Are nukes over-rated?

[Kshatriya87]

The discussion about missiles and MIRV capability is largely useless. The capability exists but its purpose is not to scare or engage in an arms race

Why is the discussion useless? Missiles can very well be used in a conventional war. MIRVs can be used with conventional warheads.

 

[no smoking]

So, what do you wanna say man. India can't do so?

No, India can do it but it didn't do it and it is not doing it.

We have done many things similar to these supa dupa powa full P5, so can't do that even.A very large infrastructural network and enough tech. Who can stop us?

You own government and parliament: you can't manage to do that without risking a bankruptcy. Cold war is gone, you can hardly persuade your people to do that.

Here's, the case of thermo nukes, we need just some sanction free time. Which we can get at war very easily.

That is funny. When the war is coming, you tell your enemy:" Can you wait until I am getting ready please?". I wonder when did P5 ask for "some sanction free time".

Moreover, we have mastered many of techs in civil nuclear sector.

SO?

Trying to build fusion reactors now. So, if you think we will have much difficulty, please kill the thought.

Yes, you do have a lot of difficulties: money, time and motivation.

 

[garg_bharat]

Fusion reactors are unlikely to be built in near future. There is a lot of talk but reality has not caught up with imagination yet.

The science of controllable fusion is in its infancy.

So let us not talk about fusion yet, and it is not a strategic thing.

The biggest job in india remains to convert current semi-socialist economy to true market economy. India wants to win friends rather than enemies to achieve that.

 

[garg_bharat]

India's solar resources are far greater than atomic energy potential. Arid and semi arid areas with high solar radiation cover one third of the country. We think that solar will provide more electricity than coal within 20 years time. Nobody is enamoured of atomic energy as some people think. Atomic energy target remains 10% of total.

 

[garg_bharat]

India is NOT going for a big nuclear and missile arsenal irrespective of what other countries do. Period.

People need to give rest to their imagination.

The government wants to improve conventional war fighting machine where armed forces cooperation is needed.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

No, India can do it but it didn't do it and it is not doing it.

what made you say that? You just ignore updates on Indian Nuclear Program or you think yourself policy maker of India?

You own government and parliament: you can't manage to do that without risking a bankruptcy. Cold war is gone, you can hardly persuade your people to do that.

Then, from where is coming the massive money in projects in budget.
We are doing it without disturbing our investments in other sectors.
Read in GoI budget FY15-16.

That is funny. When the war is coming, you tell your enemy:" Can you wait until I am getting ready please?". I wonder when did P5 ask for "some sanction free time".

Our conventional forces and missile shield systems are enough large to give us time to handle them.
And funny thing is that you think that
Countries are stupid enough to obey P5 in a nuclear war.
And it's India. We even defy P5 in normal conditions. Will we do it in war?
Nor any country gonna obey your sanctions. They have to save themselves first.

SO?

this experience will help us to develop them faster. As told in second part of the post man.

Yes, you do have a lot of difficulties: money, time and motivation.

Exclude Motivation please.
Anyway, again, experience will reduce the time taken for development.
And if you don't understand even such simple logic, you must not join a discussion.

 

[Krusty]

I think nukes are being underrated by everyone here. Aside from the fact that few well places small nukes in crowded financial Centers will cripple any country and its effect will ripple through all other countries resulting in stock market crashes and wide spread panic (have a look at what the economic collapse of a small country like Greece did to the global economy), setting off a nuke on any city regardless of size, will potentially spark the next world war, this time around, more deadlier than the two before it combined. I don't think people understand the economic ramifications of setting off a nuke. Nukes are deterrents. They are not meant for war fighting, once launched they cease to be deterrents. then on, it's just a bloody free for all. Then it's back to sticks and stones...

 

[sorcerer]

Yes, you do have a lot of difficulties: money, time and motivation.

