Cain on China: “They’re trying to develop nuclear capability”; Update: Cain getting a bad rap?

posted at 9:05 pm on November 1, 2011 by Allahpundit

Via Ace, skip ahead to 11:30 or so for the key bit. The quote:

HERMAN CAIN: I do view China as a potential military threat to the United States.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And what could you do as president to head that off?

HERMAN CAIN: My China strategy is quite simply outgrow China. It gets back to economics. China has a $6 trillion economy and they’re growing at approximately 10 percent. We have a $14 trillion economy — much bigger — but we’re growing at an anemic 1.5, 1.6 percent. When we get our economy growing back at the rate of 5 or 6 percent that it has the ability to do, we will outgrow China.

And secondly, we already have superiority in terms of our military capability, and I plan to get away from making cutting our defense a priority and make investing in our military capability a priority, going back to my statement: peace through strength and clarity. So yes they’re a military threat. They’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability and they want to develop more aircraft carriers like we have. So yes, we have to consider them a military threat.

The phrasing’s slightly ambiguous so it becomes a rorschach test on Cain. If you like him and trust that he has a grasp on policy, you’ll think he’s referring here to developing nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. The Pentagon’s chief worry right now is China building any sort of carrier, not necessarily a nuclear one, so this would be an odd bit of specificity from Cain. But fair enough — a Chinese nuclear carrier would indeed be a big deal. If you don’t like him and/or don’t trust him on policy, you’ll think he’s referring here to China developing a general nuclear capability, i.e. nuclear weapons. Which, as pretty much everyone in the world except maybe him knows, they’ve already had for decades. The way the sentence is phrased, with the two parts separated by “and,” it sounds like he’s distinguishing the nuclear component conceptually from the carriers. Could a guy who didn’t know what the “right of return” was and who whiffed on the biggest softball question ever about Gitmo really not know that China has a nuclear deterrent? I’m thinking … maybe. Although it won’t be spun that way tomorrow, needless to say.

The fact that we’re about to have a debate in the comments about whether he knows China has nukes doesn’t bode well for the general election campaign against Obama.

Watch Cain Confident He Can Win Nomination, Says Harassment Claims Are ‘Baseless’ on PBS. See more from PBS NewsHour.

Update: I didn’t see it last night, but here’s what commenter Jason Coleman had to say about Cain’s background with China and nukes:

Herman Cain spent the Vietnam war evaluating the capabilities of the Chinese to deliver a nuclear weapon onto the heads of our forces in South Vietnam.

He examined the test launches of the Dongfeng 1 (SS-1) and plotted out the trajectories for a 500kg warheads.

When China started testing the Dongfeng 2 (CSS-1) Cain plotted out the trajectories and capabilities of it’s delivery of 15 kiloton nuclear weapons.

Both of these missiles were provided to the PRC by the Soviets, Cain analysed data from the Russian test launches and determined the risk to U.S. troops in SE Asia.

Cain also observed the development of China’s first domestically produced missile, Dongfeng 3 (CSS-2) and plotted out it’s use with China’s 15-20KT fissile devices as well as China’s new thermonuclear devices.

Finally, Cain was involved in the determination that China’s Dongfeng 4 (CSS-3) was capable of delivering both fissile and thermonuclear devices to both Moscow and Guam as well as cover the entire deployment of U.S. forces in SE Asia.

Cain is well aware of China’s nuclear missile capability, the only reasonable conclusion is that Cain was indeed referring to China’s attempts to develop and sail their first nuclear aircraft carrier and their attempts to develop more dangerous nuclear cruisers.

I would have broken this out into a separate post except that, after googling, I can’t find anything to confirm Coleman’s claims that Cain spent time on Chinese nukes while he worked on ballistics in the Navy. I e-mailed Coleman to ask for his source but haven’t heard back. He mentioned in another comment last night that some of this is in Cain’s book; I haven’t read it yet but anyone who has is welcome to confirm or deny. Cain’s website says of his time working for the Navy, “Herman continued his education by earning his Master’s degree in computer science from Purdue University while working full-time developing fire control systems for ships and fighter planes for the Department of the Navy,” but Coleman claimed in his second comment that that description is incomplete. If so, I’m surprised Cain hasn’t talked more about his Navy work as a foreign-policy credential. We’ve heard endlessly about Pillsbury and Godfather’s Pizza, but the only time I remember him talking at any length about his Navy work was when Lawrence O’Donnell tried to demagogue him for being some sort of draft dodger. (He told O’Donnell he worked on a “rocket-assisted projectile.”) In any case, there’s at least some reason to doubt the theory that Cain didn’t know about China’s nuke stockpile. Duly noted.

Update: Jason Coleman e-mails to say that some of the details he provided are in Cain’s book, some have been gleaned from bits of info dropped by Cain on the trail, and some he knows from chatting with Cain’s former colleagues. He has no online links to point me too (Cain’s work for the Navy long predated the Internet, obviously) but will send them along if he finds any.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6

I thought one of the “Is he/she a rock solid conservative” test questions was to know something about foreign policy.

Palin saw Russia and Cain sees empty silos…….

Perry will eat him alive on this one at the next debate….. that is if Perry has the guts to show….

True Conservativeville is looking pretty gloomy today …. garadasil and free tuition for the masses and a gaffe about China’s nukes….

We need a hero… casting paging Mitt Romney…

Bradky on November 2, 2011 at 10:17 AM

Oh my God. What is it with this guy?

NoStoppingUs on November 2, 2011 at 10:21 AM

TOAST.

ouldbollix on November 2, 2011 at 10:52 AM

There was a time when we got constant warnings and updates on China’s nuclear ability, and then it just stopped around the year 2000. There was no final accounting, at least not in th popular media. Then it was North Korea, and now we don’t hear updates on them anymore.

Buddahpundit on November 2, 2011 at 10:59 AM

I’m starting to think my fellow conservatives WANT to lose. Last time, they went stupid on me and nominated McCain, now these dummies are pushing this fool into first place.

Wake up!!! This is going to screw us pretty soon.

TheBlueSite on November 2, 2011 at 11:05 AM

Oh my, he is done.

rjoco1 on November 2, 2011 at 11:09 AM

Those who think Cain doesn’t know that China is a nuclear power yet, are just as bad as the nutroots at dailykos. Unhinged. Sad to say, that includes Ace, Allah, Tattler and others.

