Free Web Hosting Provider - Web Hosting - E-commerce - High Speed Internet - Free Web Page
Search the Web

The Nuclear Secrets China now has

Is the core issue "did China ' steal ' nuclear secrets " ? I think these are the core issues :
  • has China now the specifications to implement Mutual Assured Destruction, i.e. to destroy the US ?
  • if yes, when will those specifications be implemented ?
  • why didn't the Clinton Administration prevent these secrets to get to China ? (the plan is to have the whole thing finished very soon, that is before China can implement MAD capability)
    • Before reading the Cox Report, please read below the answer to the first question ( YES, fundamentals of MIRV and bus design), given in message #82927, posted by jerryhere, to the New York Times Forum "The Clinton Impeachment", Feb. 16, 1999.
    By the way, the fact the author can only find the reason for the apparently suicidal politics of the Clinton administration on "those millions that Red China gave to Clinton and the Democratic Party", shows how successfully propaganda used this issue, capable of  fooling even people able to produce an otherwise brilliant analysis.
    To uncover this diversion tool you just to need to think about this : the control over the US Government is worth trillions of dollars, so it's absolutely ridiculous to imagine that a few million dollars would do the job ...
    The text above was posted to the CNN boards during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia. Now (March 2001)  that Russia prevented the satanic illuminati plan to be carried to the end, one of the consequences is China having the time of implementing MAD capability.


    By Jerryhere, Feb. 16, 1999

    Introduction - Obviously Guilty

    T.E. Lawrence wrote of his campaigns in Arabia what the House managers might think about the impeachment: "The old men came out again and took from us our victory, and remade it in the likeness of the former world they knew. Youth could win, but had not learned to keep." Then, as now, the elders had no magic but rather experience and compelling arguments. Now, as then, they say that they are accommodating the facts and moving as far as they can within their confines. Even if no jury in its right mind would have failed to convict a man so obviously guilty, the country has never supported the impeachment of this president, and, indeed, is livid in reaction to it.

    Peace, prosperity, and growing incomes have combined with the perceived triviality of the case to preclude the pressures that otherwise might have forced the president's party to abandon him. In the absence of any chance of success, the best policy is to cut one's losses and get the troops off the beach so that they might live to fight again. This analogy to Dunkirk surfaced in the Republican caucus. Some senators of great ability and judgment are convinced of it, and have acted in good conscience and with the highest integrity to save their party and do their best for the nation.

    But are they right? No, they are not. For this there are many proofs, but consider one that is accidental. The day after the closing arguments, a unit of Air Force cadets in a Virginia auditorium far less elegant than the chamber of the Senate was gathered for instruction in the problems of the air worthiness of an F-16 asymmetrically loaded with external ordnance. It may seem that nothing could be further removed from the previous day's events, but this is only partly true. These were splendid young people who were making a start into life with faith, trust, and innocence. Although they had no idea and could not have been expected to know, their future may have been wrought in the Senate the day before. How?

    Has China now the specifications to implement Mutual Assured Destruction - the answer is YES

    China wants a free hand in Asia, but is checked by American nuclear predominance and naval superiority.
    To overcome these it must build a blue water navy, which it is doing, and augment its nuclear forces to the point where they are powerful and survivable enough to neutralize even far greater American capabilities.
    To do so, they must keep missiles at sea in relatively invulnerable extended bastions within range of the entire U.S.
    And for this they must have multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) so they can triple the power of their arsenal and make economical the portage of missiles in submarines. Although they cannot do it themselves, to succeed they must miniaturize their warheads to pack them into sea-launched missiles, they must master the complicated carry-and-release system known as the bus, and they must have the machine tools to craft such things and the knowledge of composites and ceramics to design nose cones to shield them. As they are signatories of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, they must rely upon supercomputers for the design and simulation testing of their miniaturized warheads.
    President Clinton overruled various agencies and allowed the Chinese these computers, as he allowed them previously restricted machine tools from a defunct McDonnell Douglas production line in St. Louis, and as he intervened to protect the provision of American instruction in launching multiple communications satellites on one rocket: i.e. transferring the fundamentals of MIRVing and bus design.

    Conclusion - Obviously Guilty

    To help the Chinese check our main advantages over them is to set the stage for their challenge to us in Asia directly or through surrogates -- a situation in which the young Air Force cadets, when they are somewhat older, may find themselves in circumstances that we are pledged as a nation to help them avoid. It does not take a great deal of imagination to understand that their future has been betrayed. Were it simply bad policy, it would be unforgivable but it would not be impeachable. But the president of the United States, his party, and his campaigns -- prior to, during, and after these decisions -- have taken in a great deal of money from agents of the very same People's Republic of China. The network is well developed. It leads through Chinese Intelligence to the People's Liberation Army and presumably the gerontocracy in Peking, and it is not a right-wing hallucination, but has been described in detail on the front page of the Washington Post and in hearings before the Thompson committee of the United States Senate, and is based upon classified signals intelligence intercepts.

    Next to such enormity the Lewinsky affair pales in significance and, though in itself should have been sufficient for the removal of a president, must have been seen by this president as a magnificent distraction and the answer to his prayers. The Senate showed its characteristic resolve in killing the Thompson committee and taking no offense at being stiffed by scores of witnesses, which is strange for an assembly so conscious of its own dignity. Whether or not this is related to the fact that Republicans have been drawing from the wells of Taiwan since the days of Chiang Kai-shek is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the Republican majority, never mind the Democrats, failed in its duty to the country.

    And that is where Dunkirk comes in once again. Churchill had been prime minister for three weeks before the fighting retreat at Dunkirk. He was the author of the fighting, and Neville Chamberlain the author of the retreat. Had Churchill's skills and aggressive instincts been applied earlier there would have been no Dunkirk and there may have been no war. The British need not have been driven from France and the fighting disastrously prolonged. They need not have almost lost the war itself. The question was of generalship. What good are generals if they will not fight? Had Republicans not cowered behind every marble column, had they called out the president on such things as China and stood fast, they would have won the battle of public opinion over which all they have done is despair.

    In this, the House managers, with whom the Senate elders are so cross, can be likened to the soldiers of Calais. To block a German assault from the west upon the Dunkirk beaches, Churchill asked of the 30th Brigade in Calais that it would neither withdraw nor surrender, and it didn't. Commanded by a Brigadier Nicholson, units such as the Second King's Royal Rifles, the First Queen Victoria's Rifles, and the Sixth Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders waged a fierce and losing battle. They had little equipment and less ammunition. Their officers fought while wounded, until they died, in a chaos of bombing, armored attack, burning vehicles, shattered glass, artillery fire, and the bodies of the dead.

    The Germans arrogantly and accurately held out the alternatives of surrender or death, and though he knew their backs were to the sea and they were never to be relieved, Nicholson's reply was, "The answer is no as it is the British Army's duty to fight as well as it is the German's." To quote Gregory Blaxland, the historian of this great episode, "All that is certain is that there was no depression. The men were uplifted by that strange grandeur of spirit which defies rational explanation and can carry men above despair."