Are nukes over-rated?

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

Every time, when I read these figures, I can't help laughing.
In last 1980s, the figure was 10millions;
In last 90s, the figure was inflated to 20 millions;
Then, the beginning of 21st century, it rosed up to 30millions;
Now, we have a fancy boy gets it to 40-50 millions;
I am wondering, if I have the chance to see 100millions before the end of my life.

So 10 millions is ok? Shameless barbarian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong

In contrast, critics consider him a dictator comparable to Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin who severely damaged traditional Chinese culture, as well as a perpetrator of systematic human rights abuses who was responsible for an estimated 40 to 70 million deaths through starvation, forced labour and executions, ranking his tenure as the top incidence of democide in human history.

 

[A chauhan]

...
Yes, what a pity. Unfortunately, unlike the fancy boys here, government of each country has to deal with the consequence of their decision. The only reason you can condemn them is you are not in the position being responsible for millions your own people's lives.

You are posting for the sake of posting.

We are talking about Indo-Pak LoC, which is considered the most dangerous border of the world !? You know why ? because across LoC there lives a Jihadi Fidaayin monster who desperately wants to nuke India. True facyboys lives there. We'll just retaliate !

 

[no smoking]

So 10 millions is ok? Shameless barbarian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong

In contrast, critics consider him a dictator comparable to Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin who severely damaged traditional Chinese culture, as well as a perpetrator of systematic human rights abuses who was responsible for an estimated 40 to 70 million deaths through starvation, forced labour and executions, ranking his tenure as the top incidence of democide in human history.

Well, even 1000 is not ok if he did kill them.

The problem is he didn't. He was responsible for the death of those victims of GLF and GCR since their death was the consequence of his awful industrial and political policy. Unlike Hitler and Stalin, none of his policy was made to kill anyone intentionally. And opposing to most western papers, he was the first one realising the mistake and the first one trying to make it right.

 

[no smoking]

You are posting for the sake of posting.

We are talking about Indo-Pak LoC, which is considered the most dangerous border of the world !? You know why ? because across LoC there lives a Jihadi Fidaayin monster who desperately wants to nuke India. True facyboys lives there. We'll just retaliate !

Well, clearly you can't see the reality here:
Is there terrorists active on the border? Yes.
Did India government response it with a full scale war which may lead to a nuclear war? NO!

So, no, you won't retaliate only for the lives killed by Jihadi.

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

Well, even 1000 is not ok if he did kill them.

The problem is he didn't. He was responsible for the death of those victims of GLF and GCR since their death was the consequence of his awful industrial and political policy. Unlike Hitler and Stalin, none of his policy was made to kill anyone intentionally. And opposing to most western papers, he was the first one realising the mistake and the first one trying to make it right.

Yeah..yeah. whatever!

Look 50 cent stop defending the indefensible. There are many ways to kill people, you do not have to go and publicly murder someone. Denying food grains to people is a very legitimate way to kill people. It is not as if China could not have got enough food to feed its people but Mao worked in strange ways. Btw, did the guys at Tianmen square also asked for food!!

 

[A chauhan]

Well, clearly you can't see the reality here:
Is there terrorists active on the border? Yes.
Did India government response it with a full scale war which may lead to a nuclear war? NO!

So, no, you won't retaliate only for the lives killed by Jihadi.

You have missed the whole topic, if Pakistan nukes us we'll nuke them back, period.

 

[no smoking]

Yeah..yeah. whatever!

Look 50 cent stop defending the indefensible. There are many ways to kill people, you do not have to go and publicly murder someone. Denying food grains to people is a very legitimate way to kill people. It is not as if China could not have got enough food to feed its people but Mao worked in strange ways.

Well, the fact was China did not have enough food to feed its people:
1. the GLF did impact the agriculture production quite hugely;
2. the flood and droughts various provinces affect 54% national farms;
3. 38 years of war destroyed most of water conservancy, only a small portion was rebuilt until 1960;

Btw, did the guys at Tianmen square also asked for food!!