G. Charles on November 2, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Can I just say……. NEWT!!

Seriously, everyone move away from Cain. Newt’s divorces are going to be a lot easier to deal with than all the mis steps Cain is going to make between now and next November.

grahsco on November 2, 2011 at 11:27 AM

The way the sentence is phrased, with the two parts separated by “and,” it sounds like he’s distinguishing the nuclear component conceptually from the carriers.

Sounds like one train of thought to me. Did his say …and… or … , and…? a comma before … and.. would indicate two separate but related thoughts.

I’m confident that someone who has a history of working with the Navy was talking about China and nuclear aircraft carriers, just as I’m confident that someone Cain’s age knows that China has nuclear weapons.

Texas Gal on November 2, 2011 at 11:34 AM

Those who think Cain doesn’t know that China is a nuclear power yet, are just as bad as the nutroots at dailykos. Unhinged. Sad to say, that includes Ace, Allah, Tattler and others.

G. Charles on November 2, 2011 at 11:23 AM

sort of like those who really believe Obama thinks there are 57 states?

Bradky on November 2, 2011 at 11:35 AM

Oh my, he is done.

rjoco1 on November 2, 2011 at 11:09 AM

Ahhh, yes, every story out of the MSM shows he is inept, incapable of leading a scout troop, let alone a country, the same with Perry, Romney, Bachman, Newt, and of course just recently Rubio…
You guys just don’t see the pattern do you? You are so easily manipulated, molded, led…geee, I wonder how Obama ever got elected…

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 11:38 AM

“I’m reinvesting profits to develop my business”; of course that must mean there is zero business whatsoever right?

“We need to develop our natural resources”; of course that means we must use zero natural resources now, right?

“In physical therapy, I’m working to develop the muscles of my shoulder”; before PT, I must have just been a skeleton covered with skin, right?

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Romney former boyfriend , Allahpundit (wouldnt surprise anyone) needs to come up with an actual gaffe , not one where you have to read something into a non gaffe.

Cain doesn’t say China has no nuke and he doesn’t say he worried about they will someday get nukes.

This is just more proof that the “conservative ” bloggers we read are really no different than the Obama campaign team

LeeSeneca on November 2, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Oh my God. What is it with this guy?

NoStoppingUs on November 2, 2011 at 10:21 AM

The poster child for having their minds molded…nostoppingus, he is the one who was against Cain and the sexual charges, no, the sexual intimidation…no then it was he was not prepared and no sexual charges…well whatever the MSM comes up with, he stands with them…you guys are so easily led….hey, look at the shiny object, Rubio overstated his history, Perry has a rock, no Perry is a racist, Bachmann can’t debate, Perry can’t debate, Cain can’t debate…everyone is a loser, every single conservative, imagine the odds…so easy to manipulate you guys.
You should try standing up the the MSM someday and tell them to shove it, a bunch of lying low life journalist creeps, pushing the liberal agenda…except this time, they are right on about Cain, yep, this time they are taking the conservative line, and being honest, yep, sure they are.

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 11:44 AM

This is just more proof that the “conservative ” bloggers we read are really no different than the Obama campaign team

LeeSeneca on November 2, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Anything to move their agenda…anything…and the agenda just happens to line up with the agenda of the MSM, just a coincidence, I am sure.

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Newt’s divorces are going to be a lot easier to deal with than all the mis steps Cain is going to make between now and next November.

grahsco on November 2, 2011 at 11:27 AM

You must not know much about the marriages, if you think the divorces are the biggest part of Newt’s problem.

Newt can get out from under the first divorce by putting his daughter out there for the media to savage. Then that brings up door number 2 which is the conditions surrounding Newt’s first marriage.

If he gets past that, he has to deal with the conditions of his third marriage.

You must not know too much about Newt’s problems. They shot out the first divorce, and Newt caved and left the House in disgrace, they never even loaded the next to bits of mass media ammo, let alone used them.

If Newt breaks 15% polling, you’ll see the first and third marriages, not divorces, being used against him to great effect.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Newt’s problems are just limited to his marriage and extramarital affairs, they are related to his role in leading the charge against Clinton for his Monica problem at during the same time. I understand that Newt has worked hard to replace his older base with a younger base, but the older base won’t elect him. He’s gonna have to out live them in order to get elected again.

Texas Gal on November 2, 2011 at 11:55 AM

are AREN’T just limited

Texas Gal on November 2, 2011 at 11:56 AM

What happened to family values? Did that go the same way as illegal immigration?

This primary has shown me many conservatives wouldn’t hesitate to drop their conservative values if it would mean they have a better defense of their pet candidate. Newt, Perry, Romney included.

I thought conservatives were better than that, I’m disappointed.

haner on November 2, 2011 at 12:02 PM

grahsco on November 2, 2011 at 11:27 AM

+1
It really is time people took a serious second look at Newt. He’s got personal history, but it’s a lot easier to get past problems that have nothing to do with the job than huge problems on things that comprise almost all of the job.

galenrox on November 2, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Just to be clear, who exactly did Obama destroy in debates during the Democrat primaries? Did he really, or was he just as full of BS as he is now but the media just went all doe eyed on him and declared him the winner just ’cause he’s so darned eloquent and a snappy dresser? I say the latter. “Debates” these days are more like plays. The best actor wins. So I don’t put much stock in Obama’s debating prowess. That said, Cain cannot continue to shoot from the hip and not take care in his words. The phrase “trying to develop nuclear capability” by itself is troublesome. It would shock me to learn he really didn’t know that they were nuclear capable long, long ago.

And all you who like to throw words around like “moron” or “dolt” or “idiot”, look in the mirror and check that arrogance. Those of you with master’s degrees in computer science and a history of success in business such as Cain’s can cast the first stone. I don’t understand that kind of snotty, juvenile commenting.

BillyWilly on November 2, 2011 at 12:16 PM

He said: ” They’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability and they want to develop more aircraft carriers like we have.”

He said “capability” which includes strategic/tactical planning and more sophisticated production and delivery systems. I see nothing contradictory in this statement based on China’s current nuclear status.

rplat on November 2, 2011 at 12:20 PM

BillyWilly on November 2, 2011 at 12:16 PM

I think your point is fair. He’s clearly a smart guy, he wouldn’t have made it as far as he has if he wasn’t. The problem is just that he seemingly knows close to nothing about most of the things one deals with as President. I’m not comfortable with a President who comes in completely green on foreign policy (hell, Obama had 2 years on the foreign affairs committee and he’s been an absolute catastrophe).

galenrox on November 2, 2011 at 12:24 PM

It’s time to gently lead this man off stage.