Money: ..We have money..Thats the reason India is into very large innovation projects in India and abroad. Every nation has its own difficulties. china itself is finding it very difficult to read and interpret even stolen documents on arms and tech.

Time: . India had the time.India has the time. Sanctions delayed the normal time frame..but its good..India was able to make stuffs on its own.
Just because a few nations have photocopied documents doesnt mean that they are far ahead with the tech.
Just because they have a deterrent in place doesnt mean that the war is won!

Motivation: The terrorist state of pakistan and its stooge china is motivation for a whole nations to develop or opt for nukes.


North Korea has "Our Great Leader God"
china has the Great lullaby propaganda CCP which gives the chinese a good sleep.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

I think nukes are being underrated by everyone here. Aside from the fact that few well places small nukes in crowded financial Centers will cripple any country and its effect will ripple through all other countries resulting in stock market crashes and wide spread panic (have a look at what the economic collapse of a small country like Greece did to the global economy), setting off a nuke on any city regardless of size, will potentially spark the next world war, this time around, more deadlier than the two before it combined. I don't think people understand the economic ramifications of setting off a nuke. Nukes are deterrents. They are not meant for war fighting, once launched they cease to be deterrents. then on, it's just a bloody free for all. Then it's back to sticks and stones...

We aren't underestimating nukes.

But today, conventional forces are also much advanced. More and more countries are getting involved in regional disputes making the situation complex.

The most funny thing is that, that CCPian guy no smoking thinks that India can't make thermo nukes.

Without any logic, he's considering himself the judge and claims India has no capability. He thinks whole world is idiot who is concerned about our installations which could make us capable to do that. :biggrin2:
He simply igoners, India's other Nuclear achievements, like Fusion reactors, nuke sub's, missiles, first thorium based reactor in world etc. etc. .
Ignorance and sarcasm.
Underestimating power of enemy
(Specially that enemy who has screwed up those supa dupa P5 many times).
That's the reason, commies always end up suffering.


@no smoking bro, I really hope you are not showing ignorance just for cooling down us.
Brother, I wish you and your country, that Fragile and lame organization P5, really believes that India can't make thermonukes. India could not even make chemical, biological weapons, nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers, reactors etc.
:biggrin2::biggrin2:
Your ignorance helped us to make nukes in 1974, and several other weapons ignorance of these countries will also help us to develop TNWs. :grin:
Good luck, we still are dark and backward yindoos who still can't make anything.
Our all major forces which could f**k up even Europeans are fake. We are so weak.
I love your point of view.

 

[Anikastha]

We aren't underestimating nukes.

But today, conventional forces are also much advanced. More and more countries are getting involved in regional disputes making the situation complex.

The most funny thing is that, that CCPian guy no smoking thinks that India can't make thermo nukes.

Without any logic, he's considering himself the judge and claims India has no capability. He thinks whole world is idiot who is concerned about our installations which could make us capable to do that. :biggrin2:
He simply igoners, India's other Nuclear achievements, like Fusion reactors, nuke sub's, missiles, first thorium based reactor in world etc. etc. .
Ignorance and sarcasm.
Underestimating power of enemy
(Specially that enemy who has screwed up those supa dupa P5 many times).
That's the reason, commies always end up suffering.


@no smoking bro, I really hope you are not showing ignorance just for cooling down us.
Brother, I wish you and your country, that Fragile and lame organization P5, really believes that India can't make thermonukes. India could not even make chemical, biological weapons, nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers, reactors etc.
:biggrin2::biggrin2:
Your ignorance helped us to make nukes in 1974, and several other weapons ignorance of these countries will also help us to develop TNWs. :grin:
Good luck, we still are dark and backward yindoos who still can't make anything.
Our all major forces which could f**k up even Europeans are fake. We are so weak.
I love your point of view.

That was funny......
Who knows we have thermonukes and kept them secretly some where in MP or Rajasthan?
Indian Nuke test was shock to World and we faced lots of people criticised us..So How do think People like Dhoval will let such Projects out....b cool
Airlift dekha?

