Indian response to a Pakistani nuclear strike

[bengalraider]

As for Quetta it is based in a mountainous region and we could use an earth penetrating warhead instead of an airburst , this would cause much lesser radiation while the shockwave through the ground would pulverize the city along with the haqqanis and the talibs anyhow.

 

[pmaitra]

Rawalpindi is the military HQ and Islamabad the political HQ,i think both should be taken out.
why both well it's like you have gurgaon and you have delhi, both adjoin each other but both are major population centres in their own right.
with an area of approx 1000sqkm the islamabad-rawalpindi metropolitian area is big enough to warrant at least two 20kt airburst weapons, i envisage one each going off over the main political and military HQ's(over the presidential palace and military HQ), for maximum impact.

It is walking distance (30-45 min jogging) from Islamabad to Rawalpindi. Just one nuke will flatten both.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Is US support of Pakistan to any extent intended to keep that country from becoming so desperate as to use nuclear weapons?

 

[pmaitra]

Is US support of Pakistan to any extent intended to keep that country from becoming so desperate as to use nuclear weapons?

Yes, as a stop gap measure. US foreign policy usually is like that - seeking immediate gains, and suffering long term disaster (Osama bin Laden, for e.g.).

I hope better sense prevails among the powers that are.

 

[bengalraider]

It is walking distance (30-45 min jogging) from Islamabad to Rawalpindi. Just one nuke will flatten both.

The distance from the diplomatic enclave in ISLAMABAD to the GHQ in RAWALPINIDI is around 20km so i guess you may be right saying that 2 bombs would be overkill only considering the distance, but take into account the fact that it is a definite certainty that both these locations would be hardened against any sort of aerial attack including nuclear air-bursts and you will see that my argument for deploying two weapons in close proximity to each of these locations makes some sense at least.

 

[Yusuf]

Well, on the topic of flattering both Islamabad and Pindi completely that nothing survives, I'bad is 906sqkm and Pindi about 150. Anyone who thinks can destroy both cities with one nuclear bomb even if it was a Megaton yield is dreaming. You will require multiple hits on Islamabad in different areas to finish it.

I remember Stuart Slade talking about multiple megaton hits on London and London still surviving.
People have all kinds of wrong notions about nuclear warfare.

This whole talk about wiping off the map and glassing Pakistan is stuff fanboys are made off. Only the US and Soviets could do something like that.

 

[aerokan]

Any nuclear attack from Pakistan should get a disproportionate nuclear response. But not in the way it limits our strategic advances and our long term benefits.

Some suggested that pre-emptive blocking of waters is an option. That is not an option you would want to exercise. Once you exercise, you are giving legitimacy to their cause of attack and rallying sympathies against India. Not a wise move.

First step, as expected would be to use twin layer ABM shield to defend against nuclear missiles. Secondly use nukes to destroy the cities and military and important installations with complete prejudice. The more of these snakes live, the more they breed in hell holes. They are not Japanese to get back up from the war ruins to ride on to greatness and live peacefully. They are a brainwashed race. An ill-learned person is more dangerous than an uneducated. Combine that with the feelings of dark human emotions like revenge. Not a good sign.

I am not sure how far we have progressed in nuclear field due to the secrecy of the Indian govt, but if anyone is listening there are few objectives that needs to achieved on a 100% sure shot basis.

1. Develop CL-20 like non-nuclear munition at more affordable costs and in large quantities. India already developed this but still needs to develop them in such numbers that it can really eliminate pakiland out of the map using non-nuclear weapons alone.

2. Considering that India already has fusion bomb capacity, we need to build pure fusion neutron bombs in large numbers. MIRVing these bombs each containing several 0.01-0.1 kt yield fusion neutron bombs will solve the main issues yusuf highlighted in several posts(mainly talking abt the number of MIRVed heads and their yields). The range of blast will be very limited. But the kill quotient of anything living is as damaging as a regular atomic bomb without destroying the infra. Also, this would solve the issue of longterm radiation problem as this would create radiation which doesn't leave residues for years. Any nuclear attack on our soil will create the need for the people to relocate the people to somewhere else. pure fusion neutron bomb will provide that option to our people to relocate in the land we capture.

 

[shubhamsaikia]

We can exercise the option of limited scale nuclear bombarding. Instead of dropping 500kg Bombs on Pakistan we can actually go for small scale nuclear capable Missiles which cause damage in a limited area. Instead of Blowing up Major Cities, blowing up the Naval/Civilian port at Karach and other major Military Bases.

