What Should Really Alarm Us About China’s New “Hypersonic” Missile Test

10/24/2021 11:38:00 AM

It’s not the test itself.

We’ve been down this road before.

It’s not the test itself.

In other words, ICBMs, which have been around for 60 years, are also hypersonic missiles.(.New Zealand, who had not played in the U.Oct 22nd 2021.

Advertisement The United States, Russia, and China are developing genuinely new types of hypersonic missiles.One type would be an ICBM fitted with a non-nuclear warhead.The S&P 500 technology sector is up 6% month-to-date.In the U.Will Jordan scored three tries, Richie Mo'unga added another and kicked nine conversions for an All Blacks team that ran in a total of 16 tries, including nine in the first half alone.S."The question then becomes, can they keep it up?” said Sameer Samana, senior global market strategist at Wells Fargo Investment Institute.version (which doesn’t yet exist—none of these things yet exist), this would fit into the “ Prompt Global Strike ” program, which would allow the U.

S.At the same time, they named “long tech” as the market’s most crowded trade for the fourth straight month." Prior to the start, American captain Bryce Campbell dropped to one knee at the halfway line as he presented a white, No.to hit targets anywhere on earth, very quickly, without having to resort to nuclear weapons.Another type of hypersonic missile would be a glider, which flies the entire way through the atmosphere (rather than arcing into outer space), thus evading certain kinds of warning radar."If.However, the Chinese missile in question is neither of these things.jersey in honor of Sean Wainui, the Maori All Blacks player who died in a car crash on Monday.In the test, it released a “glide vehicle” only as the missile approached the target..

Through most of its flight path, it behaved the same way as a ballistic missile, except that it orbited Earth at a lower altitude.In other words, if the U.The prospect of U.'TOUGH LESSON' The Eagles, who before Saturday's match had faced the All Blacks three times in test rugby, were totally outplayed but did make history as they recorded the team's first-ever try against the most successful team in international rugby.S.bought more sensors to detect missiles coming at us from all directions, the GBMD would have no more trouble shooting down this missile than it would have shooting down other kinds of missiles.government regulatory intervention, also hangs over these behemoth companies, so investors will be keen for any insight.Advertisement Advertisement So what are the Chinese up to? It’s hard to tell.halfback Nate Augspurger broke from a ruck andslipped by Sam Whitelockbefore a burst of speedtook him past Damian McKenzie while the diving Mo'unga also could not catch him as he scored under the posts to take the hosts to 59-7 at the break.

One possibility is that they’re doing just what some fear they’re doing—they’re trying to undermine the U.S.S.missile defense system, whose capabilities they are drastically overestimating.read more A sustained rise in Treasury yields, which move inversely to bond prices, may also pose a longer-term threat to technology and other growth shares.The All Blacks had their attack firing but were ultimately unable to eclipse their record test victory, which was set at the 1995 World Cup in South Africa when they beat Japan 145-17.Some nuclear strategists have long warned that missile-defense systems only encourage adversaries to build more—or more sophisticated—offensive missiles.This is why the United States and the Soviet Union signed the Anti-Ballistic-Missile Treaty in 1972—to preempt an offense-defense arms race.The yield on the 10-year Treasury note has risen about 35 basis points in the past month to 1.

President George W." Billed as the 1874 Cup, which is a reference to the first account of organised rugby being played in the United States, the match was designed to grow interest in a nation hoping to stage a future Rugby World Cup.Bush abrogated that treaty in 2001."It hasn’t been all good news on the earnings front," wrote Art Hogan, chief market strategist at National Securities.Ever since, the U.S." Reporting by Lewis Krauskopf in New York Editing by Ira Iosebashvili and Matthew Lewis Our Standards: More from Reuters Sign up for our newsletter Subscribe for our daily curated newsletter to receive the latest exclusive Reuters coverage delivered to your inbox.Sign up.has spent about $10 billion a year developing various types of missile-defense systems, most of them designed to deal with possible threats from the likes of North Korea and Iran.

These systems have had little or no ability to deal with a major attack from Russia or China.Advertisement Advertisement But tell that to the Russians and Chinese.This issue may seem strange from the get-go—but so is the logic of nuclear deterrence, where a good defense can augment a good offense.The worry is that Country A could launch a nuclear first-strike against Country B; then, when Country B retaliates with its surviving weapons, Country A will shoot them down with its missile-defense system.In this scenario, missile defense is the back-up shield that wipes out, or greatly reduces, a country’s ability to respond to a nuclear attack.