 

[Indx TechStyle]

That was funny......
Who knows we have thermonukes and kept them secretly some where in MP or Rajasthan?
Indian Nuke test was shock to World and we faced lots of people criticised us..So How do think People like Dhoval will let such Projects out....b cool
Airlift dekha?

Our talk isn't of that. They are not reliable till they aren't well tested.
Many times tests could fail and untested nuke will make missile useless.
Our discussion is about India's capability. India has got edge in many major fields plus we know the mistake in previous weapon test.
As our knowledge about nukes keeps increasing, probability of making successful hydrogen bombs will be higher.
But this CCPian has P5mania.

And thinks that India has to do
]Falungong to master the tech.

 

[Krusty]

We aren't underestimating nukes.

But today, conventional forces are also much advanced. More and more countries are getting involved in regional disputes making the situation complex.

The most funny thing is that, that CCPian guy no smoking thinks that India can't make thermo nukes.

Without any logic, he's considering himself the judge and claims India has no capability. He thinks whole world is idiot who is concerned about our installations which could make us capable to do that. :biggrin2:
He simply igoners, India's other Nuclear achievements, like Fusion reactors, nuke sub's, missiles, first thorium based reactor in world etc. etc. .
Ignorance and sarcasm.
Underestimating power of enemy
(Specially that enemy who has screwed up those supa dupa P5 many times).
That's the reason, commies always end up suffering.


@no smoking bro, I really hope you are not showing ignorance just for cooling down us.
Brother, I wish you and your country, that Fragile and lame organization P5, really believes that India can't make thermonukes. India could not even make chemical, biological weapons, nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers, reactors etc.
:biggrin2::biggrin2:
Your ignorance helped us to make nukes in 1974, and several other weapons ignorance of these countries will also help us to develop TNWs. :grin:
Good luck, we still are dark and backward yindoos who still can't make anything.
Our all major forces which could f**k up even Europeans are fake. We are so weak.
I love your point of view.

CCP thrives on propaganda and brainwashing. Even modern day Chinese are not falling for it. China has one advantage. It can test its nukes through North Korea. But it would be dumb to assume India is not capable of making a thermonuclear bomb. P5 is no big deal honestly. I think India should stay well away from it till we sort out our internal issues. Once we do that and grow stronger economically, it will be impossible to keep India out of it.

China even though its vast and economically stronger, it has a serious weak spot. Well two actually.. Both its agricultural and industrial base is extremely concentrated. On its east. The fact that CCP deliberately left out Tibet and xinjiang from its development plans works out to our advantage. We have a smaller area and fewer cities to target, if at all we decide to strike. also, RAW will most certainly make sure that these two regions will rise up against the CCP if China is nuked. They're huge army will be tied down since they have to control two large swaths trying to over throw CCP. They need another chunk stationed against SE Asia. And one for Taiwan. In other words, China's huge army can be bogged down easily if at all it comes down to a full scale war.

I'm sure there are much smarter brains than myself in Indias war planning rooms who have already thought of this. No country is without weaknesses. The almighty (CCP likes the world to think so) China is no exception. Only that they have made a lot of enemies within their country that they wouldn't like you to know of..

 

[no smoking]

what made you say that? You just ignore updates on Indian Nuclear Program or you think yourself policy maker of India?

Yes, I know India is building new reactors, but not kind of project of building up thousands of factories in the locations where it is not making sense economically.

Then, from where is coming the massive money in projects in budget. We are doing it without disturbing our investments in other sectors.
Read in GoI budget FY15-16.

Your GOI budget didn't show any abnormal spending. We are not talking about couple of billions dollars here. It is way beyond that.

Our conventional forces and missile shield systems are enough large to give us time to handle them.

There are 2 countries, both of them have better conventional forces and missile shield systems than. But neither of them agree with you.

