Agni V Missile

[ambrish]

as arya kautilya says you should always keep your oppenent in check as there no long term friend or foes in international arena

 

[plugwater]

But we do not enough missiles to target all our foes. so stop thinking about targeting friendly nations.

 

[Yusuf]

People think before you write anything. a dozen ICBMs for one will not do anything. The soviets had hundreds and still felt it was not enough.
A dozen ICBMs means 120 nuke warheads as the ICBMs will have 8-10 MIRVs. You know what our current bomb inventory is? Last heard it was about 70 odd. Indian nukes are in component form not mated to its delivery platform. Once you talk about ICBMs. you talk about hair trigger alert. Command and control and security and what not. Its a bloody big set up. It consumed one of the super powers.

Indian doctrine is for minimum deterrence against known enemies. Right now we dont even have enough deployed against them. It is pragmatic to keep looking over the shoulder but its absolutely foolish to think on the lines of ICBMs against US. Like i said before, nothing but fanboy stuff.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

But we already have them lined up on Indias shores. P5 leaders visited one after the other and we dont even have an Agni III yet working and deployed.

I agree the Aganis are not really functional but we cant compare ourselves with the west, they dont target each other because they are part of NATO and we also dont need to target them either, the point is that they see the world like a chess game, they value the importance power that each character has on the chess board! They dont care for the pawns to much so we should be seen as mere pawns in their game. We do have the PSLV technology that can be modified to be used as ICBMs not that we are too far behind in that technology.

 

[Yusuf]

We do have the PSLV technology that can be modified to be used as ICBMs not that we are too far behind in that technology.

Sure.. But we still have not managed to do so. If it was that easy, we should not have had any difficulties in having operational A3s and A5s.

 

[mattster]

I am always surprised by some folks who seem to think that India needs to protect itself from the US. This talk about pointing missiles at US is complete nonsense.

First of all 2 major democratic countries have never fought a major war with each other.why would the US and India ever fight a war. Do you think that the canadians or mexicans who share a common border of thousand miles with the US are afraid of the US nukes ?? Not in the least bit since they know that the US will never ever threaten them or any other nuclear or non-nuclear democratic country. There are plenty of differences and issues between the US and Mexico but be attacked is out of the question.

Democratic countries do not fight wars against each other. Look back in history. Major wars are always fought between communists and democractic nations or dictatorships, etc.

India nukes are targeted strictly at Pakistan and china. India does not and will never need to worry about the US, France, Uk, russia, Israel.

I repeat what our respected DFI member Yusuf said: please think before you post - otherwise this forum becomes a waste of everyone's time with a bunch of ridiculous posts !!

 

[civfanatic]

People think before you write anything. a dozen ICBMs for one will not do anything. The soviets had hundreds and still felt it was not enough.
A dozen ICBMs means 120 nuke warheads as the ICBMs will have 8-10 MIRVs. You know what our current bomb inventory is? Last heard it was about 70 odd. Indian nukes are in component form not mated to its delivery platform. Once you talk about ICBMs. you talk about hair trigger alert. Command and control and security and what not. Its a bloody big set up. It consumed one of the super powers.

Indian doctrine is for minimum deterrence against known enemies. Right now we dont even have enough deployed against them. It is pragmatic to keep looking over the shoulder but its absolutely foolish to think on the lines of ICBMs against US. Like i said before, nothing but fanboy stuff.

Why does China keep only a few ICBMs then? Are they insane?

Obviously, such a setup is not needed or practical as of now. I am talking in the ~2050 timeframe, when India rises to true great power status and India's economy and infrastructure becomes capable of handling such a setup. India's doctrine in 2050 will not be the same (at least, I hope) as its doctrine today. If history teaches us anything it teaches us that America can never be trusted, and it is always better to be safe then sorry. In the modern age ICBMs are diplomatic weapons only, and powerful ones at that. They are NOT weapons of war.

If India had ICBMs in 1971, would the US have dared to even try and intervene? I doubt it.

why would the US and India ever fight a war.

They won't. ICBMs are not for fighting for wars.

