• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

U.S. Deaths in Iraq & Afghanistan Decline Dramatically in 2008

Squiggyfm said:
Here ya go. All the back issues of The Atlantic.

Have at it.

ETA: I can't really blame you for not being able to find it. Atlantic's website is very difficult to navigate

Atlantic.png


If only they had a well-labeled archive!
Click to expand...

Thanks.

The July/August 2007 issue has the article referring to the likely success of a U.S. first strike.

I had thought it was in 2005, but a 2005 issue had an article "How We Would Fight China" which refers to a conventional conflict with the Chinese.
 
Regarding China, one has to remember that in the past year, especiall since the economic crisis, China has shown that economically it is not nearly as powerful as many people thought it was. There's no real economic threat from China. The only other threat would be a military threat and as the US is a major part of China's economy I don't think they'll be attacking us any time soon.

Here is the article that Dayton3 is talking about: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200707/china-nukes

It's absolute trash and makes massive assumptions about China's defensive systems. I wouldn't use it to make any calls whatsoever.
 
^Yet not one of the strategic weapons facts about Chinese technology and military readiness has ever been challenged on the technical aspects.

Instead, the criticism of the study (incidentally, the people who did the study and an earlier one are CRITICS of U.S. nuclear policies) is strictly along hypothetical personal lines such as

"The U.S. would never do this."

or

"The Chinese would never do that".

To me, statements against interest, are far and away the most reliable.

When nuclear weapons experts present papers detailing U.S. weapons SUPERIORITY over China (and earlier Russia)...and then actually are CRITICAL of that SUPERIORITY because they consider it destabilizing (the experts in question have wondered if U.S. superiority will tempt a U.S. president to "go nuclear" in a future crisis knowing the U.S. can take down the Russians or Chinese and survive with acceptable damage) then I take it seriously.
 
Dayton3 said:
^Yet not one of the strategic weapons facts about Chinese technology and military readiness has ever been challenged on the technical aspects.

Instead, the criticism of the study (incidentally, the people who did the study and an earlier one are CRITICS of U.S. nuclear policies) is strictly along hypothetical personal lines such as

"The U.S. would never do this."

or

"The Chinese would never do that".

To me, statements against interest, are far and away the most reliable.

When nuclear weapons experts present papers detailing U.S. weapons SUPERIORITY over China (and earlier Russia)...and then actually are CRITICAL of that SUPERIORITY because they consider it destabilizing (the experts in question have wondered if U.S. superiority will tempt a U.S. president to "go nuclear" in a future crisis knowing the U.S. can take down the Russians or Chinese and survive with acceptable damage) then I take it seriously.
Click to expand...
Care to back any of that up?
 
Misfit Toy said:
Dayton3 said:
^Yet not one of the strategic weapons facts about Chinese technology and military readiness has ever been challenged on the technical aspects.

Instead, the criticism of the study (incidentally, the people who did the study and an earlier one are CRITICS of U.S. nuclear policies) is strictly along hypothetical personal lines such as

"The U.S. would never do this."

or

"The Chinese would never do that".

To me, statements against interest, are far and away the most reliable.

When nuclear weapons experts present papers detailing U.S. weapons SUPERIORITY over China (and earlier Russia)...and then actually are CRITICAL of that SUPERIORITY because they consider it destabilizing (the experts in question have wondered if U.S. superiority will tempt a U.S. president to "go nuclear" in a future crisis knowing the U.S. can take down the Russians or Chinese and survive with acceptable damage) then I take it seriously.
Click to expand...
Care to back any of that up?
Click to expand...

I just did.

You never provided any evidence that the article was "absolute trash" as you described it.
 
Dayton3 said:
Misfit Toy said:
Dayton3 said:
^Yet not one of the strategic weapons facts about Chinese technology and military readiness has ever been challenged on the technical aspects.

Instead, the criticism of the study (incidentally, the people who did the study and an earlier one are CRITICS of U.S. nuclear policies) is strictly along hypothetical personal lines such as

"The U.S. would never do this."

or

"The Chinese would never do that".

To me, statements against interest, are far and away the most reliable.

When nuclear weapons experts present papers detailing U.S. weapons SUPERIORITY over China (and earlier Russia)...and then actually are CRITICAL of that SUPERIORITY because they consider it destabilizing (the experts in question have wondered if U.S. superiority will tempt a U.S. president to "go nuclear" in a future crisis knowing the U.S. can take down the Russians or Chinese and survive with acceptable damage) then I take it seriously.
Click to expand...
Care to back any of that up?
Click to expand...

I just did.

You never provided any evidence that the article was "absolute trash" as you described it.
Click to expand...
No, you didn't - and please indicate where I described the article as "absolute trash".
You can't even get your facts straight from one post to another. Why should we "take your word" for anything?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top