There's no other choice. Destructive might speaks more loudly than a constructive one. Going around the world to build it up does not gain China any respect. Having the means to destroy it all, will. The Americans know this best. This is why they possess the means to destroy the whole world more than once. That is why they will always want to be the only one who can do it.

China should not be fooled by the Americans again. The last time the Americans curtailed the growth of China's nuclear arsenal when it fooled China to stop all real nuclear tests by promising to pass China the technology of computer-simulated nuclear test. Little of those technology was passed to the Chinese. China's nuclear arsenal remained a fraction of America's.

The Chinese should not forget that the Americans' nuclear arsenal is many times larger than China's and yet the Americans have passed a law to allow their nation to carry out a preemptive nuclear strike against China. Besides, the Americans have nuclear-powered allies which will simultaneously mount a nuclear attack against China. One of them, India, is just next door to China.

Not only should the Chinese up their nuclear arsenal, they should work on weapons more destructive than the nuclear type. They should not forget that part of their history when they were occupied by foreign powers. That's only a short while ago in the span of human history.

The future is becoming increasingly threatening to China. Mightiest US is treating China as an enemy and forming military alliances against China. It is encouraging the re-militarisation of Japan. Past Imperialist powers are on the rise again. If China is not careful, its humiliating past will return. Only being sufficiently armed with the most destructive weapons can prevent this from happening.

On Sunday, January 9, 2022 at 7:38:53 PM UTC-8, wog wacker wrote:
> There's no other choice. Destructive might speaks more loudly than a constructive one. Going around the world to build it up does not gain China any respect. Having the means to destroy it all, will. The Americans know this best. This is why they possess the means to destroy the whole world more than once. That is why they will always want to be the only one who can do it.
>
> China should not be fooled by the Americans again. The last time the Americans curtailed the growth of China's nuclear arsenal when it fooled China to stop all real nuclear tests by promising to pass China the technology of computer-simulated nuclear test. Little of those technology was passed to the Chinese. China's nuclear arsenal remained a fraction of America's.
>
> The Chinese should not forget that the Americans' nuclear arsenal is many times larger than China's and yet the Americans have passed a law to allow their nation to carry out a preemptive nuclear strike against China. Besides, the Americans have nuclear-powered allies which will simultaneously mount a nuclear attack against China. One of them, India, is just next door to China.
>
> Not only should the Chinese up their nuclear arsenal, they should work on weapons more destructive than the nuclear type. They should not forget that part of their history when they were occupied by foreign powers. That's only a short while ago in the span of human history.
>
> The future is becoming increasingly threatening to China. Mightiest US is treating China as an enemy and forming military alliances against China. It is encouraging the re-militarisation of Japan. Past Imperialist powers are on the rise again. If China is not careful, its humiliating past will return. Only being sufficiently armed with the most destructive weapons can prevent this from happening.

300 is more than enough.
No country can afford to have 300 cities destroyed...

On 11/1/2022 2:05 am, Rusty Wyse wrote:
> On Sunday, January 9, 2022 at 7:38:53 PM UTC-8, wog wacker wrote:
>> There's no other choice. Destructive might speaks more loudly than a constructive one. Going around the world to build it up does not gain China any respect. Having the means to destroy it all, will. The Americans know this best. This is why they possess the means to destroy the whole world more than once. That is why they will always want to be the only one who can do it.
>>
>> China should not be fooled by the Americans again. The last time the Americans curtailed the growth of China's nuclear arsenal when it fooled China to stop all real nuclear tests by promising to pass China the technology of computer-simulated nuclear test. Little of those technology was passed to the Chinese. China's nuclear arsenal remained a fraction of America's.
>>
>> The Chinese should not forget that the Americans' nuclear arsenal is many times larger than China's and yet the Americans have passed a law to allow their nation to carry out a preemptive nuclear strike against China. Besides, the Americans have nuclear-powered allies which will simultaneously mount a nuclear attack against China. One of them, India, is just next door to China.
>>
>> Not only should the Chinese up their nuclear arsenal, they should work on weapons more destructive than the nuclear type. They should not forget that part of their history when they were occupied by foreign powers. That's only a short while ago in the span of human history.
>>
>> The future is becoming increasingly threatening to China. Mightiest US is treating China as an enemy and forming military alliances against China. It is encouraging the re-militarisation of Japan. Past Imperialist powers are on the rise again. If China is not careful, its humiliating past will return. Only being sufficiently armed with the most destructive weapons can prevent this from happening.
>
> 300 is more than enough.
> No country can afford to have 300 cities destroyed...

