Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Indian Nuclear Testing

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    What is your 1st reaction?
    If I am a part of the civil authority: What is the target? What sort of blast is it (ground or airburst)? What is the yield? I guess these should give some answer to how the post blast human impact be limited
    I am part of the nuclear targetters or military: How do I hit you back, where and with what?
    If I am a civilian: Go out into the country. Board up the windows and hide under the bed
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Cactus View Post
      Try to get the hell out of Delhi.
      You're a better man than me. I would be looking for clean underwear.

      Originally posted by calass View Post
      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?
      Ok, this will be hard to understand ... and it even took me a long time to understand this. The Chinese and Indian arsenals are for deterrence only, they're not meant for war fighting. If you have to launch, you've already lost.

      The idea is to avoid nuclear war, not to fight it.

      With this said, the Indians are aiming for the same number of nukes as the Chinese. The thinking is that the destruction of 30 city targets would be unacceptable to any attacking power. Simple math means that you need 90 survivable nukes to do the job. And sufferring a first strike, you assume that half your arsenal is taken out.

      But again, the idea is to avoid nuclear war, not to fight it. That means that you don't c_ock the nuclear trigger. You don't prepare to launch a 1st strike. You always train to recover from an attack before launching, all to show the other guy that he doesn't have to launch first out of fear of being hit first.

      Originally posted by Ratus Ratus View Post
      The problem is that fear is contagious, 'feel good' is a self interest and has little bearing on the end result or fear levels.
      Good observation, Captain. Now, if they could only figure that out.

      Comment


      • #33
        OOE,obviously you and the other military men around this board know a lot more than me a civilian but I read nuclear warfare 101,102,103 and came away with the conclusion that nukes are nothing but really big bombs.Especially in the nos with China,Pakistan and India.For example even if the Chinese unload all their 200 nukes on India(very unlikely),India will still exist.She is just too big.Similarly the current Indian nuke inventory can hardly do anything to China.So is there not the temptation to use them as actual weapons of war? Deterrence can be achieved IMO only by really big nuke inventories like the ones with the US and Russia.In such a scenario would not ironically the 3 countries making more bombs help prevent the temptation of using them? I know you will say the doctrine does not support their use as weapons of war but doctrines can be easily thrown out of the window when a military sees an opening for a decisive victory.

        And therefore again if the bombs are going to be used as weapons of war by the 3 countries then India is lost as she stands now.So would it not make sense to rapidly expand the arsenal from her side?So coming back to topic maybe she really needs to perfect the hydrogen bomb as insurance.

        Comment


        • #34
          Again, deterrence vs warfighting is an extremely hard concept to grasp and I really did not grasp it until I saw Col Blasko's presentations that the Chinese views deterence as an OPOBJ.

          Nuke War 101, 102, and 103 was to explain nuclear warfighting concepts and you cannot understand nuclear deterrence until you understand those. I will use China against the USSR because that will illustrate the point far easier than say between India and China.

          During the Sino-Soviet clashes, the Chinese have about a dozen nukes. 12 nukes. The Russians at the time had over 20,000 but none across the border from the Chinese. When the Russians decided to prepare for war against the Chinese, they moved 200 nukes. So, in the space of two years, the Chinese went from local superiority to complete inferiority across the spectrum.

          So, if you were the Chinese, how could you win such a war? Obvious answer you cannot. But could the Chinese survive such a war. Yes, don't start one and don't allow the Soviets to start one. How are you going to do that? 12 nukes ain't exactly going to kill the USSR. It ain't even to hurt that much, especially when you consider the Chinese delivery systems couldn't hit the broadside of Moscow. Oh, they've got rockets that range but accuracy?

          So, how would you deter Moscow if you can't win, you can't even hurt the guy that much? You tilt the balance against Moscow. In other words, you make the war costly enough that her chances against the West goes downhill. However, both you and Moscow knows that you are going to die tilting that balance and Moscow is going to be far stronger than you after the war than when she went in.

          So, again, the idea is not warfighting. You lose at warfighting. The only way you're going to win is to not start the fight.

          Comment


          • #35
            Ok, taking this into the Sino-Indo scenario. While the Chinese have about 178 warheads, their fissible stocks are much greater than India's. Every gram of Indian fissible material production is destined for warheads. In other words, India has no fissible stocks. As soon as the factory produces it, it goes to weapons making.

            By contrast, the Chinese have already stopped fissible material production. They ain't making anymore. However, they have enough stock for about 1200 warheads on top of the ones they already have and could easily ramped up fissible material production that India simply could not keep pace with. A head start is a head start and the lead is that great.

            On top of that, they've got 1600 rockets that could fit a nuke, 1400 of them are currently armed with conventional warheads.

            Do you really think India wants to compete with those numbers?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
              Ok, taking this into the Sino-Indo scenario. While the Chinese have about 178 warheads, their fissible stocks are much greater than India's. Every gram of Indian fissible material production is destined for warheads. In other words, India has no fissible stocks. As soon as the factory produces it, it goes to weapons making.

              By contrast, the Chinese have already stopped fissible material production. They ain't making anymore. However, they have enough stock for about 1200 warheads on top of the ones they already have and could easily ramped up fissible material production that India simply could not keep pace with. A head start is a head start and the lead is that great.

              On top of that, they've got 1600 rockets that could fit a nuke, 1400 of them are currently armed with conventional warheads.

              Do you really think India wants to compete with those numbers?