(This is not fanciful.To many in the U.S.military in the 1950s and ’60s, the whole point of developing missile defenses was to enhance America’s first-strike capability.) The steps that China is now taking in nuclear weapons—this hybrid hypersonic-glide missile, as well as 200 silos that it’s dug, possibly to house 200 new ICBMs—could all be interpreted as steps to neutralize America’s missile-defense system and, therefore, to preserve its own nuclear deterrent.

Advertisement Advertisement Should we, therefore, do nothing? John Pike, director of the private research firm GlobalSecurity.org, says that as long as we’re steeped in the bizarre logic of nuclear deterrence, the U.S.“has to address every countermeasure that China demonstrates, even though China does not deploy everything it demonstrates.” (Pike doesn’t necessarily endorse the bizarre logic.

) In this sense, China may be playing a diabolical game—pressuring the U.S.to spend tens of billions of dollars on some new technology in order to defuse a demo that China doesn’t plan to turn into a weapon anyway.Some are taking the bait.Michael Gallagher, a Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, told FT that the Chinese missile test should serve as a “call to action,” warning, “The People’s Liberation Army now has an increasingly credible capability to undermine our missile defenses and threaten the American homeland.

” Gallagher seems to believe—as do many, for reasons that aren’t quite clear—that we actually have an effective missile-defense system that protects the United States.He also is wishfully blind to the fact that “the American homeland” and all the world’s homelands have been under threat of destruction since the nuclear age began in 1945—or at least since the missile age began in the early 1960s.Advertisement Advertisement Advertisement It is a terrifying thought that enough nuclear weapons exist to destroy all life on the planet several times over—and that only a small fraction of these weapons are enough to kill most Americans and wipe out everything we hold dear.It is a fact that we would all like to ignore, to the extent we’re forced to think about it.Hence our fascination with missile-defense systems and the free ride that Congress has given the Missile Defense Agency all these years, despite the pathetic test record of its products.

The problem is that a good defense, even if we succeeded in building one, would only prompt our adversaries to step up their offense—which China seems to be doing (as is Russia).Advertisement.

Read more:
Slate »
Loading news...
Failed to load news.

state propaganda

Wall St Week Ahead Tech giants' earnings may be another test for markets at new highsInvestors are homing in on a flood of earnings reports from Wall Street’s tech and Internet giants, as the high-growth stocks that have led markets higher for years face pressures from regulation, supply-chain snags and rising Treasury yields.

New Zealand rout United States 104-14 in Washington test matchNew Zealand got back to winning ways as they romped to a record 104-14 victory over the United States in Washington on Saturday in a lopsided test match in which the Eagles at least secured their first-ever try against the All Blacks. LoL I guess the US is not really into rugby 14 is a good score for us team

“It’s far more damning than was expected”—Brazil’s inquiry into Jair Bolsonaro’s covid calamityBrazil’s congress has levelled damning accusations at President Jair Bolsonaro for his handling of covid-19. “The Intelligence” asks hoganem whether they will stick hoganem SOSBrazil impeachment StopBolsonaro JailBolsonaro IntlCrimCourt HagueInstitute NadiaMarx74

Katie Price details special relationship with Harvey in brutally honest bookNew book Katie Price: Harvey and Me gets to the nitty gritty about what life is really like for the former glamour model and her 19-year-old disabled son Stop writing about this person, if she cared about her family she wouldn’t do half the things that she does. Bull 💩

New Findings on What Victims of Abuse Really BelieveUnderstanding why some people feel drawn to unreliable, dishonest, manipulative, or cruel intimate partners is the first step toward positive change. ArashEmamzadeh explains. Strippers in Bars love these relationship Psych analysis stories

Reconciliation negotiations test new clout of caregiving advocatesThe Covid-19 pandemic thrust the role of caregiving into the national spotlight, with Democrats promising an enormous injection of funding for everything from paid family leave to home care services as they try to overhaul American social policy. Ridiculous! The real problem is probably the need for both parents to work outside the home. We do NOT need the Federal government taking care of our children. Please just stop and think about this ridiculous shit before you say it. How about you ask yourself…is this a sustainable policy? it's issue of every parent, not women's only