Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Indian Nuclear Testing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    OOE Reply

    The only reason why India would need to test again is ego. Not out of any military necessity for two reasons.
    I don't know what really happened in 1998 and 2002/2003, but it doesn't seem very egotistical to admit that what had been hailed as a success is now being shown through gray lenses.

    1) India's arsenal is deterrence, not war fighting. You start fighting a nuclear war and you've already lost that fight before it began. The Chinese can blanket India with 178 nukes initially and 500 more within 6 months and they've already got the rockets, 1600 of them at last count.

    Pakistan see its arsenal as the final band of its warfighting spectrum. Right now, with the ambiguity of the TN capabilities and general decision-making confusion in India, some Pakistanis in the decision-making levels also see it as a possibly war-winning tool (possibly for the same reason you list below). That is having real security implications for Indians, as we can all see.

    2) Unless you're going for hardened targets (which you would need alot more nukes and a lot more accurate missiles), then the current yields are perfectly fine against soft targets. Ok, 12kts is not as impressive as 200kt or even 1 megaton but 12kts can destroy water treatment and sewage. Cholera can kill people just as dead as a nuke blast.

    It is psychological - and for being psy, it nonetheless has real security implications.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Cactus View Post
      The only reason why India would need to test again is ego. Not out of any military necessity for two reasons.
      I don't know what really happened in 1998 and 2002/2003, but it doesn't seem very egotistical to admit that what had been hailed as a success is now being shown through gray lenses.
      To acquire a thermonuke is all about ego, nothing to do with military necessity, at least not without a massive change in doctrine, build up, and budget.

      1) India's arsenal is deterrence, not war fighting. You start fighting a nuclear war and you've already lost that fight before it began. The Chinese can blanket India with 178 nukes initially and 500 more within 6 months and they've already got the rockets, 1600 of them at last count.

      Originally posted by Cactus View Post
      Pakistan see its arsenal as the final band of its warfighting spectrum. Right now, with the ambiguity of the TN capabilities and general decision-making confusion in India, some Pakistanis in the decision-making levels also see it as a possibly war-winning tool (possibly for the same reason you list below). That is having real security implications for Indians, as we can all see.
      And Pakistan would lose that fight before it began. Nothing has changed. There is no target in Pakistan that requires a 45kt nuke, let alone a 200kt nuke.

      Originally posted by Cactus View Post
      It is psychological - and for being psy, it nonetheless has real security implications.
      Increased missile accuracy will have far more implications than any increase in yield.

      And I am extremely surprised that no one has caught on. Is there any soft targets in India, Pakistan, and even China that ten to twenty 500lb bombs can't destroy?

      Comment


      • #18
        Colonel, technically speaking there is no target in Pakistan that requires anything more than a .22 to the base of the skull - but the security requirement is not just technical, it is also psychological. Under the current status quo, the Pakistanis always have the initial initiative - and when it appears that Indian reaction will wrest it away from them, they duck under their nuclear shield. To change that, the Indian doctrine must change - at least, in particular reference to Pakistan. And under the current escalation ladder, at the worst event even a 6-month death span appears to hold positive possibilities to the desperate jihadi hardliner. India can't do anything to decrease their desperateness or the Mamluke (slave-soldier) mindset (some of their impending troubles, like an estimated 60% drop in rainfall over next 30 years, is really out of India's control). India can make sure that MAD is really "assured" at the other end.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Cactus View Post
          Colonel, technically speaking there is no target in Pakistan that requires anything more than a .22 to the base of the skull - but the security requirement is not just technical, it is also psychological.
          Nuclear war is not a democractic vote. Only one person needs to be convinced he can't win, the key holder. The rest of the populace have no direct say in his decision.

          Originally posted by Cactus View Post
          Under the current status quo, the Pakistanis always have the initial initiative - and when it appears that Indian reaction will wrest it away from them, they duck under their nuclear shield.
          Well, here's the other point. It's been 3 years since the Americans forced the dual key release on Pakistan. And in 3 years ... well, let's just say that we determined that the Soviets did not cheat on SALT 1 and 2.

          Originally posted by Cactus View Post
          India can make sure that MAD is really "assured" at the other end.
          Thermonukes does not add to this. Will does. Just because you have thermonukes but shown no inclination to use them does that mean the Pakistanis will back off one bit. In fact, here is something. Pakistan doesn't have any thermo nukes. Who is seen more willing to use nukes?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
            In fact, here is something. Pakistan doesn't have any thermo nukes. Who is seen more willing to use nukes?
            Sorry to butt into this insightful discussion between Cactus and you.

            Based on my past readings of your opinions regarding Pak nukes on WAB,
            Pakistan having or not having thermo nukes is not decided in Islamabad but most probably in Beijing. Hence belligerence level of India/pakistan cannot be judged based on possession of thermo nukes. Am I missing something?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by tinymarae View Post
              Sorry to butt into this insightful discussion between Cactus and you.

