- Joined
- Sep 28, 2011
- Messages
- 14,139
- Likes
- 8,606
There is a difference between policies of USA and Russia.
Countries pledging to use nuclear weapons only defensively
http://www.pugwash.org/reports/nw/federov.htm
India's Nuclear Doctrine
- Thread starter Sabir
- Start date
Countries pledging to use nuclear weapons only defensively
http://www.pugwash.org/reports/nw/federov.htm
Agustya
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2014
- Messages
- 69
- Likes
- 26
I am sorry, but I have to disagree. There is no way in hell India can reduce some aggressors. So mutually assured destruction does not apply in the case of India. If China, or the West start a nuclear conflict with India then lets be honest , there is nothing India can really do. India has a 20Kt fissile. This is not deterrence. 20 kt isn't good for anything besides Pakistan.
prohumanity
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,290
- Likes
- 1,362
Well...Agustya....Remember when you were in high school..and a Bully who used to slap and hit kids who were weak and afraid. Then, one day...you decided to confront the bully when he tried to threaten you...you were no match to Bully as he was twice your size...but as he slapped you...you jumped a gave a hard punch to his balls and he screamed and walked away .After that, he never again tried to hit you. You don't have to be equally strong to Bully...you just need to be just strong enough and courageous enough to confront him and make him realize that he will also get hurt if he attacks you.
Think of a million Indian young men and women attacking computer systems of Bully, Think of a few Agni 6 nukes falling on major cities of Bully etc. You don't need capacity to destroy Bully entirely...just have enough capacity to cripple him and I bet..he will leave you alone.
Just a dozen Agni6 nukes can create chaos and collapse financial markets and hurt Bully's economy hard...and remember..a bully who loves money too much...will not like to mess with you.
You don't need to defeat the Bully...JUST NEED TO DETER HIM.
Think of a million Indian young men and women attacking computer systems of Bully, Think of a few Agni 6 nukes falling on major cities of Bully etc. You don't need capacity to destroy Bully entirely...just have enough capacity to cripple him and I bet..he will leave you alone.
Just a dozen Agni6 nukes can create chaos and collapse financial markets and hurt Bully's economy hard...and remember..a bully who loves money too much...will not like to mess with you.
You don't need to defeat the Bully...JUST NEED TO DETER HIM.
Last edited:
Agustya
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2014
- Messages
- 69
- Likes
- 26
so just like what Pakistan is doing to India?
saurabhkumarsingh
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2014
- Messages
- 9
- Likes
- 2
Pakistan has been successful to keep Indian forces from attacking it Kargil just by deterring us.
No I remember that a boy tried to slap a bully and instead ended up in hospital instead of having his tiffin stolen.
Anyway on topic, Agustya is right. India still does not possess nuclear capability similar to China.
You are also correct. I think in twenty years that gap between India and China`s nuclear arsenal will be reduced. It is of paramount importance that India matches China`s nuclear capabilities for its own safety.
prohumanity
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,290
- Likes
- 1,362
Peter...Peter...chockolate eater...you are naive...the same powers who used Paki to keep India under pressure and intimidate India ...are now trying to create enmity between India and China...so that they can continue their hegemony. I agree that India should make its Military very very strong with all kinds of weapons...this is going to lead to "peace through strenghth" When both India and China have equally powerful armies....no power in the world will try to create hatred and enmity between these two giants because a war between them will lead to destruction of the Hatemonger too.
Sir please do come back to India and then give a lesson to this chocolate eater. I really do not appreciate comments from people who live in the US,talk bad about it and yet continue to live there. Kindly come back here and then lecture me sir.
Also China and India`s enmity has not been created by anyone. The US did not goad China to attack India in 1962. You know the saying that the town is not big enough for two men. Similarly the world is not big enough for two superpowers. either India or China will emerge victorious in this new Cold War. I think it will be a miracle if both of them can exist peacefully.
FYI China is funding Maoists in India while we are extending our support to them. You know that friendship cannot be one sided.
(P.S. I did not know in America chocolate is spelled as chocokolate with a "K" in it. In which part of America do you live Sir?)
Last edited:
prohumanity
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,290
- Likes
- 1,362
Peter, where I live and what I do are irrelevant. Let's have mature discussion. You got annoyed when I called you chocolate eater...don't you eat chocolate? I do.