 

[balai_c]

We can exercise the option of limited scale nuclear bombarding. Instead of dropping 500kg Bombs on Pakistan we can actually go for small scale nuclear capable Missiles which cause damage in a limited area. Instead of Blowing up Major Cities, blowing up the Naval/Civilian port at Karachi and other major Military Bases.

Actually that is not a bad idea! Pakistani generals (the actual people who matter), care only of the weapon systems and nuclear warheads, more than their citizens. So, by hurting the weapons , we can pain them a lot more than we would if , let's say a Pakistani city is destroyed. They do not care about their common Pakistanis, people loss would not pinch them. They are a classical Kabila (an organized military settlement), caring only for what sustains them (money and weapons, along with their trained soldiers),anything else is expendable!

 

[shubhamsaikia]

Exactly the Idea of war is better to have a detteran than collateral damage and it only makes sense to smother Pakistan. So a Naval Blockade, mini Nuclear strikes and a full scale rapid deployment of the three stike corps and forward territory capturing using the Armoured corps..

 

[Yusuf]

There is nothing called mini nuclear bombings.

 

[shubhamsaikia]

Its called A tactical nuclear weapon (or TNW) refers to a nuclear weapon which is designed to be used on a battlefield in military situations. This is as opposed to strategic nuclear weapons which are designed to menace large populations, to damage the enemy's ability to wage war, or for general deterrence.

 

[shubhamsaikia]

There is nothing called mini nuclear bombings.

Its called A tactical nuclear weapon (or TNW) refers to a nuclear weapon which is designed to be used on a battlefield in military situations. This is as opposed to strategic nuclear weapons which are designed to menace large populations, to damage the enemy's ability to wage war, or for general deterrence.

he W33 was an American nuclear artillery shell, fired from an 8 inch (203 mm) M110 howitzer.
There were a total of 2,000 W33 shells produced. It was first produced in 1957 and saw service until 1992. The warhead used oralloy as its nuclear fissile material and could be used in two different yield configurations. This required the assembly and insertion of different pits, with the amount of fissile materials used controlling whether the destructive yield was low or high. The highest yield version of the W33 may have been a boosted fission weapon.

 

[Yusuf]

Its called A tactical nuclear weapon (or TNW) refers to a nuclear weapon which is designed to be used on a battlefield in military situations. This is as opposed to strategic nuclear weapons which are designed to menace large populations, to damage the enemy's ability to wage war, or for general deterrence.

he W33 was an American nuclear artillery shell, fired from an 8 inch (203 mm) M110 howitzer.
There were a total of 2,000 W33 shells produced. It was first produced in 1957 and saw service until 1992. The warhead used oralloy as its nuclear fissile material and could be used in two different yield configurations. This required the assembly and insertion of different pits, with the amount of fissile materials used controlling whether the destructive yield was low or high. The highest yield version of the W33 may have been a boosted fission weapon.

I know what a tactical nuclear weapon is. No India has none assigned for any tactical role. Yes any use of Tactical nukes will expand into and all out nuclear war. So no there will be no use of tactical nukes

 

[shubhamsaikia]

We never know, the Strategic Forces Command is one of World's best kept secrets. Besides the Shaurya Missile with a 1KT capability actualy fits in this role. It has a range of 750-1900 kms. This actually brings the whole of Pakistan in its range. We are talking of a second strike capability, so the India has already been targeted, its our turn so these low intensity Nukes are more Humane I would say

 

[Yusuf]

We never know, the Strategic Forces Command is one of World's best kept secrets. Besides the Shaurya Missile with a 1KT capability actualy fits in this role. It has a range of 750-1900 kms. This actually brings the whole of Pakistan in its range. We are talking of a second strike capability, so the India has already been targeted, its our turn so these low intensity Nukes are more Humane I would say

1KT warhead? you are kidding me right?

 

[shubhamsaikia]

Infact of the 3 tests in Pokhran under Op Smiling Buddha the third test was of a 1 KT bomb.

 

[shubhamsaikia]

1KT warhead? you are kidding me right?

1 KT Missile at 20psi/140kpa is capabble of causing damage to only 200 Metre radius. and Maximum damage upto 600 Metres.

This is the damage caused by the Little Boy which was a 13 KT Bomb

 

[Yusuf]

1 KT Missile at 20psi/140kpa is capabble of causing damage to only 200 Metre radius. and Maximum damage upto 600 Metres.

This is the damage caused by the Little Boy which was a 13 KT Bomb
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Abombdamage1945.svg

1) which can be achieved with conventional warheads.

2) I know about what little boy and fat man did.

 

[shubhamsaikia]

1) which can be achieved with conventional warheads.

2) I know about what little boy and fat man did.

Agreed but for the same damage to be caused, a conventional weapon war head will be 4 times Heavier.