scientist James Oberg thinks the Chinese arenâ€™t quite yet a threat to Americaâ€™s birds in the upper atmosphere. I leave you with a quote:

The Chinese targeted a low-orbiting, obsolete, weather satellite, where the kinetic kill energy was very great. However, the really strategic satellites fly much higher â€” the [GPS] navigation network is 20 000 km upâ€¦ [T]he orbital velocities [there] are so much lower that the impact energy would be only about a tenth as high as in last weekâ€™s test.
Distance introduces a second burden: terminal navigation.

When a target satellite is close to the Earth, ground radars can track it and relay final course corrections, both to the rocket during its ascent and to the kill vehicle, once it has been deployed on its hoped-for collision course. Radar operates at an inverse fourth power law, which means that for the Chinese system to aim many times farther than low Earth orbitâ€”as it would have to do to track objects geosynchronouslyâ€”the demands on a ground-based radar would be simply impossibleâ€¦
Nor are space targets helpless victims to such kinetic kill attacks, especially at higher altitudesâ€¦ [A] target satellite can take steps to interfere with the attacker obtaining a workable targeting solution, and the farther from Earth the attack occurs, the more the odds favor the target.

Objects can hide in space, to a greater or lesser degree, by lowering their radar reflectivity or optical brightness along the attackerâ€™s expected line of approach. This makes terminal navigation and guidance more difficult. That effect can be augmented with decoys, which can either be deployed when an attack is detected or can be sent, as a matter of routine, to fly in formation with the high-value target.

Plenty more at the link.

**American Patriot** · January 24th, 2007, 20:15

Bill Gertz: Officials fear war in space by China
Washington Times ^ | Jan 24, 2007 | Bill Gertz

China's anti-satellite-interceptor test Jan. 11 is part of a covert space-weapons program designed to cripple the U.S. military in a conflict, defense officials said yesterday as Beijing confirmed it had destroyed one of its weather satellites. China said it had not "weaponized" space.

The anti-satellite weapon was identified by U.S. government officials as a nonexplosive "kinetic kill vehicle," which destroys its target simply by colliding with it. It was the first success in four attempts by China to destroy an orbiting object in space over the past two years.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said in Beijing that the government briefed the Bush administration on the test and that international fears of Chinese space weapons were groundless.

"This test was not directed at any country and does not constitute a threat to any country," Mr. Liu said. It was the first official confirmation of the test, which was kept secret in Beijing as well as Washington until the magazine Aviation Week reported it Friday.

"What needs to be stressed is that China has always advocated the peaceful use of space, opposes the weaponization of space and arms races in space," Mr. Liu said at a press briefing.

The White House said China's explanation was not sufficient.

China's public and private "assurances" on the test were welcome but "are incomplete and do not answer many of the questions raised by the international community," said Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council.

Protests were raised by the governments of Japan, Australia, India, Canada and other states, which saw the test as part of increasing Chinese military power that contrast with Beijing's public assurances of being engaged in a "peaceful rise."

"We are concerned about China's lack of transparency," Mr. Johndroe said. "For example, China has not explained the intent of this weapons test, nor has it stated whether or not it plans future tests."

Mr. Liu said he was not aware of plans for an additional test.

Mr. Johndroe also said that China's government failed to explain how the test "is compatible with its public stance against the weaponization of space," noting the issue will be pursued further in diplomatic channels.

U.S. officials familiar with intelligence reports said yesterday that three previous tests were unsuccessful. All four tests involved the launch of a commercial rocket booster carrying an anti-satellite (ASAT) warhead that would separate from the booster in space and seek to crash into the satellite about 530 miles above the earth.

Some U.S. policy and intelligence officials have tried in internal memorandums to play down the significance of the ASAT test, saying that the warhead hit a large, low-earth-orbit satellite and that it would be more difficult to hit higher-orbiting and smaller systems.

Other defense officials, however, said the test has raised alarm bells because it exposed a key strategic vulnerability. They also said that there are major gaps in U.S. intelligence about which other space weapons and capabilities China has or is developing that could cripple or disable U.S. satellites, which handle about 90 percent of all military communications, as well as intelligence and missile guidance.

The Jan. 11 test also alarmed military and defense officials because it undermined American intelligence estimates that China's military trails the U.S. military in terms of weapons and war-fighting capabilities by 10 years.

"The ASAT test showed they are not following us [militarily] but trying to leap ahead," one defense official said.

