Thermonuclear War has never been waged before.
The United States did wage a very brief, and very one sided, Atomic war against Japan, but a Thermonuclear War has never been waged.
What is the difference between Thermonuclear War and Atomic War?
There are several major differences:
Producing Large Atomic Bombs is very expensive and very time consuming.
By comparison producing Large Thermonuclear Bombs requires only very small atomic bombs used as primers for the Thermonuclear Bombs.
Producing 1,000s of Large Thermonuclear Bombs requires less time and money than producing 100s of Large Atomic Bombs requires.
Large Thermonuclear Bombs are based on Nuclear Fusion of Hydrogen, while Large Atomic Bombs are based on Nuclear Fission of very expensive, very heavy metals.
The biggest and most important difference is size and weight. A single intercontinental missile can deliver ten or twenty Thermonuclear warheads to ten or twenty different cities on any continent, anywhere in the world. This is possible due to the light weight of Thermonuclear Bombs based on Hydrogen. A single heavy bomber can deliver even bigger Thermonuclear bombs and more of them. A small attack fighter ( light bomber ) can deliver one or two of the largest Thermonuclear bombs.
Cruise missiles carried by heavy bombers can deliver Thermonuclear weapons allowing the bombers to remain hundreds or even over one thousand miles away from the targets when the cruise missiles are launched. Again this capability is the result of the light weight of Thermonuclear weapons.
How would the First Thermonuclear War be Waged ?
-
Reality Check
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
-
Reality Check
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
How would the First Thermonuclear War be Waged ?
...
The United States has done extensive testing on waging nuclear war.
U.S. Army soldiers were marched through ground zero of above ground nuclear tests in the 1950s hours, and in some cases minutes, after the nuclear blasts.
My father in-law was one of them.
He developed cancer in his mid-fifties and died in his early sixties, but he had decades of good health to continue fighting a war after those tests of war fighting in a nuclear war environment were conducted.
The concept that no country will ever fight a thermo-nuclear war because it will destroy the earth is simply false.
China is believed to have gained access to all of the U.S. Nuclear Weapons designs and testing data through effective penetration of the United States nuclear weapons industrial complex with spies during the 1990s. The same is true of U.S. intercontinental ballistic missile technology.
Russia has conducted it's own tests.
All three of the major nuclear powers are very aware of the effects of fighting a nuclear war.
Obama may have a world view that makes him believe that no world leader would risk the long term economic and health hazards of a large scale nuclear war. But his world view may not be shared by all world leaders.
The United States has done extensive testing on waging nuclear war.
U.S. Army soldiers were marched through ground zero of above ground nuclear tests in the 1950s hours, and in some cases minutes, after the nuclear blasts.
My father in-law was one of them.
He developed cancer in his mid-fifties and died in his early sixties, but he had decades of good health to continue fighting a war after those tests of war fighting in a nuclear war environment were conducted.
The concept that no country will ever fight a thermo-nuclear war because it will destroy the earth is simply false.
China is believed to have gained access to all of the U.S. Nuclear Weapons designs and testing data through effective penetration of the United States nuclear weapons industrial complex with spies during the 1990s. The same is true of U.S. intercontinental ballistic missile technology.
Russia has conducted it's own tests.
All three of the major nuclear powers are very aware of the effects of fighting a nuclear war.
Obama may have a world view that makes him believe that no world leader would risk the long term economic and health hazards of a large scale nuclear war. But his world view may not be shared by all world leaders.
Last edited by Reality Check on Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:22 pm, edited 4 times in total.
-
Reality Check
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Re: How would the First Thermonuclear War be Waged ?
.
China could very logically treat Thermonuclear Bombs as just another weapon of war in their arsenal.
Many in the west believe there is some moral difference between using a nuclear weapon to kill thousands or even tens of thousands of people in a day and using conventional fire bombs to do the same.
The United States killed more Japanese civilians by fire bombing Japanese cities with conventional fire bombs in a single day, than the U.S. did with atomic bombs in a single day. There was no moral difference. Thousands of civilians died in each instance. More actually died from the conventional fire bombs.
China has thermonuclear weapons. Vietnam does not. A large Thermonuclear bomb delivered by a single aircraft, or single short range missile, could soften up thousands of Vietnamese troops concentrated in a small area to repel a massed Chinese invasion. China could then march / fight their massed troops through those nuked Vietnamese troops without reducing the Chinese troops battle effectiveness. China knows this from the results of U.S. tests of doing that exact thing.
Vietnam has no weapons with comparable capacity.
China could destroy the transportation networks between Vietnamese harbors and Vietnamese manufacturing centers with thermonuclear weapons.
China could destroy hydro-electric dams and flood control dams within Vietnam with thermonuclear weapons.
The same goes for coal fired electric power plants within Vietnam.
How would the United Nations respond to this - China has a veto - so the United Nations could do nothing.
How would the nuclear armed countries outside the region respond?
Give Vietnam nuclear weapons and the capability to deliver them ? Even if this was possible in the time frame required, everyone, including China would consider it the same as the provider of nuclear weapons attacking China by proxy, or in other words, an act of nuclear war against China by the nuclear power providing Vietnam the nuclear weapons to be used in an immediate attack on China.