              Based on my past readings of your opinions regarding Pak nukes on WAB,
              Pakistan having or not having thermo nukes is not decided in Islamabad but most probably in Beijing. Hence belligerence level of India/pakistan cannot be judged based on possession of thermo nukes. Am I missing something?
              No, you're not missing something but I am not being clear. I am asking does India fear Pakistan any less just because she does not have any thermo nukes?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                No, you're not missing something but I am not being clear. I am asking does India fear Pakistan any less just because she does not have any thermo nukes?
                Sir,
                Once Pakistan uses nukes, wouldn't China and Pakistan both be considered a legitimate target by the Indian forces? It is a common knowledge that China has been the father of Pakistani nukes.

                My feeling is one of the prime reason for TN is say to the Chinese,it is on them to make sure the Pakistani's dont use the nuke and help Indian TN to stay where they are.

                Ofcourse once Pakistan goes nuclear,things become very unpredictable.One scenario could be the world will mount a pre-emptive strike to remove of Indian nukes.

                One of the reason given by the TN designer was that it provides the best bang for small arsenal like India's.It becomes very expensive to maintain a second strike capability against two nuke countries having one of the largest armies in the world.

                As far as the accuracy of Indian missiles are concerned,they should improve substantially,once the Indian GPS comes online by 2012/2014.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                  Thermonukes does not add to this. Will does. Just because you have thermonukes but shown no inclination to use them does that mean the Pakistanis will back off one bit. In fact, here is something. Pakistan doesn't have any thermo nukes. Who is seen more willing to use nukes?
                  Colonel, I quote myself here from my previous post:

                  ... the Indian doctrine must change - at least, in particular reference to Pakistan.
                  The TNs target the psyche of one particular, undemocratic, type of keyholder:

                  And under the current escalation ladder, at the worst event even a 6-month death span appears to hold positive possibilities to the desperate jihadi hardliner. ... the Mamluke (slave-soldier) mindset ... make sure that MAD is really "assured" at the other end.
                  Otherwise, we are in agreement over other points.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                    No, you're not missing something but I am not being clear. I am asking does India fear Pakistan any less just because she does not have any thermo nukes?
                    Disclaimer: I am not India. That said, if "she" refers to India - then yes, imho, India has more to fear from Pakistan as long as Pakistan believes India doesn't have any thermo-nukes.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Damn, I am really screwing up. Rewrite. I am asking does India fear Pakistan any less just because Pakistan don't have any thermo nukes.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Cactus View Post
                        The TNs target the psyche of one particular, undemocratic, type of keyholder:
                        I don't think it does. A nuke is a nuke is a nuke. Take this example.

                        I'm going to nuke New Dehli.

                        What is your 1st reaction? Do you care if it's a thermo nuke?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by n21 View Post
                          Once Pakistan uses nukes, wouldn't China and Pakistan both be considered a legitimate target by the Indian forces?
                          And if that nuke is delivered by an American made F-16, would the US be considered a legitimate target by the Indian forces?

                          That fairy tail about taking on both Pakistan and China is exactly that, a fairy tail.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                            Damn, I am really screwing up. Rewrite. I am asking does India fear Pakistan any less just because Pakistan don't have any thermo nukes.
                            :)) Again, I am not India - but yes, I fear the Paks a little bit less because they don't have TNs.

                            Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                            I don't think it does. A nuke is a nuke is a nuke. Take this example. I'm going to nuke New Dehli. What is your 1st reaction? Do you care if it's a thermo nuke?
                            Try to get the hell out of Delhi. You know the drill for simple-minded like me: Defend, Create Distance, Counter-Attack. Obviously India doesn't have NMD, so there is no defense. First reaction, I'll try to create distance. That said, yes, the knowledge of whether its a TN or not does make a difference - on how fast should I move, in what direction, who should I look for counter-attack etc.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post

                              That fairy tail about taking on both Pakistan and China is exactly that, a fairy tail.
                              If India can't even defend herself against a combined Chinese-Pakistan attack then isn't it true that India's defense is under mortal threat right now?

                              And if the above is a reasonable assumption then isn't it prudent for India to make as many nukes as possible along with delivery systems that even if India gets destroyed she can inflict such level of damage in the conflict to both countries that they find unacceptable even in victory?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                                Damn, I am really screwing up. Rewrite. I am asking does India fear Pakistan any less just because Pakistan don't have any thermo nukes.
                                The fear level is there with or without such. The intent of India having such weapons adds to the 'feel more comfortable' but does not reduce the fear level.
                                Fear and 'comfort' are not the same.

                                The problem is that fear is contagious, 'feel good' is a self interest and has little bearing on the end result or fear levels.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X