Let's all take a collective breath from alarmism and appreciate the strength of the US Navy, and our Strategic Forces (i.e. the triad)Counterfactual in some ways as we explore your position below:
We still have peacemaker and minuteman III silos throughout the upper midwest...
False with regard to the MX "Peacekeeper" missile. Silos, maybe, but deployed Missiles? Guess again.
We used to have 100 deployed. Now? Zero.
And Bush isn't content to stop with dismantling the MX, but where we once had 1,000 Minutemen IIIs, Xlinton retired approx. 300 and W retired 150 Minutemen, and is seriously planning to retire yet another 100 Minuteman III missiles.
and the last time I looked we hadnt retired all our ballistic missile submarines
So dismantling over a quarter of them and converting them to tactical SLCM use only doesn't count I guess.
or our strategic bombers.
All B-1Bs converted to tactical usage only by Xlinton back in 1997. And then W had half decommissioned outright.
As for this point you make, Please save the tailored facts for someone who is not well versed in the totality of what the US already has in its arsenal.
It looks like you are not so well-versed after all.
You could use a refresher course. And you prove it when you cite as evidence anything from these anti-defense knuckle-heads:
Robert Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council and Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists in a study published in the latest issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
Let's hear from the Nuclear Freeze and MoveOn.org crowd's ideological parents. That's who these self-appointed experts really are...that's who you are giving credence to. Richard Fisher effectively just debunked them if you had been reading. Along with their buddies in the Xlinton-appointed DOD Panda-Hugging moles and fellow-travellers that have been allowed to "burrow-in".
A'hem. Ever heard of Ronald Montaperto?
Instead you show you likely didn't when you said this:
The DOD has recognized the threat China is emerging into, and I have watched plenty of testimonials on C-SPAN to know...no one has "rosey" glasses on it.
The DOD is huge. Some get it, some don't. It's all a matter of actual position. There are some who don't have the rose-colored glasses on, but they are not getting past the those who do...and are filtering out the bad news. It isn't getting up the chain of command. Evidence? Just look at W's policies. They reflect that failure to get the bad news. China is not standing still.
And as for the Chinese subs...I'm afraid you are seriously dated, and your out-of-date prejudices lead you to misunderstand the dynamics of the situations, and you are clearly unaware of their great strides in making quieting improvements.
As James Hackett reported:
A newer domestic-built submarine is the Song. The first prototype failed and had to be redesigned, but the bugs seem to have been worked out. Song-class submarines reportedly are equipped with Air Independent Propulsion, enabling them to be very quiet and remain underwater for weeks. And they carry modern anti-ship cruise missiles. Song-class submarines are in production, with seven currently in service. Last year, The Washington Times reported the appearance of yet another new non-nuclear Chinese submarine, the Yuan-class, which appears to be a completely new design combining elements of China's Song and Russia's Kilo submarines. Two Yuan-class boats have been launched to date. Over the last three years, China has launched 13 new submarines from three different shipyards.
But most notable was Beijing's purchase from Russia of four Kilo-class diesel-electric submarines, two of which are Project 636 type. These are excellent submarines, quieter than most, and have modern sensors and torpedoes. China has ordered eight more advanced Kilos, described by the Russians as "state-of-the-art Russian submarines." They will carry modern long-range anti-ship missiles, and are to be delivered by 2007.
Beijing also is improving its nuclear-powered submarines. For years China had six nuclear-powered subs, five Han-class attack submarines and one Xia-class ballistic missile submarine, which were very noisy and leaked radiation, among other problems. But the nuclear reactors have been rebuilt and French electronics and sonar equipment added. They now carry submarine-launched cruise missiles.
The first of China's newest nuclear attack submarine, Type 093, is nearing completion and the second is under construction, with two more planned. Built with Russian help, Type 093 is a major technological advance over the Han-class and will carry China's new HN-3 land-attack cruise missile.
Based largely on Russian technology, China last year launched a new Type 094 nuclear-powered missile submarine that will carry 16 JL-2 underwater-launched missiles, versions of China's DF-31 intercontinental ballistic missile. China plans to extend the JL-2's range beyond 8,000 miles and is expected to equip it with multiple warheads and penetration aids. This missile will be able to reach the U.S. mainland from China's coastal waters.
Time to take off your rose-colored glasses, and stop berating those you differ with as "alarmists". Remember, Neville Chamberlain, and Stanley Baldwin all said the same thing about Winston Churchill.
The Song class are decent...but not super. The Kilos are dangerous and they will ultimatley have 12 of them, purchased from the Russians. The Yuan class appear to be a technological advance and indiginous Chinese update to the Kilo so they will also be very dangerous in the litoral waters.
The Type 093 boats may well be already launched (I believe they are) and they are thought to be the quivalent of the Russian Victor IIIs, which is a huge inprovement over the current Han class. Roughly equivalent to our initial LA class boats perhaps.
Here is a pic of what some think is both of the new type 93s:
The Type 94 SSBN is new and will be dangerous simply because of the JL-2 missiles it carries. It will give them the ability to hit large portions of the US from their own coastal waters, or even from their ports, inlets, and harbors...making it difficult for our own subs to interdict them before a launch.