Jump to content

China Has ‘First-Strike’ Capability To Melt U.S. Power Grid With Electromagnetic Pulse Weapon


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2020/06/25/china-develops-first-strike-capability-with-electromagnetic-pulse/?fbclid=IwAR3thwLnIt4-WcPMitt9W5Nk3YIbsxUXsu6IcA_5sAH7qHPklLo97YlWQ2M#53a3e1aee190

Last week, the EMP Task Force on National and Homeland Security issued a scary report on China’s ability to conduct an Electromagnetic Pulse attack on the United States. The key takeaway, according to Dr. Peter Pry,
 executive director of the task force, is that China now has super-EMP weapons, knows how to protect itself against an EMP attack, and has developed protocols to conduct a first-strike attack, even as they deny they would ever do so.

According to the Center for Strategic International Studies, China has the most active ballistic missile development program in the world, so this is doubly troubling. China used stolen U.S. technology to develop at least three types of high-tech weapons to attack the electric grid and key technologies that could cause a surprise “Pearl Harbor” attack that could produce a deadly blackout to the entire country.

Dr. Pry outlines how China has built a network of satellites, high-speed missiles, and super-electromagnetic pulse weapons that could melt down our electric grid, fry critical communications, and even takeout the ability of our aircraft carrier groups to respond.

  Reveal hidden contents

Even more troubling, Dr. Pry found that China is eager to shoot first with “high-altitude electromagnetic pulse,” or HEMP, weapons launched from satellites, ships, and land.

“China’s military doctrine — including numerous examples presented here of using HEMP attack to win on the battlefield, defeat U.S. aircraft carriers, and achieve against the U.S. homeland a surprise ‘Pearl Harbor’ writ large — is replete with technical and operational planning consistent with a nuclear first-strike,” said Pry in his report.

Needless to say, we are not prepared for this.

  Reveal hidden contents

Sociologically, China seems to be moving into a more aggressive position globally, evidenced by their recent conflict with India and their aggression in the South China Sea with their east Pacific neighbors.

This may have been aggravated by China’s 1-child policy. Although the policy did reign in population growth (fertility rates dropped below two by 1990 and the present population is 1.3 billion), it gave rise to another problem – too few women.

Almost all cultures prefer a male as the first child and in China, the eldest male is expected to take care of his elderly parents. Therefore, the magnitude of female infanticide in China became astonishing in the decades between 1990 and 2010, when well over ten million female infants were killed. Only a relatively few found adopted homes in other countries.

China then changed to a 2-child policy, but the damage to an entire generation will not be so easily erased. The result was a skewed sex ratio in the generation born since 1980. Today, there are about 50 million more males than females. Just think of the states of Texas, New York and Ohio filled with just men.

The consequences of having too many uncoupled males in a society are worse than just making it difficult to find a mate. 

  Reveal hidden contents

tl;dr:  Chicom incels gonna use MJ to knock us back to the Stoner Age.

Edited by clapclapclap
Minor counterpoint: Nuclear MAD still in effect
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 4:40 PM, BurntEyes said:

China can't afford to shut down the US. We have economic mutually assured destruction.

 

Expand  

Yep. Plus, we're the ones always "projecting" military force everywhere. I don't blame the Chinese for wanting a deterrent. They don't gain anymore than we would by crippling or destroying another great power.

This isn't a big game of Risk. They're probably delighted to see us spending such an absurd amount on the military while they invest in their economic well being. That's were ascendancy will happen.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Maybe having the Texas power grid decoupled from the US grid will keep us from being turned into the Postman staring Kevin Costner (and Tom Petty). 

Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 4:48 PM, RomaVicta said:

Yep. Plus, we're the ones always "projecting" military force everywhere. I don't blame the Chinese for wanting a deterrent. They don't gain anymore than we would by crippling or destroying another great power.

This isn't a big game of Risk. They're probably delighted to see us spending such an absurd amount on the military while they invest in their economic well being. That's were ascendancy will happen.

Expand  

They do not need to spend as much because they steal vast amounts of technology from us and other western nations.

Their R&D depends on our openness and stupidity. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
  On 7/25/2020 at 4:38 PM, Armybrat said:

Hope we go on letting them think they have the upper hand, but they don’t.

Expand  

I know we like to think this, cuz ‘Merica. But why, exactly, do we think that we ALWAYS have the upper hand? Yeah we spend a lot of money on the military, but a lot of that is bloat. Our infrastructure has declined and our electrical grid is wide open to attack. All that military spending in the world has zero effect if every computer in the country is fried. 

Edited by SubliminalHorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Los Alamos knows they don’t. And that’s all I’ll say aboutthat.

But global economics will preclude any such attack. It would be the end of the PRC.

Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 4:57 PM, SubliminalHorn said:

I know we like to think this, cuz ‘Merica. But why, exactly, do we think that we ALWAYS have the upper hand? Yeah we spend a lot of money on the military, but a lot of that is bloat. Our infrastructure has declined and our electrical grid is wide open to attack. All that military spending in the world has zero effect if every computer in the country is fried. 