No, 350 is not enough as many is needed to fire simultaneously several
targets at different locations, and if a target is not reached its
desired effect, a few more is needed, and if other countries are
participating in surrounding you, more are need to reach all at the same
time.

Remember, when war comes to your door by one or many countries, one must
have plenty of ammo and plenty of bios and plenty of nuclear missiles
too. One must be caught not having enough of ammo, and not enough of
missiles and not enough of transport carriers like ships, submarines,
ground, and space as well.

Henceforth, the more the merrier is necessary. It is like one having a
lot of money stocked up in the bank whereby one can draw down readily to
spend on any purchases to meet the shortages and replacements when in
the midst of the war engaged in it.

Remember, in war, never get oneself ended with no ammo, missiles,
bombs, weapons, tanks, ships, submarines, aircraft, and soldiers, too.

Remember also that war to threaten and frighten another country into war
is based on a number game.

That means one needs very high number of quality troops, and large
quantity and quality weapons such as missiles, tanks, radars, fighter
jets, and many other things, too.

In short, it is no disagreeable to you to say 350 is enough. US has 5500
ICBM and Russia has 6500 ICBM. Hence China should have 5000 in order to
be humble with them.

But Hypersonic missile should not be counted as it is different from
ICBM, as it is used like rocket fired in cartridges. Therefore, China
needs 2 million of hypersonic to be ready for war to win policy.

On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 6:05:34 PM UTC, rst88...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, January 9, 2022 at 7:38:53 PM UTC-8, wog wacker wrote:
> > There's no other choice. Destructive might speaks more loudly than a constructive one. Going around the world to build it up does not gain China any respect. Having the means to destroy it all, will. The Americans know this best. This is why they possess the means to destroy the whole world more than once. That is why they will always want to be the only one who can do it.
> >
> > China should not be fooled by the Americans again. The last time the Americans curtailed the growth of China's nuclear arsenal when it fooled China to stop all real nuclear tests by promising to pass China the technology of computer-simulated nuclear test. Little of those technology was passed to the Chinese. China's nuclear arsenal remained a fraction of America's.
> >
> > The Chinese should not forget that the Americans' nuclear arsenal is many times larger than China's and yet the Americans have passed a law to allow their nation to carry out a preemptive nuclear strike against China. Besides, the Americans have nuclear-powered allies which will simultaneously mount a nuclear attack against China. One of them, India, is just next door to China.
> >
> > Not only should the Chinese up their nuclear arsenal, they should work on weapons more destructive than the nuclear type. They should not forget that part of their history when they were occupied by foreign powers. That's only a short while ago in the span of human history.
> >
> > The future is becoming increasingly threatening to China. Mightiest US is treating China as an enemy and forming military alliances against China. It is encouraging the re-militarisation of Japan. Past Imperialist powers are on the rise again. If China is not careful, its humiliating past will return. Only being sufficiently armed with the most destructive weapons can prevent this from happening.
> 300 is more than enough.
> No country can afford to have 300 cities destroyed...

300 is enough against 6000 of the US? How many of the 300 can survive a preemptive nuclear strike by the US? How many of the remaining can penetrate the missile defense system of the US? Not to forget the nuclear-armed allies of the US.
300 is a pittance.