And funny thing is that you think that
Countries are stupid enough to obey P5 in a nuclear war.
And it's India. We even defy P5 in normal conditions. Will we do it in war?
Nor any country gonna obey your sanctions. They have to save themselves first.
this experience will help us to develop them faster. As told in second part of the post man.

In a potential nuclear war, the only countries that P5 concerns are P5.

Exclude Motivation please.

Without motivation, how can you persuade your people the necessity of allocating hundreds of billions budget from economic and social sectors to preparation of highly unlikely nuclear war?

Anyway, again, experience will reduce the time taken for development.

Yes, right, it took each of P5 30-50 years to gain those experience, Indian already had them at the beginning?

And if you don't understand even such simple logic, you must not join a discussion.

Yes, right, your "simple logic" tells you that India should have done it while the simple fact is that India didn't.

 

[no smoking]

Without any logic, he's considering himself the judge and claims India has no capability. He thinks whole world is idiot who is concerned about our installations which could make us capable to do that. :biggrin2:

Yes, that is the way of Indian logic: we must have it already although there is no success test.

He simply igoners, India's other Nuclear achievements, like Fusion reactors, nuke sub's, missiles, first thorium based reactor in world etc. etc. .

Each of these achievements involves heavily foreign assistance: Canadians, Russians, French. The funny thing is after working with you for quite long time, none of them agree with you.

Yes, lot's of countries are shocked by India's test. But we are shocked by the timing and political consequence of the test, not the weapon itself. Even if the test was a success, it means very little in military since all of P5 are moving their delivery systems away from nuke now.

 

[garg_bharat]

Money: ..We have money..Thats the reason India is into very large innovation projects in India and abroad. Every nation has its own difficulties. china itself is finding it very difficult to read and interpret even stolen documents on arms and tech.

Time: . India had the time.India has the time. Sanctions delayed the normal time frame..but its good..India was able to make stuffs on its own.
Just because a few nations have photocopied documents doesnt mean that they are far ahead with the tech.
Just because they have a deterrent in place doesnt mean that the war is won!

Motivation: The terrorist state of pakistan and its stooge china is motivation for a whole nations to develop or opt for nukes.


North Korea has "Our Great Leader God"
china has the Great lullaby propaganda CCP which gives the chinese a good sleep.

Money is always an issue in R&D. We have to accept that China has built an industrial capacity that surpasses any other nation today.

India has successes and failures both. However india is strong today due to cohesion of its population that now identifies strongly with the political idea of india.

No nuclear bombs can give victory in a general war. It will require millions of well equipped soldiers.

 

[garg_bharat]

India can easily raise 10 million soldier army. India's current army can hold on for one year at least, enough time in which another million soldier can be raised.

Brandishing nuclear weapons is not a solution for india or for any other country.

I believe USA is making a serious mistake by starting unnecessary wars. The constant turmoil has already resulted in uncontrollable militancy in west Asia and Africa. Now this may spread to other parts of the world. It is a very dangerous situation.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Yes, I know India is building new reactors, but not kind of project of building up thousands of factories in the locations where it is not making sense economically.

Economically?
India's market isn't crashing. It's rising.
Some people are promoting rumours that India's Economy is slower than figures.
But they have no mind that then, how India could invest in many large ventures suddenly.
Here, we are talking about nuclear, but India is investing everywhere: infrastructure, R&D, defence, space, energy, environment, telecommunications, skill development, education and everywhere higher. So, nuclear is one of these projects.

Your GOI budget didn't show any abnormal spending. We are not talking about couple of billions dollars here. It is way beyond that.

Yes, so when I said we are building them today. Nuclear War is also way beyond. Except pakis who have even smaller nukes than us.
We are not stupid to venture country in nuclear race like pakis and north koreans without caring of national development. We have time and we are using that.

There are 2 countries, both of them have better conventional forces and missile shield systems than. But neither of them agree with you.