As India ascends to great power status, its resource needs will continue to grow at a rapid pace, along with China. Conflicts of interest between India and America over areas like Central Asia, Middle East, SE Asia are likely to happen in the future - that is, if India's leaders have any strategic appetite whatsoever.

When a superpower like America has conflicting interests with a weak power, what is the standard response? Deploy the nearest CBG, call for sanctions, rouse public opinion, etc. etc. Now add ICBMs into the picture, and the equation changes.

Granted, it is possible to achieve similar results with economic and political clout, as India would be no weak power by this time. But its always good to have a security blanket.

Do you think that the canadians or mexicans who share a common border of thousand miles with the US are afraid of the US nukes ?? Not in the least bit since they know that the US will never ever threaten them or any other nuclear or non-nuclear democratic country.

Both Canada and Mexico were victims of blatant American aggression in the past. They have been taught to know their place, and they know it very well.

For this reason, Canada nor Mexico will never become great powers. Mexico is projected to be in the Top 10 global economies by 2020, but you won't be seeing a proportional rise in Mexico's military capabilities or strategic influence. No way.

Democratic countries do not fight wars against each other. Look back in history. Major wars are always fought between communists and democractic nations or dictatorships, etc.

An irrelevant and naive assertion. You should follow your own advice and look back in history. No country in the past 220 years has provoked more wars and coups than America. It doesn't matter if wars are aimed against democratic or non-democratic countries; aggression is still aggression.

I guess America's education system really does suck.

India nukes are targeted strictly at Pakistan and china. India does not and will never need to worry about the US, France, Uk, russia, Israel.

You're talking in the present. I'm talking in the future.

 

[nrj]

Kindly keep non-A5 discussion off this thread.

Aggression strategy & doctrines be talked in relevant thread.

 

[mattster]

Guys...grow a brain, please. The A5 or its successor is not going to make India a superpower. India is not going to ascend to great power status anytime in this century. It will be good if India can become a major regional Asian power and prevent China from dominating everything in Asia in this century. India's problems are too big for it to change rapidly.

India's only strategic rival for the forseeable future is China. Whether you look at it in terms of resources, territorial disputes, regional domination, etc. it is China. And that is why the Chinese have spent the last 50 years supporting the Pakistanis - so that they can perpetually keep India tied down.

There is too much nationalistic jingoist BS on this forum. It prevents people from using their brains.

 

[civfanatic]

Guys...grow a brain, please. The A5 or its successor is not going to make India a superpower.

A superpower and great power are not the same thing.

India is not going to ascend to great power status anytime in this century.

This is funny coming from the guy who thinks Brazil will become a great power before India (LOL).

I take it you've never actually been to Brazil.

It will be good if India can become a major regional Asian power and prevent China from dominating everything in Asia in this century.

India is already a major regional power. BUT, we are not a "great power", because the definition of a great power is a country with substantial influence outside of its own borders.

India's problems are too big for it to change rapidly.

Some of us prefer to actually work towards those problems rather than writing pessimist rants over the Net.

India's only strategic rival for the forseeable future is China. Whether you look at it in terms of resources, territorial disputes, regional domination, etc. it is China. And that is why the Chinese have spent the last 50 years supporting the Pakistanis - so that they can perpetually keep India tied down.

The future of the world lies in Sino-Indian relations. Engaging in a fruitless pissing contest with China a la the US-Soviet Cold War would be America's wildest dream come true, as it would guarantee American supremacy for at least another century.

It prevents people from using their brains.

Take your own advice:

...grow a brain, please.

 

[The Messiah]

Why does China keep only a few ICBMs then? Are they insane?

Obviously, such a setup is not needed or practical as of now. I am talking in the ~2050 timeframe, when India rises to true great power status and India's economy and infrastructure becomes capable of handling such a setup. India's doctrine in 2050 will not be the same (at least, I hope) as its doctrine today. If history teaches us anything it teaches us that America can never be trusted, and it is always better to be safe then sorry. In the modern age ICBMs are diplomatic weapons only, and powerful ones at that. They are NOT weapons of war.

If India had ICBMs in 1971, would the US have dared to even try and intervene? I doubt it.




They won't. ICBMs are not for fighting for wars.