Mason on November 2, 2011 at 12:30 PM

Newt can get out from under the first divorce by putting his daughter out there for the media to savage. Then that brings up door number 2 which is the conditions surrounding Newt’s first marriage.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 11:46 AM

You mean the first daughter Newt didn’t even pay child support for?

Knucklehead on November 2, 2011 at 12:31 PM

You mean the first daughter Newt didn’t even pay child support for?

Knucklehead on November 2, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Yes, her. Without her out there in the public (and her subsequent destruction) Newt will never be able to counter the “divorced his wife on death bed with Cancer” meme. NOTE: She did not have cancer, was not on her death bed, and she asked for the divorce.

Even if he does convince his daughter to go out and get savaged by the media, Newt then has to face the second personal problem which has never been hashed out publicly:

The conditions of his first marriage.

If he gets past that, he has to face the next problem:

The conditions of his third marriage.

I personally think the second is worse than the third, but when you put high office in the mix again, the third becomes more important.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Ahhh, yes, every story out of the MSM shows he is inept, incapable of leading a scout troop, let alone a country, the same with Perry, Romney, Bachman, Newt, and of course just recently Rubio…
You guys just don’t see the pattern do you? You are so easily manipulated, molded, led…geee, I wonder how Obama ever got elected…

Yep. The MSM are fully part of the Obama/Democrat machine, so expect more and more of this. What’s utterly bizarre is how so many people here on HA are Henny Penny Perfectionists — “Oh no, such and such a candidate made a gaffe…or was caught out and isn’t perfect. Quick, abandon him!! We MUST HAVE PERFECTION!!”

Why would you dump someone like Cain who is rock solid on the things that really matter, like the debt, taxes, limiting the scope and power of government, just because of this?? Heck, Obama has set the bar REALLY low. The man had ZERO foreign policy credentials before he became president, consisting of a single trip to Russia to tag along on a Lugar-driven loose nukes bill activity. So quit arm waving about this stuff.

That having been said, Cain needs to take a few days off from campaigning and go through a policy issues fresher on some of this key stuff and make sure he’s ready for answers out of the blue on the important ones and limit the opportunity for the MSM to try and create him into being a fool or a dunce…which they will try to do to any and all GOP front runners, btw.

EasyEight on November 2, 2011 at 1:09 PM

So now that even Ace has backed away from this BS story I’m assuming AP will do the same?

Judging from how strong the stupid was on this idiotic post, I can’t wait to see how the right is going to shoot themselves in the foot closer to election day.

MisterPundit on November 2, 2011 at 1:17 PM

So now that even Ace has backed away from this BS story I’m assuming AP will do the same?

I just updated with Coleman’s comment and will have a Headline item at the top of the page pointing to this post to make sure people see it. The problem is, I can’t find anything online to confirm what Coleman said. So essentially, I’m stuck with an update that amounts to “Some guy who comments on our site says Cain worked on Chinese nukes, and while I can’t confirm that, here’s what he says just as an FYI.”

Allahpundit on November 2, 2011 at 1:56 PM

Judging from how strong the stupid was on this idiotic post, I can’t wait to see how the right is going to shoot themselves in the foot closer to election day.

And by the way, MisterP, what made it idiotic apart from the fact that you love Cain and hate when people points out his gaffes? He’s made a bunch of major ones so far. Maybe he didn’t this time, but there’s a reason why people were quick to believe that he had. If Perry said something like this, you wouldn’t be interested in it as a window onto his foreign-policy knowledge?

Allahpundit on November 2, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Yes, I like Herman Cain and, no, I don’t trust his policies. I’m tired of his silly gaffes. His knowledge and understanding of the world at large is woefully inadequate and there’s no indication that he’s assiduously studying, or studying at all for that matter, to get up to speed. His campaign is disorganized and seemingly unserious and, frankly, I don’t know what the man is about, but I suspect it has nothing to do with actually wanting to become president.

This current business is the last straw not because of the particulars but because Cain and his campaign have handled it so poorly. They knew more than a week ago that this story was coming and their response has been abysmal. It’s strictly amateur hour over in the Cain camp and they’ll be eaten alive in the general election should they get that far. I want them to go away.

SukieTawdry on November 2, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Need I remind everyone that China’s developed a ballistic missile designed to take out US carriers. If you’re going to do it nuke-style, then you’ll need to develop a nuclear weapon to do it without vaporizing the islands around it.

China’s also still working on the tech they stole in the 90s to develop things like neutron bombs.

Nethicus on November 2, 2011 at 2:21 PM

This is great blogging by Allah. But the dust-up shows what a mess a candidate can make for himself by being a gaffe machine. Now people are ready to believe that Cain doesn’t know that China is a nuclear threat.

Mark30339 on November 2, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Cain hatred has surfaced in all of its disguises.

It’s Cain Attack…run.

No one will let him be the GOP nominee except the voters who love him.

jimw on November 2, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Come on!!! I want to hear from all the Cain lovers about how this idiot is the Be All, End All for President. “Simply outgrow China”, and Apples and Oranges?

I’m sure his advisers are hard at work crafting tomorrow’s clarification……………..again. How many chances does he get?

The doughboy has no clue because he has literally walked into leadership positions that others had already put in place. Wake the hell up and support anyone other than Cain or Romney…

stacman on November 2, 2011 at 2:26 PM

In any case, there’s at least some reason to doubt the theory that Cain didn’t know about China’s nuke stockpile. Duly noted.

Heh. Some retraction, AP. Your bias is showing.

pseudonominus on November 2, 2011 at 2:32 PM

This is not an isolated incident. He made a similar comment about Chinese nukes Oct 13th on CNN.

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2011/11/video-more-from-cain-on-china.html

takeamericabackin10 on November 2, 2011 at 2:34 PM

In any case, there’s at least some reason to doubt the theory that Cain didn’t know about China’s nuke stockpile. Duly noted.

Heh. Some retraction, AP. Your bias is showing.

pseudonominus on November 2, 2011 at 2:32 PM

Give the poor guy a break. AP would get severe carpel tunnel if he were to type out a full apology for every hysterical, totally fabricated Cain “mistake” he offered up. Health-minded, he is.

whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 2:44 PM

And by the way, MisterP, what made it idiotic apart from the fact that you love Cain and hate when people points out his gaffes? He’s made a bunch of major ones so far. Maybe he didn’t this time, but there’s a reason why people were quick to believe that he had. If Perry said something like this, you wouldn’t be interested in it as a window onto his foreign-policy knowledge?

Allahpundit on November 2, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Yeah, these “Cain can do no wrong” defenders may be just as bad as the Palinistas.