My point is that why there is need for a cold war between India and China? YES, the town IS big enough for MANY men if they know how to respect each other and co-exist. You are still stuck in 1962...that time and those communist leaders were different and they are long gone.
Do you have any idea how costly and dangerous it can be for India to take a path of enmity with the group (China+Russia+Iran+Myanmar+SriLanka+
many more) ? They are all India's neighbors. Moreover, 75% of India's high tech weaponry still is of Russian origin. Who will replace these and how many years will it take for another power to replace it ...even if one wants to. Look at the reality...Where are your French Rafaels? In cold storage.
You were offered outdated F-16s. Who would sell you an aircraft career? Name a western country who is willing to give India any high tech weapons at reasonable price. The Ground reality...as you often say IS...one bird in hand is better than two in the bush. In my opinion, it will be disaster if India chooses to create enmity with Russia,China, Iran to serve interests of any other country. You have this illusion that suddenly West will give you lot of money and lot of high tech weapons to defend yourself from your giant new enemies...this won't happen. You will end up losing your friends and will gain nothing. China border issues are minor and easily fixable. Maoist are handful and can be tackled by Indian security forces if there is strong will.
I suggest watch carefully BRICS summit in Brazil in July . India need to look after its own interests and not other country's interests. Trade is the way.
By the way...Kolkata is aamar jonam bhoomy. Misty dohi ...bengan bhaja..and Sondesh ..I will be visiting in a few months. O..Calcutta ! I miss you.
My point is that why there is need for a cold war between India and China? YES, the town IS big enough for MANY men if they know how to respect each other and co-exist. You are still stuck in 1962...that time and those communist leaders were different and they are long gone.
Do you have any idea how costly and dangerous it can be for India to take a path of enmity with the group (China+Russia+Iran+Myanmar+SriLanka+
many more) ? They are all India's neighbors. Moreover, 75% of India's high tech weaponry still is of Russian origin. Who will replace these and how many years will it take for another power to replace it ...even if one wants to. Look at the reality...Where are your French Rafaels? In cold storage.
You were offered outdated F-16s. Who would sell you an aircraft career? Name a western country who is willing to give India any high tech weapons at reasonable price. The Ground reality...as you often say IS...one bird in hand is better than two in the bush. In my opinion, it will be disaster if India chooses to create enmity with Russia,China, Iran to serve interests of any other country. You have this illusion that suddenly West will give you lot of money and lot of high tech weapons to defend yourself from your giant new enemies...this won't happen. You will end up losing your friends and will gain nothing. China border issues are minor and easily fixable. Maoist are handful and can be tackled by Indian security forces if there is strong will.
I suggest watch carefully BRICS summit in Brazil in July . India need to look after its own interests and not other country's interests. Trade is the way.
By the way...Kolkata is aamar jonam bhoomy. Misty dohi ...bengan bhaja..and Sondesh ..I will be visiting in a few months. O..Calcutta ! I miss you.
prohumanity
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,290
- Likes
- 1,362
Peter, where I live and what I do are irrelevant. Let's have mature discussion. You got annoyed when I called you chocolate eater...don't you eat chocolate? I do.
My point is that why there is need for a cold war between India and China? YES, the town IS big enough for MANY men if they know how to respect each other and co-exist. You are still stuck in 1962...that time and those communist leaders were different and they are long gone.
Do you have any idea how costly and dangerous it can be for India to take a path of enmity with the group (China+Russia+Iran+Myanmar+SriLanka+
many more) ? They are all India's neighbors. Moreover, 75% of India's high tech weaponry still is of Russian origin. Who will replace these and how many years will it take for another power to replace it ...even if one wants to. Look at the reality...Where are your French Rafaels? In cold storage.
You were offered outdated F-16s. Who would sell you an aircraft career? Name a western country who is willing to give India any high tech weapons at reasonable price. The Ground reality...as you often say IS...one bird in hand is better than two in the bush. In my opinion, it will be disaster if India chooses to create enmity with Russia,China, Iran to serve interests of any other country. You have this illusion that suddenly West will give you lot of money and lot of high tech weapons to defend yourself from your giant new enemies...this won't happen. You will end up losing your friends and will gain nothing. China border issues are minor and easily fixable. Maoist are handful and can be tackled by Indian security forces if there is strong will.
I suggest watch carefully BRICS summit in Brazil in July . India need to look after its own interests and not other country's interests. Trade is the way.