Expand  

I mean the only argument you could make is that our intelligence capability and cybersecurity might be behind China or Russia - but I seriously doubt that. 

In terms of conventional warfare capability the gulf between the US and whoever is next (again Russia or China I guess) is a joke. In terms of nuclear capability it's us and Russia. 

Posted

Cold War 2.0  

my big fear is that with the Russians there was still some cultural understanding due to all the shared history between the two blocs.  We were able to have at least some insight into each other’s unsaid motivations and how each of us would react to provocations. 
 

China has such a history separate from “The West” and self isolation that I’m worried this won’t be the case this go around. 

Posted

This is why continued global economic reliance is important for everyone. 

We've also shown China that we are fractured at the seams and about the most susceptible nation on the planet to a biological attack. Just this coronavirus is breaking us down worse than just about every other developed country.  

  • Like 2
Posted



  On 7/25/2020 at 4:57 PM, SubliminalHorn said:
I know we like to think this, cuz ‘Merica. But why, exactly, do we think that we ALWAYS have the upper hand?


Cuz dey stole all their good shit from us. Look at their carriers/jets. Any decent weapons were just stolen diagrams out of our engineers trashcans.
Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 4:57 PM, SubliminalHorn said:

I know we like to think this, cuz ‘Merica. But why, exactly, do we think that we ALWAYS have the upper hand? Yeah we spend a lot of money on the military, but a lot of that is bloat. Our infrastructure has declined and our electrical grid is wide open to attack. All that military spending in the world has zero effect if every computer in the country is fried. 

Expand  

And all of their work to build an economy with a decades-long gameplan is gone if they attack us.  Our economic policy lurches from quarter to quarter at times.  Their economic policy, for good or bad, is looking years down the road.  

Not to mention that a nuke attack, whether EMP-centric or not, is a nuke attack.  They can't hit every submarine and our silos are hardened against EMP.  There would be nukes launched on China.

This is just more posturing and is a deterrent to the US (and other nations).  We keep forgetting that they are projecting their agricultural and economic businesses in Africa - they intend on being a key player there, and having influence there, and protecting what they have there.

 

Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 5:53 PM, Stannis said:

The US Navy has 14 Ohio-Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarines.  Each one of those subs carries 20 Trident submarine-launched nuclear ballistic missiles.  Each of those 20 missiles is a multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV), meaning each of the 20 Trident missiles carries up to 12 nuclear warheads (that is, if one Trident missile is launched, it can independently deploy 12 nuclear bombs to 12 independent targets).  In short, our submarine-based strategic nuclear deterrent, by itself, is capable of vaporizing every soul in China many times over.  That doesn't even take into consideration the other two arms of our nuclear triad (land-based ICBMs and strategic bombers). 

I don't think China is going to be taking down our power grid any time soon.

Expand  

Fuck.  Yeah. 

  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 5:53 PM, Stannis said:

The US Navy has 14 Ohio-Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarines.  Each one of those subs carries 20 Trident submarine-launched nuclear ballistic missiles.  Each of those 20 missiles is a multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV), meaning each of the 20 Trident missiles carries up to 12 nuclear warheads (that is, if one Trident missile is launched, it can independently deploy 12 nuclear bombs to 12 independent targets).  In short, our submarine-based strategic nuclear deterrent, by itself, is capable of vaporizing every soul in China many times over.  That doesn't even take into consideration the other two arms of our nuclear triad (land-based ICBMs and strategic bombers). 

I don't think China is going to be taking down our power grid any time soon.

Expand  

Are the missles satellite guided? What if our satellites are taken out first, power grid second?

Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 5:53 PM, Stannis said:

The US Navy has 14 Ohio-Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarines.  Each one of those subs carries 20 Trident submarine-launched nuclear ballistic missiles.  Each of those 20 missiles is a multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV), meaning each of the 20 Trident missiles carries up to 12 nuclear warheads (that is, if one Trident missile is launched, it can independently deploy 12 nuclear bombs to 12 independent targets).  In short, our submarine-based strategic nuclear deterrent, by itself, is capable of vaporizing every soul in China many times over.  That doesn't even take into consideration the other two arms of our nuclear triad (land-based ICBMs and strategic bombers). 

I don't think China is going to be taking down our power grid any time soon.

Expand  

sexy american GIF

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 5:53 PM, Stannis said:

The US Navy has 14 Ohio-Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarines.  Each one of those subs carries 20 Trident submarine-launched nuclear ballistic missiles.  Each of those 20 missiles is a multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV), meaning each of the 20 Trident missiles carries up to 12 nuclear warheads (that is, if one Trident missile is launched, it can independently deploy 12 nuclear bombs to 12 independent targets).  In short, our submarine-based strategic nuclear deterrent, by itself, is capable of vaporizing every soul in China many times over.  That doesn't even take into consideration the other two arms of our nuclear triad (land-based ICBMs and strategic bombers). 