On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 11:38:39 AM UTC-8, boro wrote:
> On 11/1/2022 2:05 am, Rusty Wyse wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 9, 2022 at 7:38:53 PM UTC-8, wog wacker wrote:
> >> There's no other choice. Destructive might speaks more loudly than a constructive one. Going around the world to build it up does not gain China any respect. Having the means to destroy it all, will. The Americans know this best. This is why they possess the means to destroy the whole world more than once. That is why they will always want to be the only one who can do it.
> >>
> >> China should not be fooled by the Americans again. The last time the Americans curtailed the growth of China's nuclear arsenal when it fooled China to stop all real nuclear tests by promising to pass China the technology of computer-simulated nuclear test. Little of those technology was passed to the Chinese. China's nuclear arsenal remained a fraction of America's.
> >>
> >> The Chinese should not forget that the Americans' nuclear arsenal is many times larger than China's and yet the Americans have passed a law to allow their nation to carry out a preemptive nuclear strike against China. Besides, the Americans have nuclear-powered allies which will simultaneously mount a nuclear attack against China. One of them, India, is just next door to China.
> >>
> >> Not only should the Chinese up their nuclear arsenal, they should work on weapons more destructive than the nuclear type. They should not forget that part of their history when they were occupied by foreign powers. That's only a short while ago in the span of human history.
> >>
> >> The future is becoming increasingly threatening to China. Mightiest US is treating China as an enemy and forming military alliances against China.. It is encouraging the re-militarisation of Japan. Past Imperialist powers are on the rise again. If China is not careful, its humiliating past will return. Only being sufficiently armed with the most destructive weapons can prevent this from happening.
> >
> > 300 is more than enough.
> > No country can afford to have 300 cities destroyed...
> No, 350 is not enough as many is needed to fire simultaneously several
> targets at different locations, and if a target is not reached its
> desired effect, a few more is needed, and if other countries are
> participating in surrounding you, more are need to reach all at the same
> time.
>
> Remember, when war comes to your door by one or many countries, one must
> have plenty of ammo and plenty of bios and plenty of nuclear missiles
> too. One must be caught not having enough of ammo, and not enough of
> missiles and not enough of transport carriers like ships, submarines,
> ground, and space as well.
>
> Henceforth, the more the merrier is necessary. It is like one having a
> lot of money stocked up in the bank whereby one can draw down readily to
> spend on any purchases to meet the shortages and replacements when in
> the midst of the war engaged in it.
>
> Remember, in war, never get oneself ended with no ammo, missiles,
> bombs, weapons, tanks, ships, submarines, aircraft, and soldiers, too.
>
> Remember also that war to threaten and frighten another country into war
> is based on a number game.
>
> That means one needs very high number of quality troops, and large
> quantity and quality weapons such as missiles, tanks, radars, fighter
> jets, and many other things, too.
>
> In short, it is no disagreeable to you to say 350 is enough. US has 5500
> ICBM and Russia has 6500 ICBM. Hence China should have 5000 in order to
> be humble with them.
>
> But Hypersonic missile should not be counted as it is different from
> ICBM, as it is used like rocket fired in cartridges. Therefore, China
> needs 2 million of hypersonic to be ready for war to win policy.

You are comparing bullets to nuclear bombs...
There is no comparison...
A nuclear bomb kills hundreds of thousands, or millions...
A bullet may not even kill one.
China is a huge country, and China has been preparing for self-defense since the beginning of communism...
China has over 3 thousand miles of tunnels...
Where do you bomb over China? How do you know what you are bombing???
During the Vietnam War, American soldiers were standing on top of the mountain where Vietnamese soldiers were hiding...
In war, the innocence will be killed. The defenders will survive.