No, they didn't ask because they got free food from the donation of Beijing citizens and guess who, CCP!

 

[no smoking]

You have missed the whole topic, if Pakistan nukes us we'll nuke them back, period.

No, you missed the whole point. Pakistan won't nuke you as long as they are not losing big in a conventional war.

So, before 1998, starting a big war to punish their 'terroristic" attack was an option for Indian government. But after that, another 1971 victory becomes unthinkable for any Indian government.

 

[Kshatriya87]

@Sakal Gharelu Ustad Went through the details of Tsar bomb again. Here's what I found.


The bomb was dropped from an altitude of 10.5 kilometres (34,000 ft); it was designed to detonate at a height of 4 kilometres (13,000 ft) over the land surface (4.2 kilometres (14,000 ft) over sea level) by barometric sensors.[3][10][11]

All buildings in the village of Severny (both wooden and brick), located 55 kilometres (34 mi) from ground zero within the Sukhoy Nos test range, were destroyed. In districts hundreds of kilometers from ground zero wooden houses were destroyed, stone ones lost their roofs, windows and doors; and radio communications were interrupted for almost one hour. One participant in the test saw a bright flash through dark goggles and felt the effects of a thermal pulse even at a distance of 270 kilometres (170 mi). The heat from the explosion could have caused third-degree burns 100 km (62 mi) away from ground zero. A shock wave was observed in the air at Dikson settlement 700 kilometres (430 mi) away; windowpanes were partially broken to distances of 900 kilometres (560 mi).[13] Atmospheric focusing caused blast damage at even greater distances, breaking windows in Norway and Finland.


This description brings the old perception of nukes back into picture. If all buildings (built of both wood and brick) were destroyed within a range of 55km, what else do you need? A city is destroyed effectively. I know that this range will be massively reduced due to the dense concrete structures back to back in cities and that the houses destroyed might not have had any protection, but still. Destroying just 10% of that range efficiently destroys the important area of a big city.

On a separate note, do you want to nuke a city? I found a website which lets you do that.

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

Enjoy !! Nuke Away !!

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

@Sakal Gharelu Ustad Went through the details of Tsar bomb again. Here's what I found.


The bomb was dropped from an altitude of 10.5 kilometres (34,000 ft); it was designed to detonate at a height of 4 kilometres (13,000 ft) over the land surface (4.2 kilometres (14,000 ft) over sea level) by barometric sensors.[3][10][11]

All buildings in the village of Severny (both wooden and brick), located 55 kilometres (34 mi) from ground zero within the Sukhoy Nos test range, were destroyed. In districts hundreds of kilometers from ground zero wooden houses were destroyed, stone ones lost their roofs, windows and doors; and radio communications were interrupted for almost one hour. One participant in the test saw a bright flash through dark goggles and felt the effects of a thermal pulse even at a distance of 270 kilometres (170 mi). The heat from the explosion could have caused third-degree burns 100 km (62 mi) away from ground zero. A shock wave was observed in the air at Dikson settlement 700 kilometres (430 mi) away; windowpanes were partially broken to distances of 900 kilometres (560 mi).[13] Atmospheric focusing caused blast damage at even greater distances, breaking windows in Norway and Finland.


This description brings the old perception of nukes back into picture. If all buildings (built of both wood and brick) were destroyed within a range of 55km, what else do you need? A city is destroyed effectively. I know that this range will be massively reduced due to the dense concrete structures back to back in cities and that the houses destroyed might not have had any protection, but still. Destroying just 10% of that range efficiently destroys the important area of a big city.

On a separate note, do you want to nuke a city? I found a website which lets you do that.

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

Enjoy !! Nuke Away !!

I think the whole point on this thread is to look at it from a realistic perspective in Indo-Pak war. Nukes are bad and can kill many people, there is no surprise about it. But it is not apocalyptic like in US-USSR scenario and seen in that context.

Btw, all these damages will be significantly reduced when the threat of war is looming and people are prepared. There will be collateral damages, but not what is being peddled in the mainstream media.