By the way...Kolkata is aamar jonam bhoomy. Misty dohi ...bengan bhaja..and Sondesh ..I will be visiting in a few months. O..Calcutta ! I miss you.
My point is that why there is need for a cold war between India and China? YES, the town IS big enough for MANY men if they know how to respect each other and co-exist. You are still stuck in 1962...that time and those communist leaders were different and they are long gone.
Do you have any idea how costly and dangerous it can be for India to take a path of enmity with the group (China+Russia+Iran+Myanmar+SriLanka+
many more) ? They are all India's neighbors. Moreover, 75% of India's high tech weaponry still is of Russian origin. Who will replace these and how many years will it take for another power to replace it ...even if one wants to. Look at the reality...Where are your French Rafaels? In cold storage.
You were offered outdated F-16s. Who would sell you an aircraft career? Name a western country who is willing to give India any high tech weapons at reasonable price. The Ground reality...as you often say IS...one bird in hand is better than two in the bush. In my opinion, it will be disaster if India chooses to create enmity with Russia,China, Iran to serve interests of any other country. You have this illusion that suddenly West will give you lot of money and lot of high tech weapons to defend yourself from your giant new enemies...this won't happen. You will end up losing your friends and will gain nothing. China border issues are minor and easily fixable. Maoist are handful and can be tackled by Indian security forces if there is strong will.
I suggest watch carefully BRICS summit in Brazil in July . India need to look after its own interests and not other country's interests. Trade is the way.
By the way...Kolkata is aamar jonam bhoomy. Misty dohi ...bengan bhaja..and Sondesh ..I will be visiting in a few months. O..Calcutta ! I miss you.
abhi_the _gr8_maratha
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2014
- Messages
- 2,193
- Likes
- 609
abhi_the _gr8_maratha
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2014
- Messages
- 2,193
- Likes
- 609
People should reduce their love of nuclear weapons.
The great Yogi says that the war should be only between combatants. Non-combatants should not be harmed.
A big nuclear weapons is the wrong type of weapon as it results in massive non-combatant fatalities.
It is important to adopt "dharma". You do not forget "dharma" just because your opponent has.
I agree with Indian leaders that nuclear weapons should be used only in extreme situations and I agree with no first use.
Although no-first use seems like a wrong policy as there is fear of pre-emptive strike, it is the right policy. The issue is not if India can successfully use its nukes, but the fact that it takes a moral stand.
This moral stand will win India many friends.
The great Yogi says that the war should be only between combatants. Non-combatants should not be harmed.
A big nuclear weapons is the wrong type of weapon as it results in massive non-combatant fatalities.
It is important to adopt "dharma". You do not forget "dharma" just because your opponent has.
I agree with Indian leaders that nuclear weapons should be used only in extreme situations and I agree with no first use.
Although no-first use seems like a wrong policy as there is fear of pre-emptive strike, it is the right policy. The issue is not if India can successfully use its nukes, but the fact that it takes a moral stand.
This moral stand will win India many friends.
India's problem is Pakistan's army and the hawkish and corrupt political structure that supports Pakistan's army. This needs to be dismantled.
There is not much benefit to consider common people of Pakistan as threats.
India has done absolutely right thing by testing small weapons. And these small weapons are the ones weaponized. I cannot offer any evidence but I am 100% sure that the weapons India has are similar to ones that India tested. Indian strategy is counter-force.
There is not much benefit to consider common people of Pakistan as threats.
India has done absolutely right thing by testing small weapons. And these small weapons are the ones weaponized. I cannot offer any evidence but I am 100% sure that the weapons India has are similar to ones that India tested. Indian strategy is counter-force.
aditya bhatia
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2016
- Messages
- 2
- Likes
- 0
No first use policy is best in case of india in my view.remember we are non signatory of ctbt or npt.but still we are consider as responsible nuclear state.we will loose this reputation if we change our nuclear doctrine as we have to keep in mind we have massive energy requirements and to fullfill those requirements we need more civil nuclear energy.the countries which are offering us these deals might think twice before any deal.do u still remember what abe said when asked if india use these nuclear deal for military perpose his reply was japan has to rerhibk its offer.in my view if we make a first use doctrine we might not we tht trustworthy to other nations.n secoundly we dont have full scale firt strike capabilities and cant take out all enemy nukes so just stick to no first use policy
cannonfodder
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2014
- Messages
- 1,570
- Likes
- 4,426
Experts tell PM, Drop ” No First Use Nuke Posture “
In the wake of emerging nuclear threats from China and Pakistan, strategic experts have asked Prime Minister Narendra Modi to review and articulate the country’s nuclear doctrine in greater detail. The panel of experts, notably including former deputy national security advisor, ambassador Satish Chandra; director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies, Lt Gen BS Nagal, pointed out that a change in strategic environment brought about by the technological advancements and the geopolitical shifts regionally as well as globally have necessitated to review the doctrine, put in place in January 2003 — over four and a half years after the May 1998 tests.
