In my own view, China have to bleed and carnage Chow Ang Moh like dirt and show the barbarism from 5000 years of carnage and war history. Take a good pee on peace and wipe out their population whole scale. The existence and possession over global resources is live and death and definitely no co-existence nor peace for any consideration.
https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/china/2019-04-29/doc-ihvhiewr8824905.shtml
媒体:中国须拒绝美拉我核裁军 反而亟需提升核武规模
2019年04月29日 07:48 环球时报
0
原标题：社评：中国须拒绝美拉我核裁军的任何念头
多名白宫官员对美国媒体表示，特朗普总统准备不续签将在2021年到期的美俄《新削减战略武器条约》，华盛顿想要推动达成一项包括中国在内的新的《削减战略武器条约》。继美国退出《中导条约》后，特朗普政府正在按照同样思路对待美俄之间仅剩的《新削减战略武器条约》。
限制中国发展战略核力量是美国出此策略的主要目的之一，华盛顿希望借助莫斯科的力量和国际（主要是西方的）舆论力量向北京施压，确保早早就给中国套上紧箍咒。
在《中导条约》问题上，莫斯科公开拒绝了美国想拉上中国一起谈的建议，因为美方的主张的确没有道理。《新削减战略武器条约》限制的是美俄核弹头以及运载工具数量，要拉中国进来，就更荒唐了。
中国的核弹头数量没有公开过，但它与美俄的核弹头数量不在一个量级上，则是众所周知的。据美国科学家联盟不久前公布的一个估算，至2018年中国核弹头数量为280枚，美国和俄罗斯各为6450枚和6490枚。让中国参与美俄的核裁军，相当于让一个儿童参与成年武士的力量削减。
中国必须毫不迟疑地驳回美国推动这一主张的任何尝试，无论美方为这种尝试投下什么本钱。我们既不可被华盛顿的花言巧语或者诱饵所迷惑，也不能被它可能在今后为此施加的压力所困扰。我们对自己战略核力量规划的实施要坚定不移。
最近这些年中国的军力实现了高速发展，使得我们的战略工具箱里有了更多选择。但必须指出，核力量仍然是最根本的战略工具，是国家在关键时刻坚定战略意志的根本支撑。中国的战略核力量本来就维持在保障国家安全所需的最低水平上，一旦它有任何削弱，我们的战略意志就有在危急关头被压弯的风险。那样的可能性必须百分之百排除。
需要看到，中国不仅核武库的保持水平低，而且是做出不首先使用核武器承诺的唯一核国家，这进一步限制了中国的核威慑。从理论上说，中国与未做这一承诺的国家保有相同数量的核弹头和运载工具，所产生的核震慑是不一样的。在这种情况下华盛顿还想拉中国参与美俄核裁军，这是一种战略上的贪得无厌。
中国人还需清晰领悟：美国对华战略傲慢有相当一部分的深层原因就是中国战略核力量与之存在量级之差。如果中国的核弹头处于几千枚的数量级上，美国决不敢在南海上搞如此轻狂的“自由航行”，它在台海地区的表现也会克制得多。
我们认为，中国应当加大提升战略核力量规模和质量的力度，而且随着中国安全形势变得更加紧迫，这一工作刻不容缓，其他考量都应让路。防止外部力量在关键时刻对中国以军事摊牌相威胁的根本保障就是加强核力量，其他所有力量建设都只能起到部分作用。关于这一点，我们必须有极其清醒的认识，切不可因为海空军的力量建设成就而搞混了轻重。
其他力量建设都是需要计算成本的，只有战略核力量建设可以不考虑成本因素。那种核武器“够用就行了”的想法一定要不断对照国家现实安全形势，充分厘清什么叫“够用”这个概念。
让美国不敢对中国发动核战争，这是一种“够用”。让美国不敢对中国发动常规战争，是另一种“够用”。让美国连军事挑衅也轻易不敢做，自动远离中国的核心利益，是更高级别的“够用”。如果说核武器能够参与塑造美国社会对中国的态度，要求就更高了。
美国作为世界上综合核力量最强的国家，2020年度国防预算增加5%，其中250亿美元用于生产核武器，应对“包括中国核武在内的威胁”。不难看出，美中两国对核武器“够用”的理解存在多大差距。
中国不必在核武器问题上对标美国，这也不现实。但中国的核力量一定要足够遏制美国鹰派对华实施战略冒险的任何念头。这应当是中国核力量的“最低水平”。
Media: China must reject the US nuclear disarmament, but it is urgent to increase the scale of nuclear weapons
April 29, 2019 07:48 Global Times
0
Original title: Social comment: China must reject any thoughts of Myra's nuclear disarmament
A number of White House officials told US media that President Trump is preparing not to renew the US-Russia "New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty" that will expire in 2021. Washington wants to promote a new "reduction strategy" including China. Weapons Treaty. After the United States withdraws from the "Guidelines on the Guided Treaty," the Trump administration is treating the only remaining Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty between the United States and Russia in the same way.
