There are those who say that Ronald Reagan's "Star Wars" program was nothing but disinformation to sow fear and confusion in the Soviet Union. Now the US has "C-PGS" (Conventional Prompt Global Strike), an equally unknown quantity but this time with China in the crosshairs.

One senior US policy analyst thinks that Beijing may be both confused and concerned about C-PGS: "Confused because I don't think anyone could explain to them what [C-PGS] entailed and perhaps still cannot with any fidelity, and concerned because it is seen as another aspect of American hegemony and space domination plans, and because it potentially changes US nuclear strategy in unanticipated and perhaps undesirable ways."

Just like "Star Wars".

For more, see the article in atimes.com here: atimes.com/atimes/China/LB04Ad01.html

or in atimes.net here: www.atimes.net/China/uss-strike-threat-c...china-off-guard.html

why does a dog lick its balls? because it can.... if you lived in a nation that spent such an insane amount of money on killing people and blowing things up you'd inevitably try and come up with something like this...

IMHO, that Star Wars had some meaningful impact in the collapse of CCCP is fairy tale spun by the campaign to deify Reagan. Yes Reagan did contribute, by helping the Taliban against the Red Army, but Star Wars? Silly.

I don't think China will be shaken or stirred over one Pentagon "review". A couple points:

1. it took weeks to mobilize a bombing campaign on Afghanistan (not going to comment on its success, just discussing time to mobilize), and many months to mobilize a ground campaign. (I don't buy the idea that the delay to invade Iraq was entirely due to international politics). If Pentagon propose to shorten the mobilization time by say 10-fold, I could consider that serious. But to suggest it can be shortened to 1 hour is an 1000x to 10,000x improvement. Just a pie-in-the-sky fantasy.

2. who would pay for CPGS? Star Wars was self-financed (and not coincidentally fizzled out in less than 10 years) but China isn't stupid enough to finance both sides of an arms race.

IIRC Peter Brown also wrote the article about China sinking a US carrier. It's amusing but not to be taken too seriously.