Launch a nuclear attack by a western military against China's expeditionary forces? Against the country of China proper?
China could very logically treat Thermonuclear Bombs as just another weapon of war in their arsenal.
Many in the west believe there is some moral difference between using a nuclear weapon to kill thousands or even tens of thousands of people in a day and using conventional fire bombs to do the same.
The United States killed more Japanese civilians by fire bombing Japanese cities with conventional fire bombs in a single day, than the U.S. did with atomic bombs in a single day. There was no moral difference. Thousands of civilians died in each instance. More actually died from the conventional fire bombs.
China has thermonuclear weapons. Vietnam does not. A large Thermonuclear bomb delivered by a single aircraft, or single short range missile, could soften up thousands of Vietnamese troops concentrated in a small area to repel a massed Chinese invasion. China could then march / fight their massed troops through those nuked Vietnamese troops without reducing the Chinese troops battle effectiveness. China knows this from the results of U.S. tests of doing that exact thing.
Vietnam has no weapons with comparable capacity.
China could destroy the transportation networks between Vietnamese harbors and Vietnamese manufacturing centers with thermonuclear weapons.
China could destroy hydro-electric dams and flood control dams within Vietnam with thermonuclear weapons.
The same goes for coal fired electric power plants within Vietnam.
How would the United Nations respond to this - China has a veto - so the United Nations could do nothing.
How would the nuclear armed countries outside the region respond?
Give Vietnam nuclear weapons and the capability to deliver them ? Even if this was possible in the time frame required, everyone, including China would consider it the same as the provider of nuclear weapons attacking China by proxy, or in other words, an act of nuclear war against China by the nuclear power providing Vietnam the nuclear weapons to be used in an immediate attack on China.
Launch a nuclear attack by a western military against China's expeditionary forces? Against the country of China proper?
Last edited by Reality Check on Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:16 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
Reality Check
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Re: How would the First Thermonuclear War be Waged ?
...
If the West did not respond in an effective manner...
Then China would have killed their dog, and scared the other local dogs and monkeys into compliance with China's demands, which was the stated goal of China in the first place.
If the West did not respond in an effective manner...
Then China would have killed their dog, and scared the other local dogs and monkeys into compliance with China's demands, which was the stated goal of China in the first place.
Last edited by Reality Check on Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Reality Check
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Re: How would the First Thermonuclear War be Waged ?
.
One can imagine President Obama giving a speech where he demonized anyone who wanted the U.S. to do more to help Vietnam as a dangerous reckless right wing war monger who wanted to destroy the world with nuclear weapons. He would accuse them of wanting to Nuke the innocent Chinese people for the actions of a very few extremists in the Chinese government. Even if Obama was only criticized for not providing more conventional military assistance to Vietnam, his critics would be demonized as stupid for suggesting something that has been "proven" not to work against a nuclear power, and Obama would accuse all of his critics of recklessly trying to draw United States into a reckless confrontation which could easily spiral into a major nuclear war.
Obama would urge, and pursue, opening negotiations with the "moderates" in the Chinese government to back the world away from a nuclear abyss. Just as he has urged and pursued only negotiating with "moderates" in Iran's government, for the past four years, for the same reasons.
One can imagine President Obama giving a speech where he demonized anyone who wanted the U.S. to do more to help Vietnam as a dangerous reckless right wing war monger who wanted to destroy the world with nuclear weapons. He would accuse them of wanting to Nuke the innocent Chinese people for the actions of a very few extremists in the Chinese government. Even if Obama was only criticized for not providing more conventional military assistance to Vietnam, his critics would be demonized as stupid for suggesting something that has been "proven" not to work against a nuclear power, and Obama would accuse all of his critics of recklessly trying to draw United States into a reckless confrontation which could easily spiral into a major nuclear war.
Obama would urge, and pursue, opening negotiations with the "moderates" in the Chinese government to back the world away from a nuclear abyss. Just as he has urged and pursued only negotiating with "moderates" in Iran's government, for the past four years, for the same reasons.
Last edited by Reality Check on Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:47 pm, edited 10 times in total.
-
Reality Check
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Re: How would the First Thermonuclear War be Waged ?
...
Many in the west would argue that such an action by China would cross a moral line and China would become a pariah.
...
Other countries might view China's success as proof that the taboo against use of nuclear weapons has been abandoned and countries with nuclear weapons might seek to prevail over their adversaries and/or neighbors ( who do not posses significant numbers of nuclear weapons and those who posses none ) with the now very credible threat of nuclear weapons use or even by actually using them, just like China did.
Pakistan making demands on Afghanistan might be one example.
Iran making demands on Azerbaijan would be another.
Russia making demands on Georgia, Ukraine and Russia's own Muslim Majority Republics being yet more examples.
Many in the west would argue that such an action by China would cross a moral line and China would become a pariah.
...
Other countries might view China's success as proof that the taboo against use of nuclear weapons has been abandoned and countries with nuclear weapons might seek to prevail over their adversaries and/or neighbors ( who do not posses significant numbers of nuclear weapons and those who posses none ) with the now very credible threat of nuclear weapons use or even by actually using them, just like China did.
