Not all text is of equal provenance and equally informative. To argue otherwise is to discard conservative notions of critical thinking and to replace them with postmodern-deconstructionist "thinking."
Your thesis accuses the Right of being unduly alarmist about revolutionary technological upgrades in the military forces of avowed adversaries of our nation, when we have 34 items higher on some list of priorities we should be addressing for security.
The fact that you felt the urge to describe the Su-30MKK and the DF-31 as "revolutionary technological upgrades" proves that you're alarmist.
I haven't... yet. But, clearly Bill Gertz and his inside defense Dept. sources feel that these deployments are militarily significant. And it is reasonable to classify them as revolutionary compared, respectively, to their previous best technologies, such as the Mig-21s, and the 24 or so liquid-fueled CSS4 ICBMs. This is because they do offer substantial and undeniable operational improvements in their war-fighting potential..... which poses increased military stress against our allies, and hence us too...since it is well known we are no longer able to fight two major wars at a time. [With apologies to Donald Rumsfeld, who was speaking contrarily for good and sufficient reasons. But not truthfully.]