Restricting China's development strategy Nuclear power is one of the main purposes of the US strategy. Washington hopes to use the power of Moscow and the international (mainly Western) public opinion forces to exert pressure on Beijing to ensure that China will be put on the spell early.
On the issue of the "Guidelines on the Treaty", Moscow publicly rejected the proposal that the United States wants to pull up China to talk together, because the US proposal does not make sense. The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty limits the number of US and Russian nuclear warheads and means of delivery. It is even more ridiculous to pull China in.
The number of nuclear warheads in China has not been disclosed, but it is not known to be an order of magnitude compared to the number of US and Russian nuclear warheads. According to an estimate released by the Union of American Scientists recently, the number of Chinese nuclear warheads will be 280 by 2018, and the United States and Russia will each have 6,450 and 6,490. Letting China participate in the nuclear disarmament of the United States and Russia is equivalent to letting a child participate in the reduction of the strength of adult warriors.
China must not hesitate to reject any attempt by the United States to promote this idea, no matter what the US has invested in such an attempt. We can't be fooled by Washington's rhetoric or bait, nor can it be plagued by the pressure it might impose on it in the future. We must be steadfast in the implementation of our strategic nuclear power plan.
In recent years, China’s military strength has achieved rapid development, which has made us have more choices in our strategic toolbox. However, it must be pointed out that nuclear power remains the most fundamental strategic tool and the fundamental support for the country to strengthen its strategic will at a critical juncture. China's strategic nuclear power has always been at the minimum level needed to protect national security. Once it has any weakening, our strategic will has the risk of being crushed at a critical juncture. Such a possibility must be ruled out 100%.
It needs to be seen that China not only maintains a low level of nuclear arsenal, but also is the only nuclear power that makes a commitment not to use nuclear weapons first, which further limits China’s nuclear deterrence. In theory, China has the same number of nuclear warheads and delivery vehicles as countries that have not made this commitment, and the resulting nuclear shock is different. In this case, Washington still wants to pull China into the US-Russian nuclear disarmament. This is a strategic greed.
The Chinese also need to clearly understand that a deep part of the US strategic arrogance toward China is the difference between China's strategic nuclear power and its magnitude. If China’s nuclear warheads are on the order of thousands of pieces, the United States will never dare to engage in such a frivolous “free voyage” in the South China Sea, and its performance in the Taiwan Strait will be much more restrained.
We believe that China should increase the intensity and quality of its strategic nuclear forces, and as China's security situation becomes more urgent, this work cannot be delayed, and other considerations should give way. The fundamental guarantee for preventing external forces from threatening China with military showdowns at critical moments is to strengthen nuclear power. All other forces can only play a part. In this regard, we must have a very clear understanding, and must not be confused by the achievements of the sea and air force.
Other forces are built to calculate costs, and only strategic nuclear forces can be built without considering cost factors. The idea that the nuclear weapon is "sufficient to use" must constantly compare the real security situation of the country and fully clarify the concept of what is "enough".
Let the United States not dare to launch a nuclear war against China. This is an "enough". Letting the United States not dare to launch a conventional war against China is another "enough". Letting the United States even dare to do military provocations, automatically away from China’s core interests, is a higher level of "enough". If nuclear weapons can participate in shaping the attitude of American society towards China, the requirements are even higher.
As the world's strongest nuclear power, the United States has increased its defense budget by 5% in 2020, of which $25 billion is used to produce nuclear weapons and respond to "threat including China's nuclear weapons." It is not difficult to see that there is a big gap between the US and China's understanding of the "enough use" of nuclear weapons.
