I am not sure what you are trying to say. Please elaborate.
I won't argue in favor of it being an accidental launch. The reason is I myself am not 100% convinced that it is. But at the same time, I do not believe our armed forces gathered enough guts to take such a huge risk. So, I will give salient points for both arguments -
The argument that it was an accidental fire :-
- Our armed forces does not really have a reputation of being pro-active, but rather reactive. Shooting a cruise missile (which can be easily taken as nuclear first strike) at an nuclear-armed enemy requires balls equivalent to Israel and Russia, that too without any strong incentive (like Pulwama).
- That GoI itself admitted that it was an misfire (lets take it at its face value for now).
- GoI formally informed about the accidental launch to Pakistan through official channels.
- Others, including US & Nitin Gokhale (journalist connected with defence forces) admitted it was accidental.
- Missile lacked a warhead. A warhead would have done greater destruction and burn marks.
- Accidents like this do happen. I have seen AA guns of jets fired on the ground, A2A missiles being fired while on ground, bombs and fuel tanks dropping unintentionally, hell, USA has accidentally dropped nuclear bombs on itself as well as on different friendly countries.
en.wikipedia.org
- The 2-key mechanism/safetly etc. as being touted by experts, they are not wrong, but fail to recognize the possibility of root-level failures, for example, software malfunction overriding safety, or hardware failure of the fire pin.
Some respectful bit of my counter arguments to yours it being accidental:
1. There is no reason to believe our armed forces aren't pro active or preemptive. Remember unlike pak our armed forces come under the MOD and report to them and before taking any big decisions such as this one they have to inform them and make it sanctioned. They have huge balls to do what it takes to protect the country but they are only as ballsy as the political will of the ruling govt. Eg? The armed forces weren't allowed to retaliate after 26/11 but the same armed forces did 2 cross border loc ops successfully and to me doing a cross border ops with fighter jets, evading radars to avoid getting shot and potentially risk of failing the op is enough to say they are ballsy enough.
2. I don't think if a murderer kills someone intentionally he/she will come out in public and say it was them who did it but rather try to hide it or frame someone else or even act mad to try to avoid life sentence if he/she gets caught. The same GOI also hasn't yet made public the proof of balakot air strike so we are to believe it was a fake op? And the most important fact people who are believing goi version is that pak is nuclear armed nation whose ministers have in public and quite seriously have given nuclear threats to us. I am pretty sure that why anyone would risk an escalation when the GOI can just brush the whole thing under the carpet as a malfunction when we have successfully met our objective.
3. Again this is like really obvious.
Nobody wants to risk a nuclear war right now nor in future and any responsible and professional country will do anything to avoid that dreaded situation. Had we not informed them about them after the launch we definitely would have seen retaliation from their side maybe even a nuclear(?). Our armed forces will never take this risk and even though they informed them the article in theprint it says they don't know at what time we informed about the launch as the source refused to answer when we did. Quite interesting.
4. Picture this. You as a responsible and professional are working in the armed forces and one day a big and bold ops like this is conducted. You also have connection to some journos outside of your professional life. But as I said this was a big and bold ops that you ever participated in, obviously you are full of excitement and adrenaline and your superiors have allowed you to give your journo contacts some bits and pieces of what they actually did but in a cryptic way or in a way that will be in line with the govt's official statement when it comes out, so you say yes it was accidental. But you also say this:
Cryptic, almost toes the line of govt's statement and gives a bit of truth on what actually happened.
5. This is the most discussed topic of this incident. There is a 50/50 chance of it being a warhead or not. But acc. to dr Shiv it could be that it was supposed to be a low intensity warhead that took out 4 buildings completely. According to some eyewitness accounts near mian area, they said there windows broke to pieces and the trunks of the car popped open. Now this implies that there were quite a strong shockwaves sent on impact so can it only be kinetic energy? I don't know for sure.
6. It's true and it can't be discarded. But the thing is Brahmos is a supersonic cruise missile and as someone said to a theprint journo there are several safety checks carried out before sending it away so kinda hard to believe that it would have had this big of a malfunction. Cuz if it's then why didn't we see any other malfunctions like this earlier ever? Then there is also this which just fails this arg of accidental launch completely:
As far as US is concerned, come on now you really think US will say otherwise? None of the world govt have spoken shit about this incident apart from the US govt completely buying our story. Doesn't this at all sound suspicious to you? There are 2 reasons acc to me for this: US and the entire EU is too busy to comment on what's going on in other part of the world cuz of the war OR we used our diplomacy to make US and others look the other way. Both are 50/50.
7. There is like only 0.1% chance it was a software malfunction. DRDO spent much of their time perfecting the software of brahmos during its testing phase and for it develop a technical snag after being inducted more than a decade doesn't make sense. Also safety mechanisms as stated in theprint article has several hardware and software checks. So say (it's a very wild and blind guess from my side) the software of brahmos safety check says the brahmos is armed and ready to be launched but the hardware part says it's not for eg there is still some kind of latch or something (idk just taking a wild guess) that prevents the brahmos from firing then it will show up on the C2 screen and I am pretty sure it won't fire. Also this is a principle when developing any safety mechanism that any safety mechanism will override the execution mechanism not the other way around. Also another thing I would like to add, when a bug occurs in a software it affects all the applications that are using that version of that software. So, it's pretty hard to digest that just this one missile of brahmos developed a technical snag and others which I am pretty sure would be undergoing maintenance regularly didn't.
)
