Chinese General Threatens To Use Nuclear Weapons

[tinybear]

July 15, 2005

Nuclear threat to US over Taiwan conflict
From Tim Reid

CHINA is willing to use nuclear weapons against the United States if it is attacked in a conflict over Taiwan, a senior Chinese military official said last night.

“If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China’s territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons,” Zhu Chenghu, a major general in the People’s Liberation Army, said at an official press briefing for foreign journalists.

General Zhu, a well-known hawk who has said before that China could strike the US with long-ranged missiles, said his comments were “my assessment”, and not the “policy of the Government”.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...695360,00.html

[Sgt. Rock]

Sounds like the typical posturing. All bark and no bite

[Osborn F Enready]

In this case, nobody wants to test for a bite Rock.

They have a valid case.

[tinybear]

Actually, no one wants to fire the first shot. So the status quo will prevail.

[Whodoe!]

Yeah - don't they say this every couple of years?

[Mr.Vicchio]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready In this case, nobody wants to test for a bite Rock. They have a valid case.

What valid case?

If we defend Taiwan against China then they have a case to Nuke us?

I think not.

[tinybear]

He said: "CHINA is willing to use nuclear weapons against the United States if it is attacked in a conflict over Taiwan."

In other words, the nuclear weapons would only be used if China is attacked. :)

[Mr.Vicchio]

Quote by: tinybear He said: "CHINA is willing to use nuclear weapons against the United States if it is attacked in a conflict over Taiwan." In other words, the nuclear weapons would only be used if China is attacked. :)

I read the article, or atleast one on the same issue, and they noted China tends to view thier warships and the like as "China". They also consider Taiwan "China" so if we hit any troops or equipment that happened ot land on that island, that would be attacking China too.

If they want to start a nuclear holocaust over Taiwan... that's scary.

[tinybear]

I think they're bluffing. The Chinese ain't crazy and they have plenty to lose if war breaks out, unlike North Korea.

[mr.perfecto]

Make sure the first salvo turns that general into glass. We still owe China for Vietnam anyway so we have a freebie launch we can still cash in.

[PatrickHenry]

Nuclear hawks should be gulagged. Nukes kill the innocent. They are terror, not its antidote.

[Mr.Vicchio]

MAD worked during the Cold War, and it does today keep the Big Dogs from fighting real Wars.

This could just be bluff as was stated, a nuclear exchange is not something most sane people contemplate without the realization of the horror that would entail.

[Osborn F Enready]

Mr Vicchio said:
MAD worked during the Cold War, and it does today keep the Big Dogs from fighting real Wars.

This could just be bluff as was stated, a nuclear exchange is not something most sane people contemplate without the realization of the horror that would entail.

I say:
The cold war....

I don't particularly want to find out if it was a bluff, over Taiwan. Taiwan would be less sense than Iraq, and China is pretty much already the last major enemy of the U.S.

We saw the flak over Iraq, and I doubt even a boob like Bush would be willing to take that flak over Taiwan, especially since there isn't a lot of oil, or people who threatened his daddy in Taiwan.

[allen]

well, this general's opinion is his only, and if you really want to inteprete it, just take it as a show that China is determined to reclaim Taiwan, no matter what it may cost.
Nobody like wars. But if Taiwan goes independent, China has to respond by resorting to force, even if it means failure or disaster. If China has to confront US directly, a regular war or a nuclear war will not make any difference to China; China will be destroyed by US anyway. But it will make a big difference for US, which will be intact in a regular war, but destroyed in a nuclear war.
Nuclear arm is the only way for China to deter US from Taiwan, but it work only if you don't use it. BTW, I think that general is speaking to Taiwan, not to US.

[ibm]

Quote by: allen well, this general's opinion is his only, and if you really want to inteprete it, just take it as a show that China is determined to reclaim Taiwan, no matter what it may cost. Nobody like wars. But if Taiwan goes independent, China has to respond by resorting to force, even if it means failure or disaster. If China has to confront US directly, a regular war or a nuclear war will not make any difference to China; China will be destroyed by US anyway. But it will make a big difference for US, which will be intact in a regular war, but destroyed in a nuclear war. Nuclear arm is the only way for China to deter US from Taiwan, but it work only if you don't use it. BTW, I think that general is speaking to Taiwan, not to US.

generally, i agree with your view here. but what makes you think of the part i've hilited? to me it's a bit over-confident - especially when we haven't "destroyed" iraq resistence after 2+ years.

[allen]

Quote by: ibm generally, i agree with your view here. but what makes you think of the part i've hilited? to me it's a bit over-confident - especially when we haven't "destroyed" iraq resistence after 2+ years.

Everyone knows the iraq war can not be said a war to US, it is just an action. If US is devoted to a war like in WWII, any country would be destroyed easily. China and taiwan see this clearly. And China need to convince US and Taiwan that China is ready to sacrifice everything for Taiwan. When US is convinced, Taiwan seperatists will be out of steam...

[ibm]

allen, i know your view is very common and makes much sense. but under- (or misunder-) estimate your opponent can cost you a lot.

in history, we have korea and vietnam wars that lasted long and where we poured in a lot of resources, yet neither we declared victory.

currently we have the war in iraq. is it really "just an action"? in a military sense, maybe. but what about other aspects of a war, such as the financial aspect? can we financially afford, say, a few more wars like that at the same time or close to at the same time?

into the future, a large-scale nuclear war, imo, will be a suicide mission for all human race. there would be no winners in that scenario. none whatsoever.

[bishop]

would the communists attempt to push for a war to capture taiwan if the social problems within china worsen? according to the diplomat that fled to australia, the communists are increasingly worried about dissent amongst the public. he cited taiwan as a very important propaganda tool for the communists.

if the communists felt that their hold on power could be overcome, and attempted a war to capture taiwan to maintain power, is it not possible that they could use a nuke?


i don't necessarily think that they would initially, but if a war ensued, they could eventually decide to use one after all - especially if they were losing.

[Mr.Vicchio]

If Taiwan is attacked we should help defend them.

They are a free people that have not chosen to "rejoin" with China, and should not be forced to.

If they want ot stay free, we as a free people are obligated to help them.

Or surrender all of our freedoms now, if we won't defend others, what right do we have to our own?

[bishop]

we are, unfortunately, required by law to defend taiwan.

once upon a time, some hick twit once said that the united states shouldn't be all things to all people.. so quickly people forget and follow along like lemmings.


and the hell with that b.s. about how "we" should help them.. gung-ho nonsense.. you go die for some random foreigners. have fun, i'll look for you on the news.