Both?
Agree about China but pakis are better?
An idiot paki may have said you that their missiles are better than India's and you believed or you are just kidding me?

Look dude, China-India war is far fetched and Indo paki war is fixed. That even with wiping out one side and almost zero damage on other side.
Till they will nuke us, we will ave destroyed their reactors. You must read about our nuclear doctrine.
And if still you think. that pakistan is a substantial threat to India, you must not call yourself any defence analyst or enthusiast and must not join any defence forum. Somebody may give laugh on you.

In a potential nuclear war, the only countries that P5 concerns are P5.

Two of P5(Brits and France) have lost many major capabilities and power projection: specially Britain.
Moreover, these are smaller so they have more problem.

And here's case of India is a threat or not, I think you always talk about something called unacceptable damage.
You may agree that a triad nuclear power and fourth largest conventional force can do at least unacceptable damage man. That's also a threat.

Without motivation,

I asked you to exclude motivation because we have motivation.
We have problem of comparatively low spending (which we are increasing slowly) and time problem.

how can you persuade your people the necessity of allocating hundreds of billions budget from economic and social sectors to preparation of highly unlikely nuclear war?

We can because we have money to do that.
If you think India is preparing for nuclear war like crazy b*tches then, forget that.

We are still heavily spending for national development.
TNWs is one of our ambitions, not a priority.
But doesn't mean that we can't fulfill our ambitions. We have fulfilled many.

Yes, right, it took each of P5 30-50 years to gain those experience, Indian already had them at the beginning?

But India got sanctions in free.
We were stopped immediately.
P5 has advantage here,So, India needs to backup from some other thing.
Experience from other researches.

Yes, right, your "simple logic" tells you that India should have done it while the simple fact is that India didn't.

My simple logic says India can do it but but didn't because of sanctions.
But you become happy thinking that India will do it never.

Yes, that is the way of Indian logic: we must have it already although there is no success test.

Atomic Device Exploded successfully according to your own country China even.
Or by wanna give conspiracy theories.
Just like man didn't landed on Moon.

Each of these achievements involves heavily foreign assistance: Canadians, Russians, French.

Like China didn't took any foreign assistance.
Anyway, if you think reverse engineering is an easy task, I can't convene you on this.
Your own country does it higher than India.

The funny thing is after working with you for quite long time, none of them agree with you.

How?
Many of them agree man. After entry of FBR, when India started making fusion reactors, they are trying to block program.

Yes, lot's of countries are shocked by India's test. But we are shocked by the timing and political consequence of the test, not the weapon itself. Even if the test was a success, it means very little in military since all of P5 are moving their delivery systems away from nuke now.

Even India isn't relying much any nukes.
P5 has NPT, and China(also one of P5) and India both have adopted NFU.
But we have to maintain a small firepower of Mass Destruction when your neighbor thinks that it is an Islamic Superpower and claims its def tech is better than India's.
Otherwise, neither P5 nor India gonna use nukes against each other.
No one of them is on verge of war with each other and they have much better conventional forces to win Battle without killing innocent civilians.

 

[sorcerer]

US Military Eyes New Mini-Nukes for 21st-Century Deterrence

The Joint Chiefs’ vice chair says smaller-yield weapons are needed to deter the use of same.

The future of nuclear weapons might not be huge and mega destructive but smaller, tactical, and frighteningly, more common. The U.S. Air Force is investigating more options for “variable yield” bombs — nukes that can be dialed down to blow up an area as small as a neighborhood, or dialed up for a much larger punch.

The Air Force currently has gravity bombs that either have or can be set to low yields: less than 20 kilotons. Such a bomb dropped in the center of Washington, D.C., wouldn’t even directly affect Georgetown or Foggy Bottom. But a Minuteman III missile tipped with a 300-kiloton warhead would destroy downtown Washington and cause third-degree burns into Virginia and Maryland.

Throughout much the Cold War, the thinking in Washington and especially Moscow was that bigger yields was better: the more destruction, the more deterrence. This thinking drove the Soviet Union to build the most powerful bomb ever, the Tzar Bomba, whose 100,000 kilotons, detonated over DC, would burn Baltimore.

But the future of nuclear deterrence lies, at least in part, in smaller nuclear weapons that the United States might actually use, Air Force Gen. Paul Selva, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Thursday at a Mitchell Institute event in downtown Washington. The threat of mutually assured destruction doesn’t work against smaller regimes in the way that it used to against the Soviet Union. Selva said the U.S. needs to be able launch a nuclear attack on an adversary without ending the world or causing massive “indiscriminate” casualties.

“If all you have is high-yield weapons to answer a low-yield attack, it’s still a nuclear attack. Answering that with a conventional weapon is likely not going to have the kind of deterrent value as saying, ‘Even if you use a low-yield weapon, we have options to respond,” he said. “If the only options we have are to go with high-yield weapons that create a level of indiscriminate killing that the President can’t accept, then we haven’t presented him with an option with an option to respond to a nuclear attack in kind.”

The United States is amid a massive modernization of its nuclear arsenal, including work on defining requirements for a new ICBM. In December, the Defense Science Board urged the Pentagon to incorporate low-yield and variable-yield reentry vehicles into future ICBM designs. Selva said Thursday that the Air Force had not yet made a final decision on that.

“Whether we do it with a ballistic missile or re-entry vehicle or other tool in the arsenal, it’s important to have variable-yield nukes,” he said.

The military has a requirement to explore such systems, mandated by several nuclear posture reviews and “that is a path we’re pursuing very quickly,” he said.

But Congressional critics who say the proliferation of such weapons would bring less, not more security.

“I have no doubt the proposal to research low-yield nuclear weapons is just the first step to actually building them,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told Roll Call in February. “I’ve fought against such reckless efforts in the past and will do so again, with every tool at my disposal.”

She also sounded a skeptical note against ‘tactical nukes in general. “There’s no such thing as limited nuclear war, and for the Pentagon’s advisory board to even suggest such a thing is deeply troubling.”

The U.S. military is not the only one that is envisioning the use of smallish nukes in combat. While Russia possesses the largest-yield nuclear weapons, it also boasts much smaller, “tactical” nuclear weapons that it’s used in exercises. And unlike the United States, Russia has not foresworn the first use of nuclear weapons in a conflict. In fact, Russian lawmakers have threatened the use of low-yield nuclear weapons were NATO forces to attack pro-Russian forces in Eastern Ukraine.

North Korea claimed last year to have tested a hydrogen bomb, which would have a potential yield between 15,000 and 50,000 kilotons, but analysis of underground North Korean missile tests showed that the yield on the test device was closer to 10 kilotons, more like a regular fission bomb.

Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, points out that the United States already has nuclear bombs that can be converted to low-yield weapons. And it may be building more. The controversial Long-Range Standoff Cruise missile will use a modified W80 nuclear warhead.

“The rumor is that they want to modify that warhead to improve the selection of lower-yield options,” said Kristensen. “Military leaders have talked about the LRSO mission as very ‘tactical’ or ‘war-fighting’ terms,” he said, highlighting this piece for the Union of Concerned Scientists.

“The still-unanswered question is why there would be a need for a low-yield warhead on ballistic missiles. What are the strikes that existing warheads can’t do, where would the President be self-deterred because of too big yield, where has the intelligence community concluded that adversaries would get an advantage and deterrence (or war fighting) would fail if we didn’t have low-yield, and why can existing capabilities not adequately hold at risk the same targets? Many questions, few answers.” said Kristensen.

http://www.defenseone.com/technolog...st-century-deterrence/139997/?oref=d-mostread

 

[FactsPlease]

Yes to those your enemies who do have it.
No to those your enemies who do not have it.
Yes to those your friends who do not have it.
No to those your friends who do have it.