Indian nuclear attack on Rawalpindi

[shaka]

I think Agni 5 (5000km range, MIRV capability) is very important for India in China context. I hope India is producing Agni 3 in high numbers and deploying these in (difficult to trace) locations including rail coaches, hidden forest sites etc.

 

[Yusuf]

Though claims are than India has 70 to 80 nukes and total arsenal less than Pakistan, surely this is debatable and India is likely to have much more than claimed.

In that case it is absolutely possible to bomb Pakistan to stone age with 10 nukes ( number may be wrong ). India has an attack plan so as how many nukes to use to annihilate Pakistan as we must make sure that the nuclear radiation does not cross our border. But one thing is for sure that apart from nukes India will be carrying out operations to take out their silo's and other line of defenses that are in place. Once thats done and Pakistan as a whole has crumbled, the surviving population will die with radiation and nuclear winter. If they dont die surely civil war and riots will begin among the population. The scenario more than enough qualifies for stone age.

But all this when Pakistan uses nukes against India first. They will be thinking the same thing to annihilate India to avoid retaliation from us. So for us to make Pakistan back to stone age we need to survive the nuclear onslaught and we need layers of BMD active.

You have no IDEA about nuke warfare. 10 bombs from India will take Pak to stone age? Its laughable. The US with their advanced technology keeps 3 warheads per target to make sure it achieves its objectives. India is nowhere near it. This "bombing back to stone age" line can be used by only two countries the US and Russia. No one else can do it.
Nuclear winter will not set in with 10 bombs.
But yes, the people of Pakistan will surely rise against its beloved army for putting it into hardship by nuking India and inviting Indias retaliation.

Pakistan does not have any silo based missiles if my knowledge is correct. Even India does not. Its all on Road and Rail.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

China surely has the capacity to bring back any country to stone age for sure..
india has the capacity to do the same with pakistan..i don't think we need to nuk every inch of pak to do so...we have 70-100 nuks and that is more than enough.

 

[SHASH2K2]

China surely has the capacity to bring back any country to stone age for sure..
india has the capacity to do the same with pakistan..i don't think we need to nuk every inch of pak to do so...we have 70-100 nuks and that is more than enough.

DO you know number and yield of Chinese nukes? Its around 200 . Even if they use it all it will not be enough to kill entire India. MOreover no fool will use entire nuclear arsenal at once and on one country. how many nukes you think will annihilate entire Russia and America.

 

[shaka]

would say that we should make it clear that if they move any step further in nuclear field we will not hesitate to adopt same policies and start arming countries which chinese are not comfortable with

Tibet comes to my mind. How about giving Tibetians some solid political backing to start with. China does not care about India and we should return the favour, otherwise there is a chance we will be toast one day.
Read this : http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/2002/03/landesman.htm

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

DO you know number and yield of Chinese nukes? Its around 200 . Even if they use it all it will not be enough to kill entire India. MOreover no fool will use entire nuclear arsenal at once and on one country. how many nukes you think will annihilate entire Russia and America.

every thing in china is iron curtain..so assumptions are that they may have 240 to 400 nuks.. Though i don't know the yield it is well ahead of indian nuk yield.
nuk strike means strike on important nuk and military instalations, comersial ares, big citys,and other strategic points.. That much is enough to break a country..no need to bomb every inch and corner of the country.

 

[Yusuf]

China surely has the capacity to bring back any country to stone age for sure..
india has the capacity to do the same with pakistan..i don't think we need to nuk every inch of pak to do so...we have 70-100 nuks and that is more than enough.

I dont think you want to learn and just rant. There are other threads on this forum on nukes. It has also been discussed in other threads also when it came to discussing war with China or Pak.
You would also do well to learn about how much destruction a nuke bomb causes and how much will survive.

Key point here on the efficiency of defenses. In the 1950s, the UK V-bomber fleet was assigned to hit over 200 targets in the Western USSR. As the 50's turned into the 60's the ability of the V-bombers to penetrate Soviet airspace came under increasing doubt. The UK shifted to Polaris - one submarine at sea, 16 missiles, three warheads per. Total of 48 targets assigned. But the USSR started to install an anti-missile system that was reasonably capable against the early Polaris-type missiles. So the UK modified Polaris in a thing called Chevaline. this took one warhead from each missile and replaced the load with decoys - then targeted all 16 missiles onto Moscow. ONE target. In effect, the Soviet defenses had reduced the UK attack plan from 200 targets to one. In other words, it was 99.5 percent effective without firing a single shot (bad news for Moscow but great news for the other 199 cities with targets in them)

That's why so many devices are needed - the inventory evaporates very fast. Thats also why defenses like ABM are so important (and the urgency behind deploying the new US Missile Defense System). The defenses don't have to be very effective to work (although the new US system is looking good), its the complexity they throw into the planning process. As long as we can assume that if we get a warhead on its way to its target, that target is going to be hit, then planning is relatively easy and the results predictable. If, however, we can't make that guarantee; if we have to factor in a possibility - perhaps a good one - that the outbound warhead will be shot down, then planning becomes very uncertain. Now put yourself in the position of somebody planning a strike - do you wish to gamble your nation's change of survival on something that MIGHT work. Of course not. So Strategic Paralysis strikes again. A defense system doesn't have to work against an attack to be effective because it works on the minds of the people who make the decisions.