As India ascends to great power status, its resource needs will continue to grow at a rapid pace, along with China. Conflicts of interest between India and America over areas like Central Asia, Middle East, SE Asia are likely to happen in the future - that is, if India's leaders have any strategic appetite whatsoever.

When a superpower like America has conflicting interests with a weak power, what is the standard response? Deploy the nearest CBG, call for sanctions, rouse public opinion, etc. etc. Now add ICBMs into the picture, and the equation changes.

Granted, it is possible to achieve similar results with economic and political clout, as India would be no weak power by this time. But its always good to have a security blanket.



Both Canada and Mexico were victims of blatant American aggression in the past. They have been taught to know their place, and they know it very well.

For this reason, Canada nor Mexico will never become great powers. Mexico is projected to be in the Top 10 global economies by 2020, but you won't be seeing a proportional rise in Mexico's military capabilities or strategic influence. No way.



An irrelevant and naive assertion. You should follow your own advice and look back in history. No country in the past 220 years has provoked more wars and coups than America. It doesn't matter if wars are aimed against democratic or non-democratic countries; aggression is still aggression.

I guess America's education system really does suck.



You're talking in the present. I'm talking in the future.

I couldn't have said it better.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

People think before you write anything. a dozen ICBMs for one will not do anything. The soviets had hundreds and still felt it was not enough.
A dozen ICBMs means 120 nuke warheads as the ICBMs will have 8-10 MIRVs. You know what our current bomb inventory is? Last heard it was about 70 odd. Indian nukes are in component form not mated to its delivery platform. Once you talk about ICBMs. you talk about hair trigger alert. Command and control and security and what not. Its a bloody big set up. It consumed one of the super powers.

Indian doctrine is for minimum deterrence against known enemies. Right now we dont even have enough deployed against them. It is pragmatic to keep looking over the shoulder but its absolutely foolish to think on the lines of ICBMs against US. Like i said before, nothing but fanboy stuff.

all the warheads of an icbm may not be nuclear.even a thermobaric,fuel air mixture explosive warhead can do a lot of damage to vital enemy installation.also do not forget we have enough weapons grade plutonium for 1000 warheads.so we must surely start building our icbm force till icbm's become obsolete by directed energy weapons.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

even north korea will deploy an icbm against the west by 2015(accord to us officials).so we must fast track the surya icbm project from now onwards.also some members are saying that we do ot have enough china specific ballistic missiles now-always remember that if we start developing today we will induct surya icbm by 2020 earliest.so the surya icbm project must be fast tracked.

 

[Yusuf]

India may well develop ICBMs but certainly not with the US in mind. NK needs them as for it the US is the biggest enemy. Our two biggest are along our border. Indian ICBMs should be developed for only one platform, submarines so that we can be anywhere in the indian ocean and still be able to hit china.

 

[The Messiah]

India may well develop ICBMs but certainly not with the US in mind. NK needs them as for it the US is the biggest enemy. Our two biggest are along our border. Indian ICBMs should be developed for only one platform, submarines so that we can be anywhere in the indian ocean and still be able to hit china.

Can you guarantee we wont have enemies other than pakistan and china in the future ?

 

[Yusuf]

Can you guarantee we wont have enemies other than pakistan and china in the future ?

No, but then india is on an economic upswing and all are going to get deeply involved in india. ICBMs in subs will be a deterrent enough for anyone. There is no need to single out US for anything.

 

[civfanatic]

No, but then india is on an economic upswing and all are going to get deeply involved in india. ICBMs in subs will be a deterrent enough for anyone. There is no need to single out US for anything.

We are not "singling out" US, just being realistic about future challenges to India.

Who else will sub-launched ICBMs be aimed against? Uruguay?

 

[Yusuf]

Who else will sub-launched ICBMs be aimed against? Uruguay?

China from somewhere in the indian ocean.

 

[p2prada]

Our current Arihant with K-15 is Pakistan specific. Only our future variants with K-4 and MIRV will be China specific. A 700Km missile is useless to gain strategic depth in China.

Also, Arihant is more of a SSGN than SSBN. So, no issues as of today. We have decent deterrence against both countries.

 

[Param]

Is the Agni 3 already deployed ? And how many might be deployed in the next two years?