Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Indian Nuclear Testing

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Captain, I want to start off by showing this image,



    This was taken from a sight manage my Kylie. The obvious question to those who can read this pic is, does the Chinese even need a nuke for a 1st strike?
    Goes back to the Tibetan plateau discussion elsewhere.
    I just could not see an argument for a China first strike so it was perplexing to see the level of discussion on that issue.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
      Captain, I want to start off by showing this image,



      This was taken from a sight manage my Kylie. The obvious question to those who can read this pic is, does the Chinese even need a nuke for a 1st strike?
      I cant see the pic,but I assume it is one of the huge no of Chinese conventional rockets.

      I guess the way around it is build a fleet of nuke submarines and leave them at sea with nuke weapons on board.Wont that give an indestructible second strike capability?Along with the other obvious methods like have mobile launchers always on the move around the country etc

      Comment


      • #63
        calass:
        grab your PM on that

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Ratus Ratus View Post
          calass:
          grab your PM on that
          Thanks for the picture...now what am I looking at?

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by calass View Post
            Thanks for the picture...now what am I looking at?

            Top right hand square - impact HE rdns
            Rest 'splatter' in a nasty way, though will depend on the type round sent across. Not sure what was used here exactly. So I will not guess.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Ratus Ratus View Post

              Top right hand square - impact HE rdns
              Rest 'splatter' in a nasty way, though will depend on the type round sent across. Not sure what was used here exactly. So I will not guess.
              Thanks..you should realize I am only a civilian.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Tronic View Post
                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.
                Tronic, the Indian nuclear program was not begun with the Chinese in cross-sights either - but that is what it had to adapt itself to. More importantly than the TNB capability, I believe that a change must be made to the N-NFU doctrine with particular and prejudiced reference to Pakistan and its jihadis. Conventional deterrence is not working in presence of their nuclear umbrella, and "will" is a subjective thing - which Paks are making full use of at your expense. As the case of Pakistan has proved, nukes are more than deterrence against other's nukes - they can also deter conventional attacks with their doctrine. The question is, under the right strategic conditions and doctrine, can they also deter sub-conventional attacks? India has to find out by experimentation.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by greatindian View Post
                  Any source for this statement?. I'm yet to see a report that cold start has been shelved. It would never happen without any buzz in think-tank circles.
                  Well, the think-tanks did not pick up on the existence of Cold Start on paper for nearly a decade (drafter in 1994, first publicly heard of in 2002) - so don't expect an official obituary for what was just a study. Look at it from what is actually going on - the direction of regular army reorganizations, the silence from IAF - and MEA. I believe that certain workable aspects were quietly extracted and are being incorporated, but the radical and the abrasive have been shelved.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                    PLA Field Marshall Nie and Indian Army General K. Sundarji don't agree with you, the architects of their respective country's nuclear doctrines.
                    ...
                    I want you to read the architect of the Indian nuclear doctrine: General K. Sundarji. An extremely brilliant man, an outside the box thinker. If he was alive at the time, he would have come up with the strategy, "What's the best way to take a castle? A donkey loaded with gold."
                    Colonel, no doubt Gen. Sundarji was a brilliant man (and his counterparts in China and elsewhere too), but you know what they say about best laid plans of mice and men. Sadly things are not working out the way the prediction below reads. He would be the first to acknowledge it if he saw detachments of his beloved mechanized infantrymen and tankers doing their COIN duties today, his officers fighting proxy-enemies in streets of Mumbai. The assumptions must change to account for the ground realities today, so must the solutions we develop with the assumptions.

                    Possession of nuclear weapons would give Pakistan the confidence to face a larger neighbour with security and honor… This confidence on the part of Pakistan is to be welcomed as it is a positive asset for national sobriety and regional stability.
                    ...
                    India has to maintain a minimum deterrence in respect of both China and Pakistan; the result of this might lead to some apparent imbalance in nuclear weapons and delivery means between Pakistan and India. The fears that this might engender in Pakistan are natural, and India must handle the issue sensibly and with sensitivity.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Cactus View Post
                      Colonel, no doubt Gen. Sundarji was a brilliant man (and his counterparts in China and elsewhere too), but you know what they say about best laid plans of mice and men. Sadly things are not working out the way the prediction below reads. He would be the first to acknowledge it if he saw detachments of his beloved mechanized infantrymen and tankers doing their COIN duties today, his officers fighting proxy-enemies in streets of Mumbai. The assumptions must change to account for the ground realities today, so must the solutions we develop with the assumptions.
                      I agree completely. Nuclear weapons have enabled Pakistan to fight even more dishonourably and I fail to see how regional stability has improved.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Some basic question on this.