On Friday, January 14, 2022 at 7:09:35 AM UTC-8, paul polikos wrote:
> On Monday, January 10, 2022 at 6:05:34 PM UTC, rst88...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 9, 2022 at 7:38:53 PM UTC-8, wog wacker wrote:
> > > There's no other choice. Destructive might speaks more loudly than a constructive one. Going around the world to build it up does not gain China any respect. Having the means to destroy it all, will. The Americans know this best. This is why they possess the means to destroy the whole world more than once. That is why they will always want to be the only one who can do it.
> > >
> > > China should not be fooled by the Americans again. The last time the Americans curtailed the growth of China's nuclear arsenal when it fooled China to stop all real nuclear tests by promising to pass China the technology of computer-simulated nuclear test. Little of those technology was passed to the Chinese. China's nuclear arsenal remained a fraction of America's.
> > >
> > > The Chinese should not forget that the Americans' nuclear arsenal is many times larger than China's and yet the Americans have passed a law to allow their nation to carry out a preemptive nuclear strike against China. Besides, the Americans have nuclear-powered allies which will simultaneously mount a nuclear attack against China. One of them, India, is just next door to China.
> > >
> > > Not only should the Chinese up their nuclear arsenal, they should work on weapons more destructive than the nuclear type. They should not forget that part of their history when they were occupied by foreign powers. That's only a short while ago in the span of human history.
> > >
> > > The future is becoming increasingly threatening to China. Mightiest US is treating China as an enemy and forming military alliances against China. It is encouraging the re-militarisation of Japan. Past Imperialist powers are on the rise again. If China is not careful, its humiliating past will return. Only being sufficiently armed with the most destructive weapons can prevent this from happening.
> > 300 is more than enough.
> > No country can afford to have 300 cities destroyed...
> 300 is enough against 6000 of the US? How many of the 300 can survive a preemptive nuclear strike by the US? How many of the remaining can penetrate the missile defense system of the US? Not to forget the nuclear-armed allies of the US.
> 300 is a pittance.

300 is more than enough...
Anything above 300 is a waste of money...

On 15/1/2022 1:04 am, Rusty Wyse wrote:
> On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 11:38:39 AM UTC-8, boro wrote:
>> On 11/1/2022 2:05 am, Rusty Wyse wrote:
>>> On Sunday, January 9, 2022 at 7:38:53 PM UTC-8, wog wacker wrote:
>>>> There's no other choice. Destructive might speaks more loudly than a constructive one. Going around the world to build it up does not gain China any respect. Having the means to destroy it all, will. The Americans know this best. This is why they possess the means to destroy the whole world more than once. That is why they will always want to be the only one who can do it.
>>>>
>>>> China should not be fooled by the Americans again. The last time the Americans curtailed the growth of China's nuclear arsenal when it fooled China to stop all real nuclear tests by promising to pass China the technology of computer-simulated nuclear test. Little of those technology was passed to the Chinese. China's nuclear arsenal remained a fraction of America's.
>>>>
>>>> The Chinese should not forget that the Americans' nuclear arsenal is many times larger than China's and yet the Americans have passed a law to allow their nation to carry out a preemptive nuclear strike against China. Besides, the Americans have nuclear-powered allies which will simultaneously mount a nuclear attack against China. One of them, India, is just next door to China.
>>>>
>>>> Not only should the Chinese up their nuclear arsenal, they should work on weapons more destructive than the nuclear type. They should not forget that part of their history when they were occupied by foreign powers. That's only a short while ago in the span of human history.
>>>>
>>>> The future is becoming increasingly threatening to China. Mightiest US is treating China as an enemy and forming military alliances against China. It is encouraging the re-militarisation of Japan. Past Imperialist powers are on the rise again. If China is not careful, its humiliating past will return. Only being sufficiently armed with the most destructive weapons can prevent this from happening.
>>>
>>> 300 is more than enough.
>>> No country can afford to have 300 cities destroyed...
>> No, 350 is not enough as many is needed to fire simultaneously several
>> targets at different locations, and if a target is not reached its
>> desired effect, a few more is needed, and if other countries are
>> participating in surrounding you, more are need to reach all at the same
>> time.
>>
>> Remember, when war comes to your door by one or many countries, one must
>> have plenty of ammo and plenty of bios and plenty of nuclear missiles
>> too. One must be caught not having enough of ammo, and not enough of
>> missiles and not enough of transport carriers like ships, submarines,
>> ground, and space as well.
>>
>> Henceforth, the more the merrier is necessary. It is like one having a
>> lot of money stocked up in the bank whereby one can draw down readily to
>> spend on any purchases to meet the shortages and replacements when in
>> the midst of the war engaged in it.
>>
>> Remember, in war, never get oneself ended with no ammo, missiles,
>> bombs, weapons, tanks, ships, submarines, aircraft, and soldiers, too.
>>
>> Remember also that war to threaten and frighten another country into war
>> is based on a number game.
>>
>> That means one needs very high number of quality troops, and large
>> quantity and quality weapons such as missiles, tanks, radars, fighter
>> jets, and many other things, too.
>>
>> In short, it is no disagreeable to you to say 350 is enough. US has 5500
>> ICBM and Russia has 6500 ICBM. Hence China should have 5000 in order to
>> be humble with them.
>>
>> But Hypersonic missile should not be counted as it is different from
>> ICBM, as it is used like rocket fired in cartridges. Therefore, China
>> needs 2 million of hypersonic to be ready for war to win policy.
>
> You are comparing bullets to nuclear bombs...
> There is no comparison...
> A nuclear bomb kills hundreds of thousands, or millions...
> A bullet may not even kill one.
> China is a huge country, and China has been preparing for self-defense since the beginning of communism...
> China has over 3 thousand miles of tunnels...
> Where do you bomb over China? How do you know what you are bombing???
> During the Vietnam War, American soldiers were standing on top of the mountain where Vietnamese soldiers were hiding...
> In war, the innocence will be killed. The defenders will survive.
>
> Yes, hypersonic missile is not bullet. More is better. More is power.
More can standby. It can fly and fight at multiple enemies at the same
time.

