Question on Indian nuclear doctrine...

Discussion in 'Strategic Forces' started by sayareakd, Nov 15, 2013.

  1. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,702
    Question to all, our nuclear doctrine 2.3 (a) says

    this is ambiguity, since it is part of nuclear doctrine, so it really means that if someone threatened with nuclear weapon, we can take out them with nuclear weapons...................:scared2:

    What members think about this interpretation :confused: ?
     
  2.  
  3. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,702
    I am sure Pakistanis are taking note of what i have posted above.
     
  4. arnabmit

    arnabmit Homo Communis Indus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2012
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    5,859
    Location:
    Kolkata
    I think this means our nukes would be put on DEFCON 1 (US) or Threat Level: Critical (UK) with VVIPs moved to NBC bunkers and strategic command on hair trigger standby.
     
  5. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,702
    it is more then that, it means if they threatened us, we will nuke their nuclear force...............
     
    arnabmit likes this.
  6. arnabmit

    arnabmit Homo Communis Indus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2012
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    5,859
    Location:
    Kolkata
    shall invoke measures to counter the threat could mean a lot of things apart from a preemptive nuke strike.

     
    kseeker and sayareakd like this.
  7. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,702
    yeah that is what i am saying if need be we will move out of no first use.
     
    kseeker and arnabmit like this.
  8. A chauhan

    A chauhan "अहिंसा परमो धर्मः धर्म हिंसा तथैव च: l" Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    4,555
    Location:
    Raipur
    Saya your interpretation is right, that ambiguity is willful.
     
    sayareakd likes this.
  9. arnabmit

    arnabmit Homo Communis Indus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2012
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    5,859
    Location:
    Kolkata
    Think it like the difference between Murder and Attempt to Murder.

    If Pakis nuke us, we will go for bona fide second strike. That's murder against murder.

    But, if Pakis start arming nukes, and we do preemptive strikes, would that be first strike or second strike? If you consider whose warhead detonated first, then India's strike would be first strike. But if you consider Attempt to nuke India by pakis, then it becomes second strike. Murder in defence of attempted murder.

    So, if we do a preemptive strike against Pakis based on irrefutable proof of imminent Paki Nuke launch, we are essentially doing a second strike. ;)

     
  10. no smoking

    no smoking Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,172
    Likes Received:
    422
    No, it means: India will get its nuke asernal ready when you feel an nuclear war is coming! But it is still defensive. There will be no india nuke weapon flying in the sky until the first nuclear explosion within India. It is as the same as China: we will not start a nuclear war unless we are hit by nuke first.
     
  11. no smoking

    no smoking Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,172
    Likes Received:
    422
    No, they are not!
    For them, nuclear weapon is like a suicide bomb which will be used when they are losing a full scale conventional war.
    The message they send is: don't push me too far, otherwise you will go down with me!
     
  12. t_co

    t_co Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2012
    Messages:
    2,537
    Likes Received:
    699
    Location:
    China
    What you're describing is an extreme form of launch on warning, and is actually more aggressive than even the US and Russian force postures.

    Launch on warning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    If India adopted nuclear pre-emption, it would have the most aggressive nuclear doctrine in the world.

    Based on the game-theory analyses of nuclear war (as encapsulated by Herman Kahn in his seminal work On Thermonuclear War), the only reason to adopt such a doctrine would be a severe lack of confidence in Indian abilities to detect and react to Pakistani launches, or complete confidence that Pakistan cannot detect and react to Indian launches - or a belief that Pakistan has sufficient technical capability to utilize the following tactics:

    Since neither Pakistan nor India possesses enough warheads to waste on suppressing enemy electronic systems via continual exoatmospheric nuclear detonations, then the only other reason India would want nuclear pre-emption would be fear that Pakistan can decapitate the Indian command structure.

    In that case, Kahn writes that a far better strategy (mathematically proven via game theory) instead of pre-emptive nuking is giving nuclear commanders release authority in the confirmed destruction of higher-level command facilities - e.g. letters of last intent, which several posters here have already elaborated upon.
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2013
  13. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,702
    Thanks AC, i was looking for your comment on this, for interpretation. Looks like clear massage (but decoded) is being send to those who want to take us for granted......:rofl:
     
    angeldude13 and A chauhan like this.
  14. Decklander

    Decklander New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,654
    Likes Received:
    4,043
    Location:
    New Delhi
    If members may recall my posts about CSD and Pak nukes, I had repeatedly stated that Our NFU has a willfull ambiguity to deal with nations like Pak. NFU does not mean that we have given up on right to self defence or right to life is we look at comparable provisions in our acts in India.
    The moment we have credible info that we are about to be nuked, we will take retaliatory measures to eliminate that threat using our nukes. This what it means.
     
    angeldude13, W.G.Ewald and sayareakd like this.
  15. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,702
    yeah you are right, if we know that they are about to use nukes and if we know the location, we will use nukes in self defence.
     
    Decklander likes this.
  16. kseeker

    kseeker Retired

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,515
    Likes Received:
    2,110
    Location:
    Bharatvarsh
    Preemptive strike doesn't really require nukes, right ?

    Say, if we have a credible proof that, our enemy is preparing for nuke strike, in that case we can destroy their facilities using conventional weapons, why involve nukes in that case ?
     
  17. vishwaprasad

    vishwaprasad Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2012
    Messages:
    354
    Likes Received:
    115
    If things were in my hand I would have first of all retired that crap policy called NO FIRST USE....it is because of this kind of our soft nature today India is a joke in sub continent where no neighbor takes her seriously, be it border violation from China, Pak, Keran infiltration or attitude from Maldives, Lanka etc.... in spite of her being a nuclear power armed with ICBMs.....

    We should declare our nuclear policy as Flexible depending on the situation during the war....When you have 2 nuclear armed aggressive neighbors on your east and west you cannot threaten them with your NO FIRST USE policy.....
     
    Decklander likes this.
  18. sayareakd

    sayareakd Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,623
    Likes Received:
    11,702
    read the first post again it is not NFU.
     
    vishwaprasad likes this.
  19. Decklander

    Decklander New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,654
    Likes Received:
    4,043
    Location:
    New Delhi
    What happens if you are not able to take out all their nukes and a few slip thru? What will be the cost of such a stupidity?
     
    sayareakd likes this.
  20. kseeker

    kseeker Retired

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,515
    Likes Received:
    2,110
    Location:
    Bharatvarsh
    Hmm, right ! I hadn't thought about that.
     
  21. DivineHeretic

    DivineHeretic Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages:
    1,050
    Likes Received:
    1,183
    Location:
    Assam
    What happens if we are faced with a massive annihilation by 120 nukes v/s say an attack by 20-30 nukes??

    If we are faced with an inevitable nuclear conflict, do we take all their hits before counter attacking and in the process get destroyed, or do we strike first, and reduce the number of nukes attacking us by 70-80%?
     

Share This Page