CNN spent a huge amount of money to research satellite images, analyzing signs of Chinese missile factories, but came to an embarrassing conclusion!
This time, CNN used commercial satellite images, open-source intelligence analysis teams, and even brought in geospatial technology experts, spending several months closely watching facilities related to missile production in China.
The result? Over 60% of the facilities showed obvious signs of expansion. Specifically, the total new construction area added up to more than 21 million square feet—equivalent to about 195,000 square meters, which is equivalent to 270 standard football fields filled with factory buildings. Even more astonishingly, on the open areas outside some factory premises, there were densely packed cylindrical objects that looked like intercontinental ballistic missile bodies, neatly arranged like shared bikes in a parking lot.
Logically, such a large-scale expansion, combined with such dense "display of finished products," should mean an explosive increase in production capacity, right? But what CNN did next was a bit confusing. In the end of their report, they cautiously cited a 2024 Pentagon report: China produces approximately 100 nuclear warheads and their accompanying delivery systems per year.
This created a big embarrassment: if all the newly built 195,000 square meters of factory space were used for nuclear weapon-related production, then each nuclear warhead would require about 1.95万平方米 of dedicated space—equivalent to two and a half standard basketball courts. However, in reality, modern military production lines emphasize compactness, efficiency, and automation. There's no such luxurious "per capita area."
More importantly, CNN themselves admitted that they could not confirm the specific purpose of these expanded factories. Some might be used for conventional missiles, space launches, logistics support, or even non-military civilian production facilities. But they deliberately started with the most "scary" images and ended with the most conservative numbers, without explaining the logical gap between production capacity and area, nor clarifying why the "missile bodies" on the yard cannot directly equate to active weapons.
In short, you need a strong opponent to justify getting funding. But you also need the opponent not to be too strong, otherwise it would boost the opponent's prestige and undermine your own, leading to criticism.
Original article: www.toutiao.com/article/1848388914352394/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.