On Friday, January 14, 2022 at 5:04:04 PM UTC, rst88...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 11:38:39 AM UTC-8, boro wrote:
> > On 11/1/2022 2:05 am, Rusty Wyse wrote:
> > > On Sunday, January 9, 2022 at 7:38:53 PM UTC-8, wog wacker wrote:
> > >> There's no other choice. Destructive might speaks more loudly than a constructive one. Going around the world to build it up does not gain China any respect. Having the means to destroy it all, will. The Americans know this best. This is why they possess the means to destroy the whole world more than once. That is why they will always want to be the only one who can do it.
> > >>
> > >> China should not be fooled by the Americans again. The last time the Americans curtailed the growth of China's nuclear arsenal when it fooled China to stop all real nuclear tests by promising to pass China the technology of computer-simulated nuclear test. Little of those technology was passed to the Chinese. China's nuclear arsenal remained a fraction of America's.
> > >>
> > >> The Chinese should not forget that the Americans' nuclear arsenal is many times larger than China's and yet the Americans have passed a law to allow their nation to carry out a preemptive nuclear strike against China. Besides, the Americans have nuclear-powered allies which will simultaneously mount a nuclear attack against China. One of them, India, is just next door to China.
> > >>
> > >> Not only should the Chinese up their nuclear arsenal, they should work on weapons more destructive than the nuclear type. They should not forget that part of their history when they were occupied by foreign powers. That's only a short while ago in the span of human history.
> > >>
> > >> The future is becoming increasingly threatening to China. Mightiest US is treating China as an enemy and forming military alliances against China. It is encouraging the re-militarisation of Japan. Past Imperialist powers are on the rise again. If China is not careful, its humiliating past will return. Only being sufficiently armed with the most destructive weapons can prevent this from happening.
> > >
> > > 300 is more than enough.
> > > No country can afford to have 300 cities destroyed...
> > No, 350 is not enough as many is needed to fire simultaneously several
> > targets at different locations, and if a target is not reached its
> > desired effect, a few more is needed, and if other countries are
> > participating in surrounding you, more are need to reach all at the same
> > time.
> >
> > Remember, when war comes to your door by one or many countries, one must
> > have plenty of ammo and plenty of bios and plenty of nuclear missiles
> > too. One must be caught not having enough of ammo, and not enough of
> > missiles and not enough of transport carriers like ships, submarines,
> > ground, and space as well.
> >
> > Henceforth, the more the merrier is necessary. It is like one having a
> > lot of money stocked up in the bank whereby one can draw down readily to
> > spend on any purchases to meet the shortages and replacements when in
> > the midst of the war engaged in it.
> >
> > Remember, in war, never get oneself ended with no ammo, missiles,
> > bombs, weapons, tanks, ships, submarines, aircraft, and soldiers, too.
> >
> > Remember also that war to threaten and frighten another country into war
> > is based on a number game.
> >
> > That means one needs very high number of quality troops, and large
> > quantity and quality weapons such as missiles, tanks, radars, fighter
> > jets, and many other things, too.
> >
> > In short, it is no disagreeable to you to say 350 is enough. US has 5500
> > ICBM and Russia has 6500 ICBM. Hence China should have 5000 in order to
> > be humble with them.
> >
> > But Hypersonic missile should not be counted as it is different from
> > ICBM, as it is used like rocket fired in cartridges. Therefore, China
> > needs 2 million of hypersonic to be ready for war to win policy.
> You are comparing bullets to nuclear bombs...
> There is no comparison...
> A nuclear bomb kills hundreds of thousands, or millions...
> A bullet may not even kill one.
> China is a huge country, and China has been preparing for self-defense since the beginning of communism...
> China has over 3 thousand miles of tunnels...
> Where do you bomb over China? How do you know what you are bombing???
> During the Vietnam War, American soldiers were standing on top of the mountain where Vietnamese soldiers were hiding...
> In war, the innocence will be killed. The defenders will survive.