 

[SHASH2K2]

every thing in china is iron curtain..so assumptions are that they may have 240 to 400 nuks.. Though i don't know the yield it is well ahead of indian nuk yield.
nuk strike means strike on important nuk and military instalations, comersial ares, big citys,and other strategic points.. That much is enough to break a country..no need to bomb every inch and corner of the country.

Even USA intelligence says its about 200 . Maintaining nuclear bombs and delivery systems is not an easy task. Only a country which has a lot of money to splurge will have so many weapons in ready state . Moreover China has a first strike policy so it will not attack unless attacked by someone.

 

[Yusuf]

every thing in china is iron curtain..so assumptions are that they may have 240 to 400 nuks.. Though i don't know the yield it is well ahead of indian nuk yield.
nuk strike means strike on important nuk and military instalations, comersial ares, big citys,and other strategic points.. That much is enough to break a country..no need to bomb every inch and corner of the country.

China has a stated policy of not attacking a non nuclear country. "From the first day it possessed nuclear weapons, China has solemnly declared its determination not to be the first to use such weapons at any time and in any circumstances, and later undertook unconditionally not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon states or nuclear-weapon-free zones."

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

@yusuf
though im not a pro my simple logic says..
giving the Bmd a point out of 240 to 400 nuks even a 100 reach target is enough to bring back any country to stone age..
and will china or any country will do it not or after effects are another matter..

 

[Iamanidiot]

Agnostic_Indian it takes 8000-9000 nukes of megaton capacity to destroy india

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

Agnostic_Indian it takes 8000-9000 nukes of megaton capacity to destroy india

You mean 8000-9000 yield/ power ?

 

[Iamanidiot]

no of nukesn to be used each of megaton capacity

 

[Yusuf]

@yusuf
though im not a pro my simple logic says..
giving the Bmd a point out of 240 to 400 nuks even a 100 reach target is enough to bring back any country to stone age..
and will china or any country will do it not or after effects are another matter..

First of all in the Chinese context, they have a NFU policy. Second you are forgetting the concept of deterrence. You dont need to bomb someone to stone age to deter him from using nukes. Make sure that the other party knows that they will lose few hundred thousand people if not more and also some vital infrastructure and they will dare not attack.
Why do you think Pakistan has managed to hold back India? It is deterrence.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

no of nukesn to be used each of megaton capacity

Unbelievable..
who has that much of nuks ?
any link for the info ??

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

First of all in the Chinese context, they have a NFU policy. Second you are forgetting the concept of deterrence. You dont need to bomb someone to stone age to deter him from using nukes. Make sure that the other party knows that they will lose few hundred thousand people if not more and also some vital infrastructure and they will dare not attack.
Why do you think Pakistan has managed to hold back India? It is deterrence.

I am not at all talking about actualy doing it or any policy of usage..
i am taking about having the capacity.. That's all.. I know no wise country will push the nuk button with out enough reason..And with out calculating the after effects.

 

[Iamanidiot]

First of all in the Chinese context, they have a NFU policy. Second you are forgetting the concept of deterrence. You dont need to bomb someone to stone age to deter him from using nukes. Make sure that the other party knows that they will lose few hundred thousand people if not more and also some vital infrastructure and they will dare not attack.
Why do you think Pakistan has managed to hold back India? It is deterrence.

Yusuf I think indian stupidity,Call it bluff start butchering Pakistanis and say any retaliation by Pakis will be considered as a first strike by China.Ask them are they willing to trade Beijing for Paki stupidity and let see If the pakis can toss nukes on us.One thing I never understood the chinese never meant to use nukes(deterrence) then how did they proliferate nukes to the Pakis I don't understand.China will dearly pay for this error someday Yusuf

 

[Iamanidiot]

The sole idea of Chinese is they know that detterence is something we believe with Pakis.If we have a political like Indhira Gandhi who calls it bluff what will happen?

 

[Yusuf]

Unbelievable..
who has that much of nuks ?
any link for the info ??

US and Russia at the hight of cold war had 50,000 nukes each.

 

[Yusuf]

Yusuf I think indian stupidity,Call it bluff start butchering Pakistanis and say any retaliation by Pakis will be considered as a first strike by China.Ask them are they willing to trade Beijing for Paki stupidity and let see If the pakis can toss nukes on us.One thing I never understood the chinese never meant to use nukes(deterrence) then how did they proliferate nukes to the Pakis I don't understand.China will dearly pay for this error someday Yusuf

Simple, they want the pakistanis to die for them and take india with them.