Ok lets break that down.

We both agree that in the event of a serious political event leading to a nuclear exchange with china nuclear weapons WOULD be launched that would hit predetermined site inside china including large population bases to induce casualties to over whelm any chance of a protracted war.

You agreed that China was target listed.That targeting went beyond  battle prep like in Germany. This was both political and strategic in its planning as China was part of a enemy faction, and had human resources far out reaching all the US and NATO combined.

Two: China was and still is communist. Communism was the enemy of the US and its allies to the extent you outlined their western Europe policy as a "we will destroy it rather then give it up." remember this golden oldie, "better dead then red?" Its fair to say that at a ideological level that anything past the point of no return would have lead to a attack on this political enemy with weapons loaded with nuclear capability.

Thus a fair conclusion is that in event of any serious events such as the almost atomic attacks in retaliation for Korea, China was targeted, and events had gotten past just planing and reach operation level before stopping, such as the 51 strike. While there was more focus and open aggression between soviet Stalinist Russia, Mao china was second on the list of enemies.

Again its clear that China was a considered a serious threat both ideologically and in military.

Today in our post industrial world China has through very controlled means risen to become in a sense "factory of the world." There responsible for the assembly of both components and the final assembly of a huge disproportionate amount of the gadgets so in favor like laptops and Ipods.
So before it went off the rails i restate my original points.

There was a period of stability as a result of the statement, during which there was a incredible rise in quality of life and comfort in the west.

The nation you wanted to nuke and thus start a final human war with now makes your Ipods.

As for your enemies having nuclear proliferation is going to happen, I also suspect several nations that have not ever claimed to have them, such as Japan, do in fact have them.

As for terrorists willing to kill civilians what are you talking about? when you drop bombs from 60000 feet people die. To get upset by a particular method is ridiculous. Some one trapped under three tons of fallen concrete versus some one dying on a street corner are not moral choices but weapon choices. 

The Taliban is a entity to emerge from a CIA funded secret war, which once over lost all interest in until the late 90s. There is a terrible rise in states on the brink of anarchy or under incredible domestic pressure such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan due to a convergence of forces and events that is happening at a planetary scale. Parts of Africa such as Somalia, and Asia have falling into debt and environmental failure so deep as to be near impossible to fix. In these places which lack any stability or real solutions religion has come to fill the vacuum. You see this in Saudi Arabia where a huge percentage of students are getting degrees in theology rather then engineering etc.
Whats seems to be happening in the US is something similar with the rise of fundamental religion, denial of scientific concepts such as stem cells or evolution. There plenty of evidence on the "Christianization" of the US armed forces over the last twenty years. So to claim their the only force motivated by crazy religions is false. Bush made many claims that god had told him to do various things such as start wars etc. as well.
To me there is little long term difference between these kinds of people on both sides. IF the human race is to get out of this century we will have to get past the silly differences in our various symbols and deal with the larger issues as a species rather then various tribes.

"As for terrorists willing to kill civilians what are you talking about? when you drop bombs from 60000 feet people die. To get upset by a particular method is ridiculous. Some one trapped under three tons of fallen concrete versus some one dying on a street corner are not moral choices but weapon choices."

I'm talking about targeting civilians directly, hence "prime target", not as collateral damage. Hijacking a plane full of civilians and flying it into a civilian target etc. is very different than targeting military sites that happen to have civilians in the area.

"Whats seems to be happening in the US is something similar with the rise of fundamental religion, denial of scientific concepts such as stem cells or evolution. There plenty of evidence on the "Christianization" of the US armed forces over the last twenty years. So to claim their the only force motivated by crazy religions is false. Bush made many claims that god had told him to do various things such as start wars etc. as well. "

"Fundamental" Christianity is very different from Islam. No Christians that truly believe in the fundamentals of Christianity are going to wage "holy war". There is no such thing as holy war in Christianity. And Catholicism doesn't count as they go beyond the scriptures. Holy war and conversion by the sword is, however, fundamental to Islam.

There is no "denial" of stem cells. The debate is over what kind of stem cells we should be using. It's an ethical debate, not religious. Evolution has been used as an excuse for eugenics and genocide, so don't even bother. And I suppose you can get actual quotes from Bush saying that God told him to start wars? What do you think about Hillary saying the holy spirit guides her?

Deamon
Got those Bush quotes yet, or do you want to recant? Real evidence of the "Christianization" of the US Military would also be nice. You can't just make claims about the motives of the military without evidence.