Army chief: Nuclear weapons only for strategic deterrence

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
While India has a declared commitment of "no first-use", its nuclear doctrine does hold that "nuclear retaliation to a first strike will be massive".

http://toi.in/BzrghY
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Nuclear weapons are for strategic deterrence.

That is why they have never been used after Hiroshima and Nagasaki!

And no one has used the Tac nukes either!
 

spikey360

Crusader
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
3,453
Likes
6,392
Country flag
That is same as saying 'no first use'. Do you think anyone is foolish enough to have second strike capability but not strike? Then the word 'strategic' would have had no significance.
 

Killswitch

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2012
Messages
132
Likes
161
Country flag
I think the no first uses policy is foolish.


Example:

If china masses a huge army at the mountain passes the option of using a tactical nuke should be on the table.
 

spikey360

Crusader
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
3,453
Likes
6,392
Country flag
I think the no first uses policy is foolish.


Example:

If china masses a huge army at the mountain passes the option of using a tactical nuke should be on the table.
And be vapourised by the chinese second strike? No chance.

Only countries which do not have sufficient troops at the border have policies like that. For example, the Russian nuclear doctrine is made in such a way that if they are dragged into a war the odds of which are stacked even slightly against them, they'll go nuclear. So if tanks from Germany cross their border and head for Russia, their nuclear doctrine suggests nuclear strikes.
Similar picture for Pakistan, they talk of nuclear retaliation at the drop of a hat. However, this is an untenable posture because if such a first use does happen, the country is bound to be annihilated by the nuclear second strike, which is always going to be many times more intense and massive than first strike. So first use policy is futile and counterproductive
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top