It is not realistic that China does not have to mark the United States on the issue of nuclear weapons. But China’s nuclear forces must be enough to contain any thoughts of the American hawks’ strategic venture against China. This should be the "lowest level" of China's nuclear power.
https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/china/2019-04-29/doc-ihvhiewr8824905.shtml
媒体:中国须拒绝美拉我核裁军 反而亟需提升核武规模
2019年04月29日 07:48 环球时报
0
原标题：社评：中国须拒绝美拉我核裁军的任何念头
多名白宫官员对美国媒体表示，特朗普总统准备不续签将在2021年到期的美俄《新削减战略武器条约》，华盛顿想要推动达成一项包括中国在内的新的《削减战略武器条约》。继美国退出《中导条约》后，特朗普政府正在按照同样思路对待美俄之间仅剩的《新削减战略武器条约》。
限制中国发展战略核力量是美国出此策略的主要目的之一，华盛顿希望借助莫斯科的力量和国际（主要是西方的）舆论力量向北京施压，确保早早就给中国套上紧箍咒。
在《中导条约》问题上，莫斯科公开拒绝了美国想拉上中国一起谈的建议，因为美方的主张的确没有道理。《新削减战略武器条约》限制的是美俄核弹头以及运载工具数量，要拉中国进来，就更荒唐了。
中国的核弹头数量没有公开过，但它与美俄的核弹头数量不在一个量级上，则是众所周知的。据美国科学家联盟不久前公布的一个估算，至2018年中国核弹头数量为280枚，美国和俄罗斯各为6450枚和6490枚。让中国参与美俄的核裁军，相当于让一个儿童参与成年武士的力量削减。
中国必须毫不迟疑地驳回美国推动这一主张的任何尝试，无论美方为这种尝试投下什么本钱。我们既不可被华盛顿的花言巧语或者诱饵所迷惑，也不能被它可能在今后为此施加的压力所困扰。我们对自己战略核力量规划的实施要坚定不移。
最近这些年中国的军力实现了高速发展，使得我们的战略工具箱里有了更多选择。但必须指出，核力量仍然是最根本的战略工具，是国家在关键时刻坚定战略意志的根本支撑。中国的战略核力量本来就维持在保障国家安全所需的最低水平上，一旦它有任何削弱，我们的战略意志就有在危急关头被压弯的风险。那样的可能性必须百分之百排除。
需要看到，中国不仅核武库的保持水平低，而且是做出不首先使用核武器承诺的唯一核国家，这进一步限制了中国的核威慑。从理论上说，中国与未做这一承诺的国家保有相同数量的核弹头和运载工具，所产生的核震慑是不一样的。在这种情况下华盛顿还想拉中国参与美俄核裁军，这是一种战略上的贪得无厌。
中国人还需清晰领悟：美国对华战略傲慢有相当一部分的深层原因就是中国战略核力量与之存在量级之差。如果中国的核弹头处于几千枚的数量级上，美国决不敢在南海上搞如此轻狂的“自由航行”，它在台海地区的表现也会克制得多。
我们认为，中国应当加大提升战略核力量规模和质量的力度，而且随着中国安全形势变得更加紧迫，这一工作刻不容缓，其他考量都应让路。防止外部力量在关键时刻对中国以军事摊牌相威胁的根本保障就是加强核力量，其他所有力量建设都只能起到部分作用。关于这一点，我们必须有极其清醒的认识，切不可因为海空军的力量建设成就而搞混了轻重。
其他力量建设都是需要计算成本的，只有战略核力量建设可以不考虑成本因素。那种核武器“够用就行了”的想法一定要不断对照国家现实安全形势，充分厘清什么叫“够用”这个概念。
让美国不敢对中国发动核战争，这是一种“够用”。让美国不敢对中国发动常规战争，是另一种“够用”。让美国连军事挑衅也轻易不敢做，自动远离中国的核心利益，是更高级别的“够用”。如果说核武器能够参与塑造美国社会对中国的态度，要求就更高了。
美国作为世界上综合核力量最强的国家，2020年度国防预算增加5%，其中250亿美元用于生产核武器，应对“包括中国核武在内的威胁”。不难看出，美中两国对核武器“够用”的理解存在多大差距。
中国不必在核武器问题上对标美国，这也不现实。但中国的核力量一定要足够遏制美国鹰派对华实施战略冒险的任何念头。这应当是中国核力量的“最低水平”。
Media: China must reject the US nuclear disarmament, but it is urgent to increase the scale of nuclear weapons
April 29, 2019 07:48 Global Times
0
Original title: Social comment: China must reject any thoughts of Myra's nuclear disarmament
A number of White House officials told US media that President Trump is preparing not to renew the US-Russia "New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty" that will expire in 2021. Washington wants to promote a new "reduction strategy" including China. Weapons Treaty. After the United States withdraws from the "Guidelines on the Guided Treaty," the Trump administration is treating the only remaining Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty between the United States and Russia in the same way.