NoStoppingUs on November 2, 2011 at 2:45 PM

You guys just don’t see the pattern do you? You are so easily manipulated, molded, led…geee, I wonder how Obama ever got elected…

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 11:38 AM

You know, going through your comment history on hotair and other sites, it’s evident you only support African American Republicans. Keyes, Steele, Cain – you defend all of them to the death.

White guilt much? And we are the ones that have been manipulated?

NoStoppingUs on November 2, 2011 at 2:48 PM

TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 1:29 AM

Yes, I remember. Among the slick lefty flip-flopper, the sexual harassing lying moron, and the drunken fool, my top choice is the drunken fool.

That said, I’d vote for Hysterical Headache Woman, Pennsylvania Send-em-to-the-Back-Alleys Man, Mr. I-Had-an-Affair-and-Got-Divorced-for-America, or either of the Huh?-Who’s-That? candidates (Utah-China Guy and Nameless-New-Mexico Guy) — vote for any of them over Obama. (Not Mr. Who-Cares-if-Iran-Gets-a-Nuke, though. Sorry.)

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Update: Cain getting a bad rap?

Alternate update headline: Cain getting bad rap from Hot Air?

Um, yes.

exdeadhead on November 2, 2011 at 2:58 PM

And by the way, MisterP, what made it idiotic apart from the fact that you love Cain and hate when people points out his gaffes?
Allahpundit on November 2, 2011 at 1:58 PM

I don’t hate it when people point out his gaffes, I hate it when people make up his gaffes, and then expect him to clarify it. But yes I like the guy, in a “little engine that could” way, and because he doesn’t stink of politics. But I don’t like how he tries too damn hard to be neutral on important subjects these days. He was never like that, but now that he’s a front-runner, he is hurting himself by trying to sound like, and be more like, a DC insider. His multiple explanations on his position on abortion is a great example. The pre front-runner Cain would have simply said … abortion blows, period. And that would be that. The post front-runner Cain needed at least 3 iterations of clarification on the subject. We (his supporters) know where his heart is. He needs to get back to being himself in a hurry.

MisterPundit on November 2, 2011 at 3:02 PM

Oh my God. What is it with this guy?

NoStoppingUs on November 2, 2011 at 10:21 AM

The poster child for having their minds molded…nostoppingus, he is the one who was against Cain and the sexual charges, no, the sexual intimidation…no then it was he was not prepared and no sexual charges…well whatever the MSM comes up with, he stands with them…you guys are so easily led….hey, look at the shiny object, Rubio overstated his history, Perry has a rock, no Perry is a racist, Bachmann can’t debate, Perry can’t debate, Cain can’t debate…everyone is a loser, every single conservative, imagine the odds…so easy to manipulate you guys.
You should try standing up the the MSM someday and tell them to shove it, a bunch of lying low life journalist creeps, pushing the liberal agenda…except this time, they are right on about Cain, yep, this time they are taking the conservative line, and being honest, yep, sure they are.

right2bright on November 2, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Great post.

I can understand some of these posts from the Kos crowd, but wow. The way a lot of people are trashing Cain, Perry and others, I’ll start putting my money on Obama.

When parts of the conservative blogsphere pound on innuendoes of one of the top running candidates, well, I just don’t know what to say. If it were a slow week, I could understand once. But over and over again. Sigh.

MikeM on November 2, 2011 at 3:02 PM

I can understand some of these posts from the Kos crowd, but wow. The way a lot of people are trashing Cain, Perry and others, I’ll start putting my money on Obama.

When parts of the conservative blogsphere pound on innuendoes of one of the top running candidates, well, I just don’t know what to say. If it were a slow week, I could understand once. But over and over again. Sigh.

MikeM on November 2, 2011 at 3:02 PM

Yeah, God forbid we actually hold our own folks accountable for their actions…

Do you really want us to turn a blind eye to major gaffes and controversies? If you support that, you’re no better than the far left.

NoStoppingUs on November 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM

the sexual harassing lying moron,

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Wow. Guess I’m glad I fell asleep early last night and was busy with Bible study today.

Won’t have time to skim the comments from last night till tonight, but maybe I’ll pass. Must have been a doozy.

Time will tell, people. Time will tell.

Elisa on November 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM

The fact that ‘jason coleman’ can’t cite any evidence backing up his claims, including something as simple as a page number for his claim that he got this from Cain’s book, makes me call BS.

Also, coleman is only making 1 simple claim: that cain worked on Chinese ICBM stuff in the Navy, yet he claims he got this from various scattered sources. You don’t piece together something that simple and straightforward from various sources.

Unless and until I see sources and evidence, I am inclined to dismiss ‘jason coleman’s assertions entirely. Cain has never spoken as if he had the expert knowledge coleman attributes to him.

I also would tend to doubt that coleman is some kind of expert, everything he said about chinese nukes is easy to google up or read on wikipedia.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 3:08 PM

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Awesome summary of our candidates…which is really pretty sad, actually.

DrAllecon on November 2, 2011 at 3:13 PM

Ok, how does the US outgrow China? “Reassert the economic leadership of liberty” sounds nice, but how realistically?

DarkCurrent on November 2, 2011 at 1:08 AM

One word: deregulate. We are not operating in anything close to a free-market economic environment today. No one gets to make his own choices about anything economic. There is a menu of available options, set by the government. Many of the things that menu doesn’t have on it are exactly the things we need to be free to do.

We aren’t stuck with the economic environment we have. It will take changing government policy to change the environment, however. If people will get that through their heads, we will be stunned by the difference it makes to growth, jobs, and revenue.

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 3:14 PM

The fact that ‘jason coleman’ can’t cite any evidence backing up his claims, including something as simple as a page number for his claim that he got this from Cain’s book, makes me call BS.
kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 3:08 PM

Let me help you out then. Cain in 2005, paragraph 6:

“The U.S. should be less concerned about China’s economic potential than by the military threat it poses. Three Chinese spies were recently indicted in the U.S. for conspiring to steal numerous naval warship technologies. This summer China and Russia participated in a week-long joint military exercise. China’s build up of nuclear, military and space technologies to rival the U.S., and its saber-rattling over Taiwan’s independence, signals a commitment to more red, not green.”

MisterPundit on November 2, 2011 at 3:18 PM

Awesome summary of our candidates…which is really pretty sad, actually.

DrAllecon on November 2, 2011 at 3:13 PM

You know, the sad party is us. Everyone who has ever run for or been president could have been characterized in such negative ways. Literally everyone. The fact that we today are so ready to give the negative rent-free space in our brains is a development, not an eternal condition.