> China has over 3 thousand miles of tunnels...
> Where do you bomb over China? How do you know what you are bombing???

There are enough satellites to pick up a launch, rocket or missiles, anywhere on earth. That 3000 miles of tunnel can't hide any missile launch.

> During the Vietnam War, American soldiers were standing on top of the mountain where Vietnamese soldiers were hiding...
> In war, the innocence will be killed. The defenders will survive.

Nowadays there are bombs which can penetrate deep into earth.

Land-based missile faces the risk of being shot down and exploded within your own territory.

When it comes to weapons, there is never enough. Only if you can afford it.

Location, mobility and stealth are important attributes of modern weapons. The missiles must be located as close to enemies' territory as possible. They must be always on the move to reduce the chances of being destroyed. They have to be stealthy enough to avoid detection before and during attack.

China is the most populous nation on earth. It has the largest number of lives to defend. Logically, it should be the most defended nation. That means it should possess the largest number of most powerful weapons.

On Monday, January 24, 2022 at 1:10:12 AM UTC-8, wog wacker wrote:
> On Friday, January 14, 2022 at 5:04:04 PM UTC, rst88...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 11:38:39 AM UTC-8, boro wrote:
> > > On 11/1/2022 2:05 am, Rusty Wyse wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, January 9, 2022 at 7:38:53 PM UTC-8, wog wacker wrote:
> > > >> There's no other choice. Destructive might speaks more loudly than a constructive one. Going around the world to build it up does not gain China any respect. Having the means to destroy it all, will. The Americans know this best. This is why they possess the means to destroy the whole world more than once. That is why they will always want to be the only one who can do it.
> > > >>
> > > >> China should not be fooled by the Americans again. The last time the Americans curtailed the growth of China's nuclear arsenal when it fooled China to stop all real nuclear tests by promising to pass China the technology of computer-simulated nuclear test. Little of those technology was passed to the Chinese. China's nuclear arsenal remained a fraction of America's.
> > > >>
> > > >> The Chinese should not forget that the Americans' nuclear arsenal is many times larger than China's and yet the Americans have passed a law to allow their nation to carry out a preemptive nuclear strike against China.. Besides, the Americans have nuclear-powered allies which will simultaneously mount a nuclear attack against China. One of them, India, is just next door to China.
> > > >>
> > > >> Not only should the Chinese up their nuclear arsenal, they should work on weapons more destructive than the nuclear type. They should not forget that part of their history when they were occupied by foreign powers. That's only a short while ago in the span of human history.
> > > >>
> > > >> The future is becoming increasingly threatening to China. Mightiest US is treating China as an enemy and forming military alliances against China. It is encouraging the re-militarisation of Japan. Past Imperialist powers are on the rise again. If China is not careful, its humiliating past will return. Only being sufficiently armed with the most destructive weapons can prevent this from happening.
> > > >
> > > > 300 is more than enough.
> > > > No country can afford to have 300 cities destroyed...
> > > No, 350 is not enough as many is needed to fire simultaneously several
> > > targets at different locations, and if a target is not reached its
> > > desired effect, a few more is needed, and if other countries are
> > > participating in surrounding you, more are need to reach all at the same