Restricting China's development strategy Nuclear power is one of the main purposes of the US strategy. Washington hopes to use the power of Moscow and the international (mainly Western) public opinion forces to exert pressure on Beijing to ensure that China will be put on the spell early.
On the issue of the "Guidelines on the Treaty", Moscow publicly rejected the proposal that the United States wants to pull up China to talk together, because the US proposal does not make sense. The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty limits the number of US and Russian nuclear warheads and means of delivery. It is even more ridiculous to pull China in.
The number of nuclear warheads in China has not been disclosed, but it is not known to be an order of magnitude compared to the number of US and Russian nuclear warheads. According to an estimate released by the Union of American Scientists recently, the number of Chinese nuclear warheads will be 280 by 2018, and the United States and Russia will each have 6,450 and 6,490. Letting China participate in the nuclear disarmament of the United States and Russia is equivalent to letting a child participate in the reduction of the strength of adult warriors.
China must not hesitate to reject any attempt by the United States to promote this idea, no matter what the US has invested in such an attempt. We can't be fooled by Washington's rhetoric or bait, nor can it be plagued by the pressure it might impose on it in the future. We must be steadfast in the implementation of our strategic nuclear power plan.
In recent years, China’s military strength has achieved rapid development, which has made us have more choices in our strategic toolbox. However, it must be pointed out that nuclear power remains the most fundamental strategic tool and the fundamental support for the country to strengthen its strategic will at a critical juncture. China's strategic nuclear power has always been at the minimum level needed to protect national security. Once it has any weakening, our strategic will has the risk of being crushed at a critical juncture. Such a possibility must be ruled out 100%.
It needs to be seen that China not only maintains a low level of nuclear arsenal, but also is the only nuclear power that makes a commitment not to use nuclear weapons first, which further limits China’s nuclear deterrence. In theory, China has the same number of nuclear warheads and delivery vehicles as countries that have not made this commitment, and the resulting nuclear shock is different. In this case, Washington still wants to pull China into the US-Russian nuclear disarmament. This is a strategic greed.
The Chinese also need to clearly understand that a deep part of the US strategic arrogance toward China is the difference between China's strategic nuclear power and its magnitude. If China’s nuclear warheads are on the order of thousands of pieces, the United States will never dare to engage in such a frivolous “free voyage” in the South China Sea, and its performance in the Taiwan Strait will be much more restrained.
We believe that China should increase the intensity and quality of its strategic nuclear forces, and as China's security situation becomes more urgent, this work cannot be delayed, and other considerations should give way. The fundamental guarantee for preventing external forces from threatening China with military showdowns at critical moments is to strengthen nuclear power. All other forces can only play a part. In this regard, we must have a very clear understanding, and must not be confused by the achievements of the sea and air force.
Other forces are built to calculate costs, and only strategic nuclear forces can be built without considering cost factors. The idea that the nuclear weapon is "sufficient to use" must constantly compare the real security situation of the country and fully clarify the concept of what is "enough".
Let the United States not dare to launch a nuclear war against China. This is an "enough". Letting the United States not dare to launch a conventional war against China is another "enough". Letting the United States even dare to do military provocations, automatically away from China’s core interests, is a higher level of "enough". If nuclear weapons can participate in shaping the attitude of American society towards China, the requirements are even higher.
As the world's strongest nuclear power, the United States has increased its defense budget by 5% in 2020, of which $25 billion is used to produce nuclear weapons and respond to "threat including China's nuclear weapons." It is not difficult to see that there is a big gap between the US and China's understanding of the "enough use" of nuclear weapons.
It is not realistic that China does not have to mark the United States on the issue of nuclear weapons. But China’s nuclear forces must be enough to contain any thoughts of the American hawks’ strategic venture against China. This should be the "lowest level" of China's nuclear power.