I don't think China is going to be taking down our power grid any time soon.

Expand  

Agree. The Northern Hemisphere would become a nuclear winter hellscape. Pure madness. 

  • Like 1
Posted

Me Chinese, me play joke. 

Me make you think everything a hoax. 

 

We're so vulnerable as a people now, I'm not sure if we respond in the same way y'all think. Something like losing the power grid would be the start of the end times. 

Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 8:23 PM, BigHorn'13 said:

We're so vulnerable as a people now, I'm not sure if we respond in the same way y'all think. Something like losing the power grid would be the start of the end times. 

Expand  

Taking out the US power grid with an EMP is a huge strategic attack that can potentially destroy the country (as we know it at the very least).  That's definitely a nuclear response.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 8:23 PM, BigHorn'13 said:

We're so vulnerable as a people now, I'm not sure if we respond in the same way y'all think. Something like losing the power grid would be the start of the end times. 

Expand  

Why? just because every person under 30 who doesn't work for a tire store can't change a flat tire without a phone is no reason to panic

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

I'm assuming we have some sort of anti-EMP weapon defense capability of our own?  One that we'll probably be giving to Russia for $50 and a handjob rather soon?  

Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 8:23 PM, BigHorn'13 said:

Me Chinese, me play joke. 

Me make you think everything a hoax. 

 

We're so vulnerable as a people now, I'm not sure if we respond in the same way y'all think. Something like losing the power grid would be the start of the end times. 

Expand  

Any ambiguity to what our response would be is dangerous.  If we plan on responding to an emp attack with nukes, it needs to be known. 
 

that said, if we don’t plan on responding with nukes, maybe the ambiguity is a good thing. 
 

happy I’m not in charge of defense policy.   I bet it’s a stressful job.  Thankfully we probably have top men on it.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
  On 7/25/2020 at 8:31 PM, MadBurgerMaker said:

Taking out the US power grid with an EMP is a huge strategic attack that can potentially destroy the country (as we know it at the very least).  That's definitely a nuclear response.  

Expand  

We've certainly threatened the use of nuclear weapons over far less so this would be a real moment of truth.

I'm a little concerned we're just moving onto our next bogeyman... Russia, The Terror, now China. We will always have an enemy to justify the defense spending. 

Edited by B00M
Redundancy dept called
Posted (edited)
  On 7/25/2020 at 11:32 PM, Xian said:

Any ambiguity to what our response would be is dangerous.  If we plan on responding to an emp attack with nukes, it needs to be known. 
 

happy I’m not in charge of defense policy.   I bet it’s a stressful job.  Thankfully we probably have top men on it.  

Expand  

Obligatory....

 

58494539-8D96-4ABB-83DA-4488473A77A2.png

Edited by Armybrat
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 10:41 PM, mulletpelini said:

Why? just because every person under 30 who doesn't work for a tire store can't change a flat tire without a phone is no reason to panic

Expand  

Why are we vulnerable right now as US citizens? Is that a serious, for real for real, question?

 

And FTR I'm over 30, don't work at a tire store and know how to change a tire without the assistance from a person or the internet. 

Posted (edited)

this shit is coming. yes, its a cold war. and yes, i hope it stays like that. 

but - that means proxy wars and plenty of shit. i can easily see infrastrucutre attacks in various sattelite players here - Indonesia, Aussie, Taiwan, etc. 

actually, i think the first line is cyber attacks on finance. already happening. the key to this cold war is for the US and allies (Japan, ANZ, SE Asia, Europe I hope) to respond in kind. having subs with nukes IS NOT responding in kind. that is last measure e/o world shit. we need to ensure we can attack their grid, take down the great firewall, make bank accounts go to zero and the like. its a nicely managed tit for tat as our economies uncouple and our poors revolt. 

India and SE Asia are so important. there needs to be coordination there against anything that happens from China. 

Just today again, the Aussies have announced that "there is no legal ground for China to claim the SCS". i fear now this must be a constant effort and use of resources to sway this and the world's view against China

Edited by staboner
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
  On 7/25/2020 at 5:53 PM, Stannis said:

The US Navy has 14 Ohio-Class Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarines.  Each one of those subs carries 20 Trident submarine-launched nuclear ballistic missiles.  Each of those 20 missiles is a multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV), meaning each of the 20 Trident missiles carries up to 12 nuclear warheads (that is, if one Trident missile is launched, it can independently deploy 12 nuclear bombs to 12 independent targets).  In short, our submarine-based strategic nuclear deterrent, by itself, is capable of vaporizing every soul in China many times over.  That doesn't even take into consideration the other two arms of our nuclear triad (land-based ICBMs and strategic bombers). 

I don't think China is going to be taking down our power grid any time soon.

Expand  

24 missile tubes.  

  • Hook 'Em 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...