I put the list in those terms to make a point. I don’t actually see the candidates that way. We can’t rely on the media, though, to help us evaluate political candidates more responsibly and usefully. They’re never going to. We have to just say no to the constant temptation to feast on gossip and give up on people. Only we can do that.

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 3:20 PM

Elisa on November 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM

Elisa, see my response to Dr. Allecon above. I was being sarcastic in those candidate characterizations.

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 3:22 PM

Here is the problem I have with ‘coleman”s defense:

He gives tremendous amounts of detail, yet he can’t recall his source. Nonsense. There is no way a person could rattle off such ridiculous details of Cain’s civilian work for the department of the navy, and yet draw such a blank on the source of that in-depth knowledge. It is not like ‘coleman’ wrote “I seem to remember reading that Cain’s navy work dealt with Chinese nukes, but I can’t recall where, exactly”…

… no, ‘coleman’ spoke with authority as if he knew this as an expert, then when pressed for a source, he gave a nonsensical wishy washy answer with a hearsay escape hatch (he supposedly personally knows people who worked with Cain for the dept of the Navy in the 70s? yeah right!).

Allahpundit, you got trolled. I can’t believe that this guy warranted a post update and a headlines update for you to reprint the kind of unsourced nonsense that would not be allowed into any mainstream media source (unless it was too good to check, like Rathergate).

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 3:30 PM

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 3:08 PM

It’s only in the last couple of days that people have begun to deny that Cain worked in ballistics for the Department of the Navy.

Go back a few weeks and it was common knowledge.

Herman Cain: pizza boss, radio host, ballistics expert, minister. President?

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 3:31 PM

…The problem is just that he seemingly knows close to nothing about most of the things one deals with as President.
galenrox on November 2, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Ahh yes. But seemingly, everyone else knows these things. The Press, the people here at HotAir, Ace seems to be a genius, etc, etc, etc.

So Cain is the dumbest fu<&er ever apparently?!?

BierManVA on November 2, 2011 at 3:35 PM

Let me help you out then. Cain in 2005, paragraph 6:

MisterPundit on November 2, 2011 at 3:18 PM

#1. That is not from any of the 3 sources cited by ‘coleman’ is it? So what relevance does it have to his defense of Cain? None. You are making a different argument entirely and trying to pass it off as something else.

#2. Op-ed articles, like speeches, are often not written by the candidates themselves, merely reviewed/approved. I strongly doubt that Cain researched and wrote that article himself. It doesn’t sound like him at all in terms of style.

#3. The language you cite doesn’t resolve anything, even if Cain wrote the article himself. It says “China’s build up of nuclear, military and space technologies”, which is far more ambiguous, so it could mean anything. You could say “Iran’s build up of nuclear technologies” and it would be correct, even though Iran does not have nukes, because Iran is building up nuclear technologies in order to get nukes.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 3:38 PM

It’s only in the last couple of days that people have begun to deny that Cain worked in ballistics for the Department of the Navy.

Go back a few weeks and it was common knowledge.

Herman Cain: pizza boss, radio host, ballistics expert, minister. President?

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 3:31 PM

A civilian math guy working on ballistics for the dept of the navy, and an expert on China’s ballistic missile program, are two very, very different things. Apples and oranges, as Cain would say.

Ballistics could mean anything. It does not imply nukes. The Navy’s primary interest in ballistics is for naval gun design. Ballistic missiles are a USAF, not a Navy, issue.

I still think you are trolling, albeit very successfully. Prove me wrong. Cough up a source that backs up any of the very, very specific claims you made.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 3:44 PM

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 3:44 PM

Please cite where I stated that Cain was an “expert on China’s ballistic missile program”.

I mentioned three specific missiles that Cain would have had knowledge of given the group he worked with at the Department of the Navy’s exterior ballistics program as well as his work with the Navy after that.

The Navy’s primary interest in ballistics is for naval gun design. Ballistic missiles are a USAF, not a Navy, issue.

Stop beclowning yourself. The Navy is heavily involved with anti-ballistic-missile work and dominated the ABM field at the time. The AF at the time was working to make ballistic missiles, the Navy was working to shoot them down.

Of course the Navy had/has their own very large ballistic missile program as well.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 3:53 PM

After searching through every google reference to Cain’s time in the Navy, I could only find one unreliable comment saying he worked on fire control systems (which sounds exactly like what a civilian math guy would do), NOT anything about China.

I seriously doubt Cain would be used, as a civilian, to work on secret matters such as analysis of China’s missile capabilities during the cold war, if he didn’t even have a security clearance. It doesn’t make any sense.

All signs still point to trolling.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 3:57 PM

every google reference to Cain’s time in the Navy, I could only find one unreliable comment

Really? Every Google reference? That’s quite definitive, now isn’t it. Only one?

Did you miss this post from hotair?

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/07/lawrence-odonnell-vs-herman-cain/

Watch the video.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 4:07 PM

Please cite where I stated that Cain was an “expert on China’s ballistic missile program”.

More than happy to:

Herman Cain spent the Vietnam war evaluating the capabilities of the Chinese to deliver a nuclear weapon onto the heads of our forces in South Vietnam.

He examined the test launches of the Dongfeng 1 (SS-1) and plotted out the trajectories for a 500kg warheads.

When China started testing the Dongfeng 2 (CSS-1) Cain plotted out the trajectories and capabilities of it’s delivery of 15 kiloton nuclear weapons.

Both of these missiles were provided to the PRC by the Soviets, Cain analysed data from the Russian test launches and determined the risk to U.S. troops in SE Asia.

Cain also observed the development of China’s first domestically produced missile, Dongfeng 3 (CSS-2) and plotted out it’s use with China’s 15-20KT fissile devices as well as China’s new thermonuclear devices.

Finally, Cain was involved in the determination that China’s Dongfeng 4 (CSS-3) was capable of delivering both fissile and thermonuclear devices to both Moscow and Guam as well as cover the entire deployment of U.S. forces in SE Asia.

I copy pasted that from AP’s post, of course, quoting you. Add up your comments, and yes, if Cain did what you claim, he would absolutely be an expert on Chinese ballistic missiles from that time period.

Stop beclowning yourself. The Navy is heavily involved with anti-ballistic-missile work and dominated the ABM field at the time. The AF at the time was working to make ballistic missiles, the Navy was working to shoot them down.