U.S. intelligence agencies received some advance indications of the test, in which a commercial KT-1 rocket, a version of the medium-range DF-21 missile, was launched from the Xichang space center, in southwestern Sichuan province.

The ASAT weapon separated from the last stage in space and then destroyed the Feng Yun-1C weather satellite, launched in 1999 and orbiting over both poles, by ramming into it at high speed. U.S. officials said debris from the destroyed satellite continues to orbit and poses a risk to some of the 800 satellites now in space, 400 of which are American.

China also illuminated a U.S. satellite with a ground-based laser in another anti-satellite test, according to a report by the congressional U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

The report, produced by defense analyst Michael Pillsbury, revealed that China has plans for secret space weapons that include ground-based lasers, air-to-space missile interceptors and an exotic plasma bomb that would destroy orbiting satellites by enveloping them in an electronic cloud.

The report also stated that three books written by Chinese colonels in 2001, 2002 and 2005 contain "proposals for covert deployment of antisatellite weapons directed at U.S. assets."

One author, Col. Jia Junming, stated in his 2002 book that Chinese space-weapons development should be covert and "intense internally but relaxed in external appearance to maintain our good international image and position."

The 2005 book, "Joint Space War Campaigns," by Col. Yuan Zelu, calls for deploying an orbiting network of strike weapons that "will be concealed and launched only in a crisis or emergency" to "bring the opponent to his knees."

**Ryan Ruck** · January 24th, 2007, 20:29

Originally Posted by Rick Donaldson

I saw this story at the Times this morning and didnâ€™t give it a second thought. An authoritarian regime with less than complete oversight of its most sensitive weapons? It smelled like undistilled spin cooked up by the U.S. to defuse the tension by absolving the Chinese government of responsibility.

Bingo! That sounds like nothing more than an attempted damage control

**American Patriot** · November 12th, 2013, 15:07

Well, it is time. The Chinese are going to nuke us. Probably after an EMP event. It is coming. Time is short. Preparations for some are complete. For some, not so good.

11.12.13
by wkchild

What to Do When China Nukes the U.S.

Source: Daily Reckoning.com, by Byron King

Official Chinese news media are openly — gleefully! — discussing how their country’s navy can conduct nuclear attacks on the U.S. mainland. Yes, you read that right… nuclear attacks! I’ll show you one of the Chinese targeting maps below.

This is pure thunder out of China! Of course, U.S. media are burying the story. Here in the U.S., we’re more concerned with the abysmal failure of Obamacare (let alone the eponymous website) or which professional football player hazed another football player.

But nuking America? I hope that you’re concerned about getting nuked in at least a geopolitical sense. Is there a new, “Cool War” brewing with our largest creditor? More practically, what does China’s nuclear bragging mean to you? One key point is that it’s investable. So let’s follow the facts and get a better handle on what’s happening.
Here’s the background. In China, major media are state-controlled. “Beijing Big Brother,” so to speak, watches what Chinese reporters write and editors publish. Nothing controversial gets out unless the big guy upstairs — the guy with blood-red Communist Party credentials — vets it.

Thus, it’s worth noting that last week, several large Chinese media outlets simultaneously published long, identical articles about Chinese nuclear strikes on the U.S. West Coast. Here’s one of the illustrative maps, from China’s Global Times newspaper.

Black dots on the map identify potential nuclear targets — and there’s more on that below. Red, yellow and orange areas are fallout patterns from West Coast strikes, based on prevailing wind patterns. There’s no mistaking what’s going on.

This map depicts a nuclear attack and post-attack scenario. Indeed, the Chinese are blunt about everything. In Global Times, the author states: “Because the Midwest states of the U.S. are sparsely populated, in order to increase the lethality, [our] nuclear attacks should mainly target the key cities on the West Coast of the United States, such as Seattle, Los Angeles, San Francisco and San Diego” (emphasis added).

Take another look at that Chinese targeting map. What do you see? From the spacing of black dots, the apparent ground zeroes are Seattle and environs. Think of target sets like Boeing and suppliers, “software valley” with Microsoft and more, the extensive Puget Sound naval infrastructure, Joint Base Lewis-McChord and others.
Down south in California, there’s San Diego and its extensive naval and other military facilities. In the middle of the Golden State, we can say farewell to San Francisco. No more Google barge, eh?
In Nevada, we’ll lose Las Vegas (aiming at Nellis AFB, I suppose) as well as Reno — no more “Top Gun” school at NAS Fallon if the bomb hits close enough.