P.S. I have seen that site before and bombed many cities to dust already!!

 

[Kshatriya87]

I think the whole point on this thread is to look at it from a realistic perspective in Indo-Pak war. Nukes are bad and can kill many people, there is no surprise about it. But it is not apocalyptic like in US-USSR scenario and seen in that context.

Btw, all these damages will be significantly reduced when the threat of war is looming and people are prepared. There will be collateral damages, but not what is being peddled in the mainstream media.

P.S. I have seen that site before and bombed many cities to dust already!!

Lol.. I just started nuking today. Maybe the other members can join in.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

Lol.. I just started nuking today. Maybe the other members can join in.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Read this for a good summary: http://yugaparivartan.com/2016/01/15/are-nukes-over-rated-in-indo-pak-war/

In the backdrop of Pathankot attack, it becomes important to think about Pakistan’s nuclear program because Pak’s nuclear bluff stops India from taking any concrete actions against it. Nukes have pretty little tactical benefit apart from killing civilians, which can also be contained once nuclear threat is not a surprise. The pertinent question in Indo-Pak equation is to find out how big is Pak’s nuclear threat or it is just a bluff under which Pak military can avoid overt Indian response?

In the first part of this article, we will summarize how devastating effects of nuclear weapons are exaggerated in the regular media. While small scale nuclear detonation will definitely annihilate the local population but wars are destructive in general and nuclear detonation should be seen in this context. In the second part, we will specifically talk about the nuclear program of Pakistan and show that Pak neither has the requisite delivery vehicles nor enough warheads to cause enough destruction and change the tide of the war.

The first and foremost important point to consider is that the nuclear bomb can neither deliver nor guarantee victory/stalemate in any war and specifically Indo-Pak war. Just like in a battle, not all fired bullets deliver the head of the enemy, similarly a nuclear strike will achieve very few of its intended target goals. One of the biggest misconception is related to the destructive power of modern bombs as compared to old and smaller bombs used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I will quote William H. Hessler to put this point succinctly:

 

[garg_bharat]

I think India has NO interest in starting a nuclear war. While I cannot vouch for Pakistan, I would think Pakistan would avoid a strategy that can threaten its existence.

Despite all the "analysis" and "fears" put out by analysts, the chances of a nuclear war in South Asia remain low in the foreseeable future.

GOI would take any action to maintain a deliverable nuclear arsenal consistent with a deterrent capacity. There is no doubt about it.

Rest assured that India's weapons will be ready for a retaliatory strike even in case of a sudden first strike by adversary. It is not such a simple case that an enemy can cripple India with a first strike.

Ultimately the large masses of India are the pillars of political power of India, and India has the capacity to raise a 10 million army and wage a 10 year war. This is more important than any nukes.

 

[Nuvneet Kundu]

If Pakistan nukes us, at the most we will loose a few thousand people which is not a very big number. Every year we loose 10,000 people to insect bites alone. Japan was unprepared and had no air defense back then. Let's say Pakistan fires 50 nukes, 48 of them will get caught in our air defense net, maybe 2 will land on our soil. Then we start our bombing run and Pakistan becomes Kabristan. It's not Pakistan that stops us, it's the US threat to retaliate against India that stops us. Even during 1971 war, a US submarine sunk one of our naval assets.

Everyone watch this :

 

[tsunami]

@Sakal Gharelu Ustad Went through the details of Tsar bomb again. Here's what I found.


The bomb was dropped from an altitude of 10.5 kilometres (34,000 ft); it was designed to detonate at a height of 4 kilometres (13,000 ft) over the land surface (4.2 kilometres (14,000 ft) over sea level) by barometric sensors.[3][10][11]

All buildings in the village of Severny (both wooden and brick), located 55 kilometres (34 mi) from ground zero within the Sukhoy Nos test range, were destroyed. In districts hundreds of kilometers from ground zero wooden houses were destroyed, stone ones lost their roofs, windows and doors; and radio communications were interrupted for almost one hour. One participant in the test saw a bright flash through dark goggles and felt the effects of a thermal pulse even at a distance of 270 kilometres (170 mi). The heat from the explosion could have caused third-degree burns 100 km (62 mi) away from ground zero. A shock wave was observed in the air at Dikson settlement 700 kilometres (430 mi) away; windowpanes were partially broken to distances of 900 kilometres (560 mi).[13] Atmospheric focusing caused blast damage at even greater distances, breaking windows in Norway and Finland.