              I understood your prev post about China and the USSR but I don't understand this one...bear with me please.

              Why would India need parity with China on warheads?..after all Beijing or Shanghai will need only X amount of warheads to destroy.You can't keep destroying what is already radioactive dust can you?So when and if India manages to make the X amount of warheads/delivery systems needed to survive a first strike and still destroy say for sure 30 major cities in China wont that and that only give her the deterrence she needs?She IMO has zero deterrence now.Maybe against Pakistan but certainly not against China.Hence the need to keep ramping up production and the need to make even more powerful bombs...like the hydrogen ones.What am I missing here?

              Edit: Thinking more about this when does a country like India decide that they have enough to deter both Pakistan and China from a nuke war with her? What do you think the no they should be aiming for or have they already reached that level?
              Last edited by calass; 30 Aug 09,, 20:53.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by calass View Post
                Why would India need parity with China on warheads?
                She doesn't and it's a very, very bad idea to try.

                Originally posted by calass View Post
                ..after all Beijing or Shanghai will need only X amount of warheads to destroy.You can't keep destroying what is already radioactive dust can you?
                Well, yeah you can but that's into nuclear warfighting and not deterrence. Again, if you have to launch, you've already lost. The idea is not to have to launch. In fact, the idea is not to even want to launch.

                Originally posted by calass View Post
                So when and if India manages to make the X amount of warheads/delivery systems needed to survive a first strike and still destroy say for sure 30 major cities in China wont that and that only give her the deterrence she needs?
                No, that's only one part of it. The other part is to convince the Chinese that you don't want nuclear war and that you will only fight nuclear war if and only if you got hit by a nuke first.

                You have to convince the Chinese not to do a 1st strike and that includes denying them the hit or be hit option, ie if the Chinese don't hit you first, you'll hit them first. You have to convince your oppenants of this very crucial arguement in order to deter them.

                Originally posted by calass View Post
                She IMO has zero deterrence now.
                Nuclear wise, she does since the Chinese need their arsenal to deter others. The Chinese are not in an arms race with India. All indications are that they're perfectly willing to live with a nuclear armed India instead of driving an arms race that would bankrupt India.

                Originally posted by calass View Post
                Maybe against Pakistan but certainly not against China.Hence the need to keep ramping up production and the need to make even more powerful bombs...like the hydrogen ones.What am I missing here?
                Thermo nukes are an entirely a different issue and one that has absolutely zero effect on deterrence. The big advantage of thermo nukes is that they have a bigger yield in a smaller package but the bigger yields are only used for hardened targets, ie missile silos and command bunkers. India does not have the accuracy to target those assets.

                Originally posted by calass View Post
                Edit: Thinking more about this when does a country like India decide that they have enough to deter both Pakistan and China from a nuke war with her? What do you think the no they should be aiming for or have they already reached that level?
                Open source data stated that India is aiming for 200 warheads. She currently has about 90 with 50 being deployable while the others are being built or in maintenance.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                  That fairy tail about taking on both Pakistan and China is exactly that, a fairy tail.
                  Sir, I think the IA would disagree.
                  Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
                  -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Tronic View Post
                    Sir, I think the IA would disagree.
                    This is in context of a nuclear exchange.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                      This is in context of a nuclear exchange.
                      Yes, then its surely game over; for probably all 3 countries. One will cease to function as a country, the other two would've lost their objective.
                      Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
                      -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Cactus View Post
                        IMHO, as Kargil and numerous Pak-backed terrorist campaigns show, India has yet to come up with a credible nuclear deterrence against Pakistan - let alone China. And for a enemy whose decision-making factions are possibly infected with ideological rabies, only the threat of immediate and maximum retaliation can hope to wake the more sensible enemy and help them restrain their brothers. If India can come up with a credible detente with Pakistan, it is more than likely that India will get real credibility with the Chinese.
                        Cactus, Indian nukes were never meant for the Pakistanis. India's '74 nuke test was in response to the Chinese test a decade earlier. And with the NFU in place, it is not nukes which will deter the Pakistanis; it is the will to use conventional might against the Pakistanis. We haven't had that since Indira or Rajiv. Nukes are only deterrence against nuclear strikes, not against proxy wars. Those must be dealt with, or deterred with, conventional might.
                        Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
                        -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Ahhh, it's so nice talking to adults.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            OOE..thanks for the explanation...my mistake was thinking that the nukes are to be used as weapons and not as deterrence.But does not the premise of the chinese nuke weapon being only a deterrent something that stands on flimsy ground considering that their top leadership is completely in the shadows?

                            That been the case,I still think India needs a lot more than 200 nukes and nukes a lot stronger than 20 KT along with the required delivery systems.IMO preparing for a nuke war is the best way to avoid one.I see conflict between the 2 countries as inevitable and India better protect herself.

                            Edit:- why conflict would be inevitable is due to shortage of resources in the world.Today's world cannot support great power aspirations of another 2 billion plus people.
                            Last edited by calass; 31 Aug 09,, 01:10.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Tronic View Post
                              Sir, I think the IA would disagree.
                              Can the IA really fight on 2 fronts..what would be the tactics,a holding action across the Himalayas while they sort out Pakistan across the plains first?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer. To take on two countries would be suicide par excellence. Nobody has any intention of using them, so in reality the argument is null and void.

                                PS. If anyone has inside information to the contrary please let me know so I don't waste money booking a holiday to India next year;)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X