China's Nukes

"The commentary in the official Liberation Army Daily also reiterated China's longstanding stated policy that it 'will never be the first to use nuclear weapons at any time and under any circumstances.' Written by a retired general, the piece follows last week's international nuclear-security summit in Washington and comes amid questions in the US, Japan, and elsewhere about the intent behind China's efforts to strengthen its nuclear forces", Gordon Fairclough at the WSJ, 23 April 2010, link:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704830404575199720063121034.html.

"I first began working on strategic arm control with the Russians in 1970, an effort that led to the first Strategic Arms Limitation Agreement with Moscow two years later. ... The same answer holds true for the new START agreement: The US is far better off with this treaty than without it. It strengthens the security of the US and out allies and promotes strategic stability between the world's two major nuclear powers. ... First, it limits significantly US and Russian strategic nuclear aresenals and establishes an extensive verification regime to ensure that Russia is complying with its treaty obligations. ... Second, the treaty preserves the US nuclear aresenal as a vital pillar of our nation's and our allies security posture. ... Third, abd related, the treaty is buttressed by credible modernization plans and long-term funding for the US nuclear weapons stockpile and the infrastructure that supports it. ... Fourth, the treaty will not constrain the US from developing and deploying defenses against ballistic missioles, as we have made clear to the Russian government. ... The new START treaty has the unanimous support of America's military leadership", my emphasis, Robert Gates at the WSJ, 13 May 2010: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703339304575240164048611360.html.

Can anyone play this game? You may as well look at goat entrails as attempt to ascertain China's "intent". Only capabilities count!

Gates is our Secretary of Defense. I don't remember the last time I read so many nonsequiters in as short a piece. That our military leadership unanimously supports this only convinces me they are a bunch of ticket-punching cowards. Why START? To give the Obamites a basis for not: moderninzing our nuclear weapons or developing ballistic missile defenses. Why do we need this thing if we have this wonderful piece of paper? Neville Chamberlain lives! How many French generals thought the Maginot Line would protect France?