Oh really? Do tell. I’d love to be enlightened about how the Navy supposedly dominated ABM work back during the Vietnam War. I’m sure you can easily name the development programs, right? Like, for example, Safeguard and Nike, and maybe you think the Defense Atomic Support Agency and Defense Nuclear Agency were actually part of the Navy? (they weren’t)

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Watch the video.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 4:07 PM

I was talking about sources on google referencing what Cain worked on. Like AP said, there is very little out there on it, certainly nothing that backs up your rather detailed claims.

I’ve seen that interview before. So what? It doesn’t support your claims.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 4:22 PM

oh and to elaborate, Cain in the interview says he worked on the “rocket assisted projectile”, not anything to do with China, or anything else. He says it at 6:40 on part 2 at this link:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/herman-cain-and-lawrence-odonnell-duke-it-out-on-the-last-word/

See? citing a source is not that hard. Now anyone who reads this can see what I’m talking about with their own eyes and not have to take my word for it, which is the approach you seem to favor.

because. you. are. a. troll. :)

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 4:32 PM

I was talking about sources on google referencing what Cain worked on.

So then you’re admitting that there are AT LEAST TWO, now right?

1. Fire Control while at Purdue.
2. Exterior Ballistics after graduation.

Or are you going to deny the Exterior Ballistics work since it was on Hotair and not part of your original google search?

I’m sure you can easily name the development programs, right? [Regarding DotN ABM programs]

ASMS (later renamed AEGIS) [Radar]
Bumblebee [Missiles]

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 4:43 PM

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 4:19 PM

??? The Navy has had nuclear ballistic missiles since 1960, and had its own nuclear ballistic missile program called “Navy Jupiter” in the 1950s before it changed the name to Polaris. The first submarines designed specifically to carry ballistic missiles were on the drafting board by the early 1950s. USS George Washington (SSBN-598) was commissioned in 1959, the first nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine. Sicne Polaris, the Navy has had the Poseidon and Trident ballistic missile classes in service. Poseidon and Trident were intercontinental/global from inception.

I haven’t seen anything that confirms the precise analyses of Chinese ballistic missiles listed by Jason Coleman, but the timing of Cain’s service as a ballistics analyst would have been approximately right for treating those questions. I’d have to know more particulars about Cain’s employment to be certain he worked on these specific subjects.

The caveat I would enter is that the Cain website says this about what Cain did while working for the Navy:

Inspired by the work ethic and character of his parents, Herman continued his education by earning his Master’s degree in computer science from Purdue University while working full-time developing fire control systems for ships and fighter planes for the Department of the Navy.

Cain could easily have contributed work on exterior ballistics in this capacity, but the work would not have involved evaluating Chinese missiles. It would have been focused on the ballistics of projectiles fired by US ships and fighter planes.

Maybe he did both. But they’re two separate disciplines.

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 4:48 PM

So then you’re admitting that there are AT LEAST TWO, now right?

1. Fire Control while at Purdue.
2. Exterior Ballistics after graduation.

False. According to Cain’s interview, his work on exterior ballistics = rocket assisted projectile. Period. Nothing to do with China.

ASMS (later renamed AEGIS) [Radar]
Bumblebee [Missiles]

Bumblebee? That was not an ABM program.

“Talos was the end product of Operation Bumblebee, the Navy’s 16-year surface-to-air missile development program for protection against guided anti-ship missiles like Henschel Hs 293 glide bombs, Fritz X, and kamikaze aircraft.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-8_Talos

ASMS wasn’t either. Aegis did not get any serious ABM development until SDI in the 1980s. Let’s remember your original statement:

The Navy is heavily involved with anti-ballistic-missile work and dominated the ABM field at the time. The AF at the time was working to make ballistic missiles, the Navy was working to shoot them down.

Literally the only thing the Navy did in that timeframe was to test fire some anti-aircraft missiles at some old obsolete short range missiles, and then to forego any ABM development until the 1980s. It actually took a very long time to get the AEGIS BMD working at all, and it was only deployed recently, in 2009. So your comment was just silly.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 5:06 PM

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 4:48 PM

You are talking about SLBMs, I was talking about (the lack of) ABMs. Of course the Navy had SLBMs, it just wasn’t working on shooting Chinese ballistic missiles down.

Maybe he did both. But they’re two separate disciplines.

Cain, in his interview, specifically says that his exterior ballistics work was on rocket assisted projectiles. Those are artillery rounds that use rockets to boost their range. Nothing at all to do with China.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM

Literally the only thing the Navy did in that timeframe was to test fire some anti-aircraft missiles at some old obsolete short range missiles

That sounds pretty much like an ABM development program to me.

Given that the Navy didn’t have any Df-1′s or R-2′s to fire at, it makes sense that their ABM program would use our obsolete SRBM’s in their testing.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Those are artillery rounds that use rockets to boost their range.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM

Um, NO, not just “artillery rounds”.

Some Naval RAP’s aren’t fired out of a gun at all.

They have their own dedicated ships that have no big guns.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 5:34 PM

You are talking about SLBMs, I was talking about (the lack of) ABMs. Of course the Navy had SLBMs, it just wasn’t working on shooting Chinese ballistic missiles down.

———————————-

The Navy’s primary interest in ballistics is for naval gun design. Ballistic missiles are a USAF, not a Navy, issue.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 3:44 PM

Oh. . . So in that second quote, you weren’t referring to “ballistic missiles”, you were excluding SLBM’s and SRBM’s. And of course you werent’ talking about ballistic cruise missiles like the Regulus 1.

Gotcha.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 5:57 PM

That sounds pretty much like an ABM development program to me.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Except that it wasn’t. Firing anti-aircraft missiles at some obsolete missiles (they were not SLBMs, they were short range missiles that were obsolete by the mid 60s), and not taking the next step, is not development. It is just checking whether existing anti-air missiles had the ability to hit old, slow missiles. Your statement that the Navy was somehow leading ABM development was ridiculous.

Um, NO, not just “artillery rounds”.

Don’t argue with me, go argue with globalsecurity.org, tell them that you are smarter than they are, know more about military technology than they do, and their web site is wrong.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/rap.htm

Gotcha.

Hey ‘jason coleman’, you remember how you said Herman Cain worked extensively with Chinese ballistic missile analysis, and you detailed how he was involved with the Chinese DF 1 through 4 designs, even though this would have been highly classified information at the time, and even though no one can find anyone corroborating your extremely detailed claims?

Because I’m pretty sure your complete and utter lack of credibility is the topic we are discussing, not whether I mentioned SLBMs. The fact that you are nitpicking my posts and splitting hairs just shows that you are what I’ve been saying all along: a troll who made your story up out of whole cloth.