> > > time.
> > >
> > > Remember, when war comes to your door by one or many countries, one must
> > > have plenty of ammo and plenty of bios and plenty of nuclear missiles
> > > too. One must be caught not having enough of ammo, and not enough of
> > > missiles and not enough of transport carriers like ships, submarines,
> > > ground, and space as well.
> > >
> > > Henceforth, the more the merrier is necessary. It is like one having a
> > > lot of money stocked up in the bank whereby one can draw down readily to
> > > spend on any purchases to meet the shortages and replacements when in
> > > the midst of the war engaged in it.
> > >
> > > Remember, in war, never get oneself ended with no ammo, missiles,
> > > bombs, weapons, tanks, ships, submarines, aircraft, and soldiers, too..
> > >
> > > Remember also that war to threaten and frighten another country into war
> > > is based on a number game.
> > >
> > > That means one needs very high number of quality troops, and large
> > > quantity and quality weapons such as missiles, tanks, radars, fighter
> > > jets, and many other things, too.
> > >
> > > In short, it is no disagreeable to you to say 350 is enough. US has 5500
> > > ICBM and Russia has 6500 ICBM. Hence China should have 5000 in order to
> > > be humble with them.
> > >
> > > But Hypersonic missile should not be counted as it is different from
> > > ICBM, as it is used like rocket fired in cartridges. Therefore, China
> > > needs 2 million of hypersonic to be ready for war to win policy.
> > You are comparing bullets to nuclear bombs...
> > There is no comparison...
> > A nuclear bomb kills hundreds of thousands, or millions...
> > A bullet may not even kill one.
> > China is a huge country, and China has been preparing for self-defense since the beginning of communism...
> > China has over 3 thousand miles of tunnels...
> > Where do you bomb over China? How do you know what you are bombing???
> > During the Vietnam War, American soldiers were standing on top of the mountain where Vietnamese soldiers were hiding...
> > In war, the innocence will be killed. The defenders will survive.
>
> > China has over 3 thousand miles of tunnels...
> > Where do you bomb over China? How do you know what you are bombing???
> There are enough satellites to pick up a launch, rocket or missiles, anywhere on earth. That 3000 miles of tunnel can't hide any missile launch.
> > During the Vietnam War, American soldiers were standing on top of the mountain where Vietnamese soldiers were hiding...
> > In war, the innocence will be killed. The defenders will survive.
> Nowadays there are bombs which can penetrate deep into earth.

Yes, but where would you bomb??? Where are the tunnels?

>
> Land-based missile faces the risk of being shot down and exploded within your own territory.

Most missed.

>
> When it comes to weapons, there is never enough. Only if you can afford it.

The Vietnam War, Afghanistan War, the Syrian War, ... prove "Weapons" have no intelligence. The U.S. bombed the Ho Chi Min trail with more bombs than all the wars combined, yet weapons continue to flow to the South... by women using bicycles...

>
> Location, mobility and stealth are important attributes of modern weapons.. The missiles must be located as close to enemies' territory as possible. They must be always on the move to reduce the chances of being destroyed. They have to be stealthy enough to avoid detection before and during attack.

Hypersonic weapons, space weapons, tunnels, distance, ... are the future...
You'll dead before you know it...

>
> China is the most populous nation on earth. It has the largest number of lives to defend. Logically, it should be the most defended nation. That means it should possess the largest number of most powerful weapons.

The CCP is way ahead of you...