                        Have matters really changed enough that the current nuclear doctrine needs to change, as altering of assumptions implies directly the doctrine is out of whack.
                        So will Indian setting of a series of TN tests actually bring things back on line or would it just set off a chain reaction of "keeping up with the Jones"?

                        If one nation has the ability for TN, while the other one not, will this possibly cause an imbalance, hence dilute the deterrence philosophy behind the Indian doctrine?
                        Is not the underling Indian doctrine deterrence?

                        How much of the current situation is really nuclear deterrence/doctrine failure and how much can actually be placed back on the political leaders of the two nations?

                        So India goes ahead and tests their latest working TN device. How will this really change things?
                        Will it stop the proxy-enemies?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Ratus Ratus View Post
                          Have matters really changed enough that the current nuclear doctrine needs to change, as altering of assumptions implies directly the doctrine is out of whack.

                          So will Indian setting of a series of TN tests actually bring things back on line or would it just set off a chain reaction of "keeping up with the Jones"?
                          There is a major confusion regarding the TN device 'fizzle' in Pokhran-II tests. While the people involved in the bomb design say that the device has given expected yields, the other set of people say we need to do more tests as the TN was fizzle. It is not clear whom to believe, though literature available on the tests heavily skew towards the assertions of bomb designers.

                          If India sets off TN tests now, it may or may not be followed by Pakistani nuke tests depending on whether Uncle Sam has control over the Pakistani nukes. And I don't see any changes in the Indian nuclear doctrine even if the nuke tests are successful.

                          So India goes ahead and tests their latest working TN device. How will this really change things?
                          Will it stop the proxy-enemies?
                          It doesn't change anything. More nuclear tests will not stop proxy-elements and it did not previously. More tests will only increase the confidence in deterrence.

                          As far as nuclear balance with Pakistan, it doesn't matter. Pakistan will be the first one to go for a nuke strike.
                          Question everything, answer nothing.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by greatindian View Post
                            It doesn't change anything. More nuclear tests will not stop proxy-elements and it did not previously. More tests will only increase the confidence in deterrence.
                            So in reality it comes down to fear and perceptions of safety.

                            As far as nuclear balance with Pakistan, it doesn't matter. Pakistan will be the first one to go for a nuke strike.
                            Now taking that and this which I posted earlier here:
                            From my limited readings about Cold Start has the potential to force a first strike by Pakistan. Is that what is really the underlying issues in Cold Start? What has been written so far implies that is not the case, but we came back to perceptions and fear.

                            Besides the mater of the full Cold Start doctrine being on or off has little meaning as the intent is of doing something to Pakistan, be it destruction of just the PA or holding ground for the table discussions after. The intent of a fast combined thrust into Pakistan is still there and that thrust can, by its nature, go beyond the "limited war". Again perceptions are dangerous especially from the other side.

                            Also I have never got an answer to this:
                            under what conditions will India go for a first strike against China or Pakistan?
                            The answer it will never happen is more of an avoidance of the problem.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Ratus Ratus View Post
                              under what conditions will India go for a first strike against China or Pakistan?
                              Captain,

                              From my limited understanding
                              1. In a war against China: Unlikely. The reasons being that India and China have an NFU and also as has been pointed out by OOE the terrain and the geopolitical environment limits a full scale war between the two to an extent that India's existence is threatened
                              2. In a war against Pakistan: Unlikely. India, at least ofr the moment is committed to NFU even though Pakistan does not have a similar commitment. A full scale assualt by the PA may be repelled by the IA by virtue of the original sundarji doctrine of Strike and Holding Corps so it is unlikely that India would face an existential threat
                              3. Two Front war against India and China: I think this is the one case where this may be possible, especially if China launches a major offensive through Pakistan and compromises New Delhi. In that the reason for the nuclear doctrine would have failed anyway, so there may be a case for an attack. I would think that attack should be directed against Pakistan, so as to theoretically not violate the Indian-Chinese NFU and thus avoid a Chinese nuclear response (hopefully)


                              I would not be surprised if the above reasoning is deemed as garbage by the pros:)
                              "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


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Ratus Ratus View Post
                                Also I have never got an answer to this:
                                under what conditions will India go for a first strike against China or Pakistan?
                                The answer it will never happen is more of an avoidance of the problem.
                                Quick answer, Captain, if and only if the Indians win a nuclear arms race with China.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X