Everyone has been waiting for you to back up your claims, but so far everything you’ve pointed out actually contradicts your rather outlandish story. You could have easily flipped though Cain’s book and cited the page number which discusses Cain’s Chinese ballistic missile work.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 7:11 PM

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM

OK, I’m with you. While there was a bit more than just a couple of extracurricular fun-shots by the Navy at ballistic missiles before the 1980s, I would agree that serious ABM development (e.g., committing Aegis to that role) began after the inauguration of SDI.

The Navy did study the ballistics of foreign ballistic missiles long before that, which Cain may have been involved in. I tend to wonder what he may have done, as much of the work was theoretical and done under the aegis (if you will) of technical intelligence. (A field in which there’s a lot of hilarious lore about highly-cleared miltiary and CIA analyts competing with each other.) The purpose was multifarious, covering more things than potential ABM considerations.

But public references to Cain’s employment with the Navy point to weapons development — specifically, fire control — for US Navy platforms. At the time of his employment, that would have been unrelated to the exterior ballistics of Chinese ballistic missiles.

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 7:13 PM

Elisa on November 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM

Elisa, see my response to Dr. Allecon above. I was being sarcastic in those candidate characterizations.

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 3:22 PM

I’m so sorry, J.E. My apologies. I should know better because I don’t use sarc tags either.

I didn’t get to read all the comments from last night yet, so I should have shut up, since I didn’t know who said what.

But I’m sure there was alot of exaggeration, gossip (as you rightly criticized) and name-calling by others. That went on even before last night.

Again, so sorry.

Elisa on November 2, 2011 at 8:26 PM

highly-cleared miltiary and CIA analyts

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 7:13 PM

Those are the kind of people who would be working on the kind of tasks that coleman is attributing to Cain, I’d imagine. I would think it would be VERY unusual to take a civilian contractor grad student and have him work as an analyst on such a sensitive subject. After all, Chinese missile development was highly secretive, and they didn’t even successfully test until 1966. So this would have been very important, very secretive, cutting-edge stuff. It really doesn’t make sense that Cain, a math guy, would be working on it. If the analysts needed a math guy to crunch some numbers, they certainly wouldn’t tell him “this is for a chinese missile”. What ever happened to a “need to know” basis?

This is one of the first things that jumped out and made the coleman comments not pass my BS detector.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 8:38 PM

Don’t argue with me, go argue with globalsecurity.org, tell them that you are smarter than they are, know more about military technology than they do, and their web site is wrong.

It’s not wrong, it’s just incomplete. Incomplete as it only talks about RAP’s in the American arsenal today. Nor does it list experimental RAP’s.

Here’s a BOMROC, a a type of rocket assisted projectile, being fired from the USS Clarion River. Notice the absence of large naval guns.

http://www.chinalakemuseum.org/history/overview_pages/rocketship.html

The Clarion River was a testbed for a large number of RAP’s.

Firing anti-aircraft missiles at some obsolete missiles (they were not SLBMs, they were short range missiles that were obsolete by the mid 60s),

Notice that I never said anything about the Navy shooting down SLBM’s, I do know that the Navy was interested in shooting down SRBM’s (Short Range Ballistic Missiles) like the Df-1′s. The Navy was also interested in shooting down most theatre ballistic missiles, ICBM’s were out of the Navy’s reach until much later.

Hey ‘jason coleman’, you remember how you said Herman Cain worked extensively with Chinese ballistic missile analysis, and you detailed how he was involved with the Chinese DF 1 through 4 designs, even though this would have been highly classified information at the time, and even though no one can find anyone corroborating your extremely detailed claims?

How about you notice that I never said he “worked extensively” with Chinese ballistic missile analysis, I said that he “examined the test launches and plotted trajectories”, I didn’t say that he developed the orignal data, but merely plotted data available that was relevant to his program.

Let us suppose you are trying to hit a target, let’s suppose that target is a SRBM launcher, and you’re going to try and hit it from say. . . an LSMR in shallow water with a RAP. You’d need to plot out the trajectories from your target’s target to find out how far from your ship’s possible locations your launcher might be.

Doing so would give you a range of possibilities for your target location that you would have to hit with your RAP and let you know if you were developing a worthwhile or a worthless weapon to accomplish a particular objective.

Now one would also have to take into account why one would have to do this, why not just fly a plane over it and bomb it. Why not send some battleships in close to shore and pound it. . . well, there were certainly political realities at the time that would have prevented both of those scenarios.

Of course this is all highly speculative at this point and might not be exactly why Cain and his group were doing this, but the timelines and the methodology is certainly correct, and is line with the General nature of what Cain’s group was working on with regards to RAP’s.

As for the Df-2′s arriving on the scene and changing the game, Cain, or specifically, the working group that Cain was a part of, would have to evaluate this new MRBM and it’s capabilities and see if they could reach out and hit the locations that the Df-2′s could be placed. It was quickly determined (by examining the data and plotting the possible trajectories) that RAP’s like those they were working on could not reach the possible locations of MRBM launchers. The entire RAP program folded up a short while later, only to be resurrected into the types of naval weapons that the GlobalSecurity site mentions.

As for the 3 and 4, Cain, or more specifically Cain’s working group, would have observed the development of the Df-3 as it was concurrent with their work against the Df-2 which proved to be too much of a target for their group.

As the RAP program was wrapping up, Cain, or more specifically Cain’s working group, saw the Df-4 go into deployment. Cain’s group as well as others crunched the numbers on the SS-4/Df-4 and it was determined that the Chinese could hit Guam or Moscow, the Russians could hit most of Europe and the Middle East, and the game forever changed.

———————————

Now as to “highly classified”. Ranges on the R’s and Df’s were not classified, and if anyone wanted to, you could plot them at home. The Russians and Chinese were quite vocal about what they could hit with these weapons. We don’t classify our enemies capabilities, we classify our own capabilities. Since our enemies at the time wanted the American people to know that they (the Chinese) could hit our troops in SE Asia should they so choose, the information was not “highly classified”. For example the range of the Russian Topol is 11,000 KM.

That’s not to say that Cain didn’t have a clearance while at the DotN, I’m quite sure he did, I can in fact guarantee he had some level of clearance. I won’t speculate what he had or had access to outside of the needs of the RAP programs he worked on, but he definitely had some level of clearance in order to do his work.

—————————————-

Now I will “walk something back”. . . I wrote “involved in the determination that”, and that’s a mistake on my part because it implies that Cain and his group discovered new information.

