Over at HotAir, Dyer and Allah are asking about the development of the DF-21D Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM).
Hey, I'll steal from myself - here is my comment to them.It is a potential weapon that will need to be tested, evaluated and refined. As that takes place, other weapons will be developed to counter it either at its launching point or in the terminal phase.
Then it will have to be used in combat in order to know if it is effective.
130 years ago it was the torpedo boat. It did not mean the end of large surface ships.
105 years ago it was the Dreadnought. It did not mean the end of anything but large surface ships with and all gun battery.
90 years ago it was the aircraft. It did not mean the end of large surface ships.
70-80 years ago it was the dive bomber. It did not mean the end of surface ships or aircraft carriers.
60 years ago it was the nuclear weapon. If did not mean the end of surface ships or aircraft carriers.
40 years ago it was the anti-ship cruise missile. It did not mean the end of surface ships or aircraft carriers.
... and so today we are talking about Anti-ship cruise missiles.
There is an evolution and survival of the fittest in warfare. It is only a problem if ignored. It is only a reason to panic if you lack a historical perspective and a lack of confidence in your military to effectively meet a new threat ... at threat that is yet to be fully formed.The only thing needed here is to ask the CNO - what is your plan to address this possible threat? Are your priorities aligned with preserving your nation's ability to project power into the future?