This description brings the old perception of nukes back into picture. If all buildings (built of both wood and brick) were destroyed within a range of 55km, what else do you need? A city is destroyed effectively. I know that this range will be massively reduced due to the dense concrete structures back to back in cities and that the houses destroyed might not have had any protection, but still. Destroying just 10% of that range efficiently destroys the important area of a big city.

On a separate note, do you want to nuke a city? I found a website which lets you do that.

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

Enjoy !! Nuke Away !!

TSAR was a 27,000 KG bomb. No missile can deliver a Bomb like this to any other country. The only way a strategic bomber. In case of Pakistan, forget about a bomb of 50 MT they don't even have a bomb of 25 KT. Simply 2000 times less powerful. Just calculate.

 

[no smoking]

If Pakistan nukes us, at the most we will loose a few thousand people which is not a very big number. Every year we loose 10,000 people to insect bites alone.

Even a single bomb dropped in Delhi or Bombay will kill lot more than your estimation immediately, let alone those died from radiation and disease in the following days.

Japan was unprepared and had no air defense back then. Let's say Pakistan fires 50 nukes, 48 of them will get caught in our air defense net, maybe 2 will land on our soil.

Don't buy your own scientists' bragging. Even S-400 can't be that good. end-stage interception is a dead end for BMD. This kind of system is useless against any missile with end-stage maneuver capability which is not new today. When the RV is maneuvering at 11M, how lucky the interceptor with top speed of 4.5M could be to catch the target in 10 seconds, not to mention this interceptor has to push itself from 0 to 4.5M at the same time.

No, my friend, there is no system in this world can do that.

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

Even a single bomb dropped in Delhi or Bombay will kill lot more than your estimation immediately, let alone those died from radiation and disease in the following days.



Don't buy your own scientists' bragging. Even S-400 can't be that good. end-stage interception is a dead end for BMD. This kind of system is useless against any missile with end-stage maneuver capability which is not new today. When the RV is maneuvering at 11M, how lucky the interceptor with top speed of 4.5M could be to catch the target in 10 seconds, not to mention this interceptor has to push itself from 0 to 4.5M at the same time.

No, my friend, there is no system in this world can do that.

That perfectly explains why Chinese are shit scared of Indian nukes!!

 

[Nuvneet Kundu]

That perfectly explains why Chinese are shit scared of Indian nukes!!

They're scared of much less than that. Doval was at a meeting in 2009 when he was asked about Chinese threat, he said that we don't need to engulf their whole nation in flames to win the war; Even if we hit their industries with conventional weapons, China's will collapse. The fact that someone spoke about hitting out instead of defending was the refreshing change.

 

[no smoking]

That perfectly explains why Chinese are shit scared of Indian nukes!!

Yes, we are scared of any nukes possessed by any country, everyone should be.
Anyone says the opposite is either idiot, or ignorant.

 

[no smoking]

Doval was at a meeting in 2009 when he was asked about Chinese threat, he said that we don't need to engulf their whole nation in flames to win the war; Even if we hit their industries with conventional weapons, China's will collapse.

Well, the part this gentleman forgot to say is: Chinese industries centres spread all over the country, in order to destroy enough Chinese industries to collapse Chinese economy only with conventional weapons, you really need bring their whole nation to the flames. And the necessary quantity required for the conventional weapon is far beyond any country's current capability. US and Russia have the potential to produce the number, but they need years to accumulate. Other countries are not even close.

The fact that someone spoke about hitting out instead of defending was the refreshing change.

The fact that someone just overstates their defend capability is kind of stupid.