I’ll admit I was deliberating on how to present this information, and I certainly made a mistake in implying that Cain, or his group was the discoverer of the information that that Df-4 could hit Guam or Moscow, and that is indeed incorrect. My intention there was to set up that the determination of the Df-4′s range made the closure of the RAP program (as it existed during Cain’s time with the group) as a necessary outcome.

I’ll also walk back and then forward my original “evaluating the capabilities”, I should have said something along the lines of “evaluating and defeating the capabilities”.

—————————–

Everyone has been waiting for you to back up your claims, but so far everything you’ve pointed out actually contradicts your rather outlandish story. You could have easily flipped though Cain’s book and cited the page number which discusses Cain’s Chinese ballistic missile work.

I doubt seriously that “everyone” is waiting. Most simply don’t care, some are simply intent on tearing me down, something I could care less about. If I cared about your opinion of me, I’d use a pseudonym.

I’ll note that until a short while ago, you were bound and determined to deny that Cain worked in any serious capacity with the Navy at all.

After searching through every google reference to Cain’s time in the Navy, I could only find one unreliable comment saying he worked on fire control systems

One unreliable comment eh? Every google reference?

Some things simply aren’t on the internet, my friend. Especially not everything about every minor and in large part failed program that didn’t make major news at the time, and certainly not everything that occurred in the pre-internet era. Although given the number of inquiries I’ve had, and the information that has been provided to me since Allah and Ace turned the spotlight on my 1AM comment, I’m sure that within a few days we’ll know more about Cain’s work with the Department of the Navy than we, or the Navy or even Cain himself ever wanted to know.

Will I be proven correct? I’m not sure. I’m confident, quite so, but absolutely certain? No, an atheist is never that certain.

I’ve reached out to a few that can confirm, and I’ve been in contact with a number of people who were involved both in the RAP programs on the military and civilian sides. I don’t think it will be hard to put together some concrete information over the next few days that can logically prove the point and back it up with hard evidence. Although by this time tomorrow, I’m sure that more than few will have been quicker to gather and publish this information than I will be.

I expect that Cain himself is going to elaborate on his work with the Navy to the extent that he can, and if I’m proven right, great, if I’m proven wrong, so be it.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 8:51 PM

I would think it would be VERY unusual to take a civilian contractor grad student and have him work as an analyst on such a sensitive subject.

kaltes on November 2, 2011 at 8:38 PM

So would I.

Elisa on November 2, 2011 at 8:26 PM

Not to worry. I think we’re all getting a little punchy with the constant barrage of manufactured “bad news” about the front-running GOP candidates (minus Romney, for whom the “bad news” machine will probably crank into high gear if he wins the nomination).

J.E. Dyer on November 2, 2011 at 8:59 PM

After all, Chinese missile development was highly secretive, and they didn’t even successfully test until 1966.

The Df-1 is the Soviet R-2, which went to service in 1951. It’s range wasn’t “highly secret”, it was offered up for sale to Soviet clients.

The Df-2 is the Soviet R-5, also not “highly secret” and offered up for sale.

The Df-3 WAS “highly secret”, until they shot one off, in 1967 it’s range wasn’t a secret anymore. After that, every grunt in Vietnam knew they were under the Soviet and Chinese umbrellas.

The Df-4 was also “highly secret” and again, until they shot one off; in 1970, the entire world knew it had a range of at least 2000nm.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 9:13 PM

Cain’s group as well as others crunched the numbers on the SS-4/Df-4 and it was determined that the Chinese could hit Guam or Moscow

That’s clunky and incorrect in it’s current structure.

My reference there to SS-4 is in relation to the question of whether or not RAP’s could have been useful in the CMC and Df-4′s were the new threat in SE ASIA.

Didnt’ mean to imply the SS-4 and DF-4 is the same missile, but I did, and for that I apologize.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 9:23 PM

Before it’s brought up, I need to concede on the BOMROC and the Clarion River. BOMROC was not one of the systems Cain worked on, but it was indeed a gun delivered system.

I’m waiting for a chief gunner’s mate to give me the correct name of the early RAP system Cain worked on that later became the BTERM.

My apologies.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 9:38 PM

Before it’s brought up, I need to concede on the BOMROC and the Clarion River. BOMROC was not one of the systems Cain worked on, but it was indeed a gun delivered system.

That’s it, I’m done with this for now, I’ve been up all night and day discussing this with too many people to keep track of and can’t continue.

I’ll come back and present a more coherent defense after some sleep.

BOMROC is not a gun delivered system, it is a Rocket and Launcher.

Cain indeed worked on a gun delivered system.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 9:42 PM

Kaltes, if you want to have at me for those mistakes about BOMROC and Clarion River, so be it, shoot me an email and I’ll forward you what I was fed about Clarion River so you can have a go at them too.

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 9:45 PM

My God, all this crap from Kaltes, to prove that Cain couldn’t have known about China because he couldn’t have been exposed to any of this information while working for the Navy???? Are you kidding me? What did you accomplish? Cain doesn’t know anything about China’s muclear capacities? Talk about a dog worrying a dirty rag…

lovingmyUSA on November 3, 2011 at 7:59 AM

Cain has now been asked about his statement, and he says he mis-spoke, saying he meant China would get MORE capability.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/03/herman-cain-china-nuclear-weapons_n_1073477.html

Of course, now that his gaffe was played on the Colbert Report and mentioned in other places, his campaign team would have picked up on it and corrected him. So this doesn’t prove he knew at the time, it just shows he knows now. Whether you believe he knew at the time will depend on your overall opinion of Cain.

lovingmyUSA on November 3, 2011 at 7:59 AM

I never tried to prove anything about Cain, I was criticizing the outlandish, obviously false information posted by ‘Jason Coleman’, who pretty clearly now seems to have simply made it all up.

When such obvious misinformation makes it into a Hot Air post, I take notice.

I have nothing against Cain, though from having watched him in interviews, he seems to be under-prepared for running for the Presidency.

kaltes on November 3, 2011 at 12:36 PM

Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Awesome. Right on.

Also “capability” is not just an off on switch. People themselves are saying that Cain might have the capability of running a corporation (Mitt’s common claim), but less capability of running a nation. It’s not like he either has administrative capability or he does not. That person is saying that he doesn’t have the grade of capability for a desired goal.

When conservatives start buying spin that would convince Kos kids–it’s time to admit that we’re a bunch of teenage girls under the pressure of peers, and close up shop.

This embarrassment claptrap is for people who don’t have the fortitude. And I’ve seen this kind of buckling from Allahpundit all the time.

Axeman on November 3, 2011 at 7:43 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6