Elsewhere in the U.S., we have dots representing a number of very odd, very unmilitary places, as target sets go: Green Bay, Wis.; Lansing, Mich.; Albany, N.Y.; Manchester, N.H.; and Augusta, Maine. It’s strange, right? But that’s what countervalue looks like.

Still, for now, let’s not dwell on the Chinese view of strategic American geography. Eventually, they’ll figure out where they want to aim the bombs and get that part right.
The point is we now have a coordinated Chinese media blast (so to speak) about nuking the U.S. mainland with what’s called a countervalue strike. This isn’t some faraway nuclear war at sea scenario, where gray hulls vaporize other gray hulls and submarine hulls get crushed by the weight of seawater.

Nope. The Chinese are openly discussing how to hit the homeland. We’re all at ground zero. It’s distressing when somebody rubs something like this right in your face. Then again, maybe this news will help the country lose its national lethargy and get serious. Can’t happen too soon, some might say.

In other words, the Chinese are explicitly planning to blast U.S. “key cities” and then watch as nuclear fallout kills off more of the American population. That’s just this one attack scenario. I’ll digress and mention that in technical terms, this is what’s known as a nuclear “countervalue” strategy.

In the argot of nuclear war planning, countervalue targeting makes no distinction between aiming at and hitting purely civilian activities versus military-related activities. By comparison, attacking military and mil-industrial assets is known as “counterforce.”

At root, countervalue targeting is just indiscriminate killing and destruction for the sake of killing and destruction. In the decades after the terrible events of World War II, most reputable legal scholars — at least in the West — have come to believe that countervalue violates first principles of internationally accepted law of armed conflict.

The short version is that countervalue targeting is a prima facie war crime, assuming that anyone is around to reconvene a postwar, Nuremberg-style tribunal.

The Chinese nuclear war description — describing countervalue targeting, if not an overt, premeditated war crime — didn’t come from some small, unknown, hole-in-the-wall news site or policy organization. The publisher was not, say, an elite Chinese academic source or obscure “think tank,” which is often the case when policy wonks talk with each other.

No, the Chinese nuclear war news came out in banner headlines from large media players with vast numbers of readers and/or viewers. Publishers include China’s People’s Daily newspaper, China Central TV, Global Times, China Youth Daily, Guangming Daily and PLA Daily (the official newspaper of the Peoples’ Liberation Army — PLA).

These are all major Chinese media. They cater to an educated, influential audience that matters within Chinese culture and governance. Indeed, the nuclear attack news would not/could not have come out without high-level approval from Chinese political and military authorities.

So when state-run media of a potential military opponent publishes banner headlines about nuking the West Coast of the U.S. and killing tens of millions of American people, what has to happen next? Well, adult leadership of the U.S. has to fund military systems to deter and counter that kind of unpleasantness. That’s how the world works.

Right away, it takes us to Raytheon (RTN:NYSE). Here we have a company that makes quite a bit of what the U.S. military needs to defend against Chinese submarines, missiles and much more. Raytheon makes heavyweight torpedoes (Mk-48) for U.S. submarines, as well as lightweight torpedoes (Mk-50 and Mk-54) for airborne assets.

Raytheon also manufactures sonar for tracking submarines, as well as radar for tracking ballistic missiles. Then Raytheon supplies battle management software for following rockets and warheads, as well as the Standard Missile (SM-3) for shooting them down. All that, and much more.

Or consider a company like L-3 (LLL: NYSE), which focuses on communications and signals equipment and systems. L-3 makes products that allow watchers to watch, trackers to track, leaders to lead and “deciders” to decide.

Plus, right away, this nuclear news from China reinforces the Navy’s decision to upgrade its airborne submarine tracking abilities with the P-8 aircraft from Boeing, and to continue working on directed energy weapons from a variety of contractors.

The news from China also adds emphasis to the importance of continuing the build for new submarines painted in the dark colors of the U.S. Navy. After all, the best way to find, track, control and kill another guy’s submarines is with one of your own. Or half a dozen.

This takes us to the likes of General Dynamics (NYSE: GD), with its Electric Boat division in Connecticut; and Ingalls Shipbuilding — the new name for the old Newport News Shipbuilding company — with its massive yard in Norfolk, Va. Plus the vendors and supply chain, of course.

Thread: The China Threat

Thread Tools

Display

The China Threat

The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Re: The China Threat

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions