India will hit Pakistan back, in case of a nuclear attack

Discussion in 'Defence & Strategic Issues' started by rajkumar singh, Oct 23, 2014.

  1. rajkumar singh

    rajkumar singh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    36
    Location:
    Ghaziabad, India, India
    No distinction between a small or big Nuclear attack.India will hit back in either case.

    According to Shyam Saran, Chairman of the National Security Advisory Board (NSAB), “a limited nuclear war is a contradiction in terms” and that, “any nuclear exchange, once initiated, would swiftly and inexorably escalate to the strategic level.”

    “The label on a nuclear weapon used for attacking India, strategic or tactical, is irrelevant from the Indian perspective.”

    Indiaks response -in nuclear retaliation will be massive and designed to inflict unacceptable damage on the adversary.

    “India does have a credible theory of how its nuclear weapons may be used and that is spelt out in its nuclear doctrine.”

    “India’s nuclear doctrine is based on the current geopolitical environment, especially with Pakistan",who actively building up its nuclear arsenal and keeping its aggressive actions and strategies against India in mind.

    So, It would be far better for Pakistan to finally and irreversibly abandon the long-standing policy of using cross-border terrorism as an instrument of state policy and pursue nuclear and conventional confidence building measures with India.
     
  2.  
  3. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    We need to establish a calibrated nuclear response. Our doctrine needs a revisit
     
  4. tramp

    tramp Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    578
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Is there scope for a calibrated response once it turns nuclear? I would be interested to hear more on that.

     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2014
    Sylex21 likes this.
  5. Hari Sud

    Hari Sud Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2012
    Messages:
    1,050
    Likes Received:
    847
    Location:
    Ontario
    As Syam Saran said, there is no need for calibrated response in case nuclear weapon used, whether tactical or strategic or whether on Indian territory or on enemy territory, is used against India or on Indian troops. All that means that our adversary has used nuclear weapons. A response, massive enough has to be sent.

    Hopefully, US with all its resources would intervene to prevent nuclear weapon's first use. It is a subject which should knock some sense into the enemy Jihadi elements, who think that it is part of their Allah given mandate to destroy the enemy by whatever means possible. Either way whether they use or not use, their strategy has failed.

    Stop intimidating India.
     
  6. rajkumar singh

    rajkumar singh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    36
    Location:
    Ghaziabad, India, India
    Conventional War in the Presence of Nuclear Weapons


    Nuclear weapons cannot obviate wars, but can change its complexion and influence the manner of its conduct. In order to keep nuclear weapons from entering into real warfare, it is important to intelligently judge an adversary's nuclear thresholds and to calibrate one's own conventional strikes.-

    For India, the exploration of this space is particularly important in order to deny Pakistan a free hand to indulge in sub-conventional conflict even as it holds the threat of an all-out nuclear war against an Indian conventional response.-

    Indian military has their full plan for this, after experience -of Kargil, 1999.
    -It concludes that limited war – with precise, clearly articulated objectives, calibrated use of military force, and astute use of politico-diplomatic space – offers scope for conduct of conventional war in the presence of nuclear weapons.
     
  7. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,543
    Likes Received:
    6,547
    India can focus on building neutron bombs limited radiation fallout same devastation
    And also focus on EMP bombs. The proximity is a concern but Pakistan does not
    Consider this along with shared water supply.
     
    sesha_maruthi27 and ghost like this.
  8. ladder

    ladder Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2013
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    2,666
    Location:
    India
    old but relevant

    'Neutron bomb capability exists'
     
    ghost likes this.
  9. tramp

    tramp Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    578
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Has India made any credible breakthrough in neutron bomb tech?

     
  10. sgarg

    sgarg Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2014
    Messages:
    3,479
    Likes Received:
    962
    My understanding is that India can build all types of nuclear weapons. But if certain weapons are built or not is a separate question.

    There is a serious problem of strategy when we discuss warfighting. India has never integrated nuclear weapons with war-fighting.

    Our nuclear posture is very different from Americans who wanted to use nukes for winning a war.

    India retains its defensive posture and mindset. Nukes are offensive weapons by their very nature.

    My understanding is that India will keep the conflict conventional until the opponent uses nuclear weapons. This is a dangerous concept as an enemy can make an attempt to take out India's nuclear capability by conventional means. But it is what it is. It is a flawed policy but it is where we stand.
     
    rajkumar singh and ghost like this.
  11. tarunraju

    tarunraju Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    3,888
    Location:
    Hyderabad
    The scope for nuclear war with Pakistan is less than that with China. Pakistan won't push India to nuclear war, China will. China holds the ability to grab Indian territory, and use that as bargaining chips. China is closer to India's densely populated areas, than India is to China's. Vast expanses of sparsely populated Tibet and Xinjiang act as natural shields for missile or air-delivered warheads to Chinese cities. India must achieve a credible nuclear triad (SSBNs with SLBMs), even if we have to eat grass for it. Only China's Han-populated southern/eastern seaboard being in SLBM range from Indian subs will deter China adequately.
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2014
  12. roma

    roma NRI in Europe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,248
    Likes Received:
    1,862
    exactly ! ---- i tend to agree with what your statement tends towards - that once started it is going to be
    basically impossible to control - it will escalate and frankly i think India would like to put an end to all the
    nonsense once and for all ?

    most likely they will go for something limited - question is can it remain limited - it think it may be limited in region
    but never again in time - that is to say it will continue with a guerilla type warfare, land sea and air for all time and eternity
    if the present equilibrium between India and china is ever upset .

    China has to attack within the next 5 or so years - because within that window, as it is today, the defences of India
    are stuck with load of loopholes - navy is weak with few submarines compared to china - secondly the air defence is
    also very weak and mmrca deal continues hanging in in the air ....... mig 21 is ancient , sukhoi fleet is being grounded , mmrca going nowhere and even the tejas is plodding at a snails pace, upgrades are taking forever
    and production volume hardly fills the need


    - this is the time for china to attack ...otherwise , Modi plus NDA will have great opportunities .
    within the next few years to patch up all the stupid loopholes which UPA has left the nation saddled with .


    in reality the "buttons " are held in the palms of humans who are subject to emotions ,
    even if there might well be a group of human people to corroborate the decision to use weapons

    i think the temptation to go for it - all the way will be difficult to resist ....for either side.
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2014
  13. Ashutosh Lokhande

    Ashutosh Lokhande Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2014
    Messages:
    1,285
    Likes Received:
    561
    Location:
    Mumbai, Maharashtra, India, India
    China has a 'No First Use' policy just like us. and china has more to loose than india in nuclear exchange. but the same cant be said about the pakis.
     
  14. tarunraju

    tarunraju Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    3,888
    Location:
    Hyderabad
    That's besides my point. My point is that China will occupy Indian territory (besides what it already occupies), forcing us to use nukes first. SLBMs, rather than MRBMs will deter China from pushing us to first-use. China has countless conventional MRBMs pointed at India's densely populated territory, from its sparsely populated territory.

    My initial point was that it's more likely that we have a nuclear exchange with China than Pakistan.
     
  15. Ashutosh Lokhande

    Ashutosh Lokhande Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2014
    Messages:
    1,285
    Likes Received:
    561
    Location:
    Mumbai, Maharashtra, India, India
    ya i second your opinion that SLBMs will be a much better detterence than MRBMS.
    but i dont think there would be a likely nuclear exchange between india-china. dont forget that from past 50 years there wasnt a single bullet fired from either side at border. personely i dont think china would march in and hold a large chunk of land that might cross the nuclear threshold of india. there 50 years of hardship has made them from zero to hero at the world stage. i see no reson for china to risk a nuclear exchange for a land like AP which has no strong strategic value.

    i feel there is a much higher chance of nuclear exchange between pak and india as they tend to be suicidal and fanatical. they have more reson to use nukes against us considering our more conventional superiority and also to take revenge of 1971 humiliation from handfull of indian soldiers.
     