Pakistan making demands on Afghanistan might be one example.
Iran making demands on Azerbaijan would be another.
Russia making demands on Georgia, Ukraine and Russia's own Muslim Majority Republics being yet more examples.
Last edited by Reality Check on Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:54 am, edited 6 times in total.
-
Reality Check
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Re: How would the First Thermonuclear War be Waged ?
The above is one scenario by which the world becomes a safe place to conduct Thermonuclear war.
Are there others ?
Are there others ?
Re: How would the First Thermonuclear War be Waged ?
preparation for nuclear attack -- just in case from ---
Jammu and Kashmir Police’s Civil Defence and State Disaster Response Force
http://www.section9department17.com/1/p ... ttack.html
Jammu and Kashmir Police’s Civil Defence and State Disaster Response Force
http://www.section9department17.com/1/p ... ttack.html
-
Reality Check
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Re: How would the First Thermonuclear War be Waged ?
.
2013 - January 23rd - Chinese Military Statement on Nuclear War with Japan and U.S.
A CHINESE military officer has raised the spectre of nuclear weapons and warned Australia not to side with the United States and Japan as a territorial dispute in the East China Sea continues to escalate.
Senior Colonel Liu Mingfu, of the National Defence University, blamed America's ''orchestration'' and Japan's ''militarism'' for rising tensions
...
''America is the global tiger and Japan is Asia's wolf and both are now madly biting China,'' Colonel Liu said.
...
China was a peaceful nation but it would fight to the death if seriously attacked, he said.
...
Asked about the People's Liberation Army fighting capability,
Colonel Liu referred to the PLA department that houses China's strategic missile and nuclear arsenal.
He raised a hypothetical scenario that he said would justify a nuclear attack, while clarifying that he was not calling upon China to take such measures.
''If this Japanese wolf again attacks ... how do you know it wouldn't receive another nuclear bomb?'' Colonel Liu said.
''The world would hail if Japan receives such a blow.
''I don't want to mention China here, as it is sensitive,'' he added.
Colonel Liu is one of a group of outspoken hawkish PLA ( China's Communist People's Liberation Army ) officers who do not claim to speak on behalf of the leadership but are given licence ( by the Chinese Communist Dictatorship ) to speak stridently on some issues.
Foreign diplomats say they ( Colonel Liu and other unofficial spokesmen of the Chinese Government ) can serve to provide unofficial warnings, test foreign reactions and rally nationalistic support for the Communist Party or sections of it.
Colonel Liu directly warned Australia not to follow the US or Japan into any military conflict with China.
He said Australia should play the role of a ''kind-hearted lamb'' and China would discourage it from being led astray.
''Australia should never play the jackal for the tiger ( United States ) or dance with the wolf ( Japan )", he said ...
Colonel Liu asked that his message be conveyed directly to the ( Australian ) Prime Minister, Julia Gillard ...
http://www.theage.com.au/world/china-co ... z2ImhGOIu8
2013 - January 23rd - Chinese Military Statement on Nuclear War with Japan and U.S.
A CHINESE military officer has raised the spectre of nuclear weapons and warned Australia not to side with the United States and Japan as a territorial dispute in the East China Sea continues to escalate.
Senior Colonel Liu Mingfu, of the National Defence University, blamed America's ''orchestration'' and Japan's ''militarism'' for rising tensions
...
''America is the global tiger and Japan is Asia's wolf and both are now madly biting China,'' Colonel Liu said.
...
China was a peaceful nation but it would fight to the death if seriously attacked, he said.
...
Asked about the People's Liberation Army fighting capability,
Colonel Liu referred to the PLA department that houses China's strategic missile and nuclear arsenal.
He raised a hypothetical scenario that he said would justify a nuclear attack, while clarifying that he was not calling upon China to take such measures.
''If this Japanese wolf again attacks ... how do you know it wouldn't receive another nuclear bomb?'' Colonel Liu said.
''The world would hail if Japan receives such a blow.
''I don't want to mention China here, as it is sensitive,'' he added.
Colonel Liu is one of a group of outspoken hawkish PLA ( China's Communist People's Liberation Army ) officers who do not claim to speak on behalf of the leadership but are given licence ( by the Chinese Communist Dictatorship ) to speak stridently on some issues.
Foreign diplomats say they ( Colonel Liu and other unofficial spokesmen of the Chinese Government ) can serve to provide unofficial warnings, test foreign reactions and rally nationalistic support for the Communist Party or sections of it.
Colonel Liu directly warned Australia not to follow the US or Japan into any military conflict with China.
He said Australia should play the role of a ''kind-hearted lamb'' and China would discourage it from being led astray.
''Australia should never play the jackal for the tiger ( United States ) or dance with the wolf ( Japan )", he said ...
Colonel Liu asked that his message be conveyed directly to the ( Australian ) Prime Minister, Julia Gillard ...
http://www.theage.com.au/world/china-co ... z2ImhGOIu8
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 67 guests