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2014
  16. sorcerer

    sorcerer Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,203
    Likes Received:
    5,114
    Location:
    India
    This is the actual thing I am worried about: - The human emotion when it comes to the policies and the doctrine
     
  17. LordOfTheUnderworlds

    LordOfTheUnderworlds Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    557
    Likes Received:
    406
    Location:
    Patal Lok
    India really does not need to threaten Pakistan with nukes to scare them. Just announce that in response to any serious aggression by Pakistan, India's first step will be to flatten the elite areas- the military installations, along with all those Bahria towns and DHA colonies etc, with conventional bombs. Rest of awam is just fodder, they don't matter really.
     
  18. Sylex21

    Sylex21 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    326
    Location:
    USA
    The chance of Nuclear war with China is near zero, to imply China would nukes against India first or vice versa is ridiculous. There is never a justifiable reason to use nukes first under any circumstances. There is no "measured or calibrated response" to nukes.

    There is only one proper response to any nuclear attack on India. It should be a well thought out coordinated policy, an emergency contingency plan in place that might as well be called "Armageddon". If Pakistan is Bat-$hit crazy enough to ever use a nuclear weapon, then they can not be trusted to be rational after that at all. Basically by the time you are insane enough to use a nuke in combat, no logic or reason can be applied to your actions. At that point it becomes a countdown fore survival for India. After the very first nuke, India must fire every nuke, on every possible inch of Pakistan that might have a nuclear installation that cannot be capture, along with the rapid mobilization of 5-10 million troops and the conversion of all non-military resources (every cat, boat, plane) to a full and utter invasion of Pakistan resulting it total and utter disarmament and annihilation of Pakistan. At that point it is total war, all cities populations must be disbursed and the entire nation must shut down, till the war is won and the aftermath of the situation is recovered from.

    I know this sounds extreme, but logically think of a reasonable alternative, there is none. There is no guarantee that the next nuke Pakistan uses won't land on Delhi, so the situation rapidly escalates to a struggle for each nations very survival.
     
    rajkumar singh likes this.
  19. anupamsurey

    anupamsurey Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2014
    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    396
    Location:
    karnataka
    yes it is true you need to target just 20 pc of paki population (those are the elite, rich and sometimes the decision makers), rest of the population is non existent.
    since offense is the best defense, the attack response should be quick under the threat of a nuclear attack...taking out enemy nukes, nullifying their nukes, could save the day for India.
     
  20. Razor

    Razor CIDs from Tamilnadu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    5,357
    Likes Received:
    4,500
    Location:
    ഭരതം (Bharatham)
    Actually the statement should read: The chance of Nuclear war with China is unknown. Therefore it would be in India's favor, if India assumes such a scenario and proceeds to make plans for such a scenario. Because in a nuclear war scenario with China, India has more to lose.

    "India must fire every nuke, on every possible inch of Pakistan": I don't think it works that way. Firstly I'm thinking India has like 100-200 nuke warheads. And they will keep aside some nukes for future uses. With the rest of the nukes, it is not possible to nuke "every possible inch of Pakistan."

    "rapid mobilization of 5-10 million troops", "a full and utter invasion of Pakistan": I don't think it is a smart idea to send 5-10 million troops into a freshly irradiated land. Besides sending troops into areas with a massive hostile population in the tens of millions, is a bad idea. Think Chechnya, multiple by 100.

    I think the way to take Pakistan down is through China and other neighbors of pakistan.
    If Pakistan loses China's backing and feels isolated in it's own region, it will make it more worried and more careful about the moves it makes.
     
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2014
  21. ladder

    ladder Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2013
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    2,666
    Location:
    India
    A good documentary, leaning towards nuclear-disarmament. [Directed and produced by Dr. Hoodbhoy]

     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015

Share This Page