The main feature of the doctrine is “A No First Use Posture”, wherein nuclear weapons will be used only “in retaliation against a nuclear attack on Indian territory or on Indian forces anywhere. It also calls for building and maintaining a credible minimum deterrent. Its main shortcoming is that it has not mentioned tactical weapons or nuclear bomblets that can be fired in the theatre of war through tanks and heavy guns. Arguing for a periodic review of India’s nuclear doctrine, the experts have asked for reinforcing a deterrence policy and signalling commitment to a massive retaliation posture in response to an attack with tactical weapons more effectively. The experts termed India’s Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) effort as a factor of stability. The director general of India’s premier strategic thin-tank Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis (IDSA) Jayant Prasad, said it was opportune time to debate on the issue, following the changing nuclear doctrines and postures of the great powers, especially those of the United States, the Russian Federation, and China.
Significant to mention that both China and Pakistan have not mentioned “No First Use” in their documents. In its National Defence white paper unveiled last year, China also announced to build a strategic missile early warning capability for its nuclear forces, similar to those of the United States and Russia. The United States maintains a network of satellites and land-based radars that can detect and track the launch of an enemy long-range missile heading towards its territory. This capability makes it possible to respond quickly. Instead of India’s “minimum deterrence”, Beijing’s theory of “limited deterrence”, entails development of enough capabilities to deter conventional, theatre and strategic war and to suppress escalation during a nuclear war. This requires a sufficient range of weapons and operational capabilities, especially to respond to any level of attack.
Satish Chandra believes that appointment of a Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) as recommended by the Kargil Review Committee as well upgradation of the NTRO as a capable apex techint organisation would also go a long way to convey a message that any attack on India would ensure swift and massive nuclear retaliation inflicting unacceptable damage. “An indication that we have in place multiple, well camouflaged and well secured vectors which are constantly being further refined in order to enable the country to inflict unacceptable damage even after absorbing a first strike by its adversaries,” says the former Deputy NSA.
Pakistan doctrine is divided into four different thresholds before the weapons are being operationally charged during the conventional and nuclear war with an aggressor state. In an event of war between India and Pakistan, when an Indian military aggression is more likely to penetrate through Pakistan’s defences, which cannot be restored by conventional means, it would order use of nuclear weapons to stabilise the situation, as part of the first strike. While describing political threshold, it has made clear that any attempt to break away any of Pakistan’s province, significant in the wake of current crisis in the province of Balochistan, could invite a nuclear attack, if Islamabad has credible reason to believe that the integrity of the country was at stake. Of late, Pakistan accusing India of its involvement in Balochistan points towards this scenario.
http://idrw.org/experts-tell-pm-drop-no-first-use-nuke-posture/#disqus_thread .
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DROP NFU please...:bounce:
In the wake of emerging nuclear threats from China and Pakistan, strategic experts have asked Prime Minister Narendra Modi to review and articulate the country’s nuclear doctrine in greater detail. The panel of experts, notably including former deputy national security advisor, ambassador Satish Chandra; director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies, Lt Gen BS Nagal, pointed out that a change in strategic environment brought about by the technological advancements and the geopolitical shifts regionally as well as globally have necessitated to review the doctrine, put in place in January 2003 — over four and a half years after the May 1998 tests.
The main feature of the doctrine is “A No First Use Posture”, wherein nuclear weapons will be used only “in retaliation against a nuclear attack on Indian territory or on Indian forces anywhere. It also calls for building and maintaining a credible minimum deterrent. Its main shortcoming is that it has not mentioned tactical weapons or nuclear bomblets that can be fired in the theatre of war through tanks and heavy guns. Arguing for a periodic review of India’s nuclear doctrine, the experts have asked for reinforcing a deterrence policy and signalling commitment to a massive retaliation posture in response to an attack with tactical weapons more effectively. The experts termed India’s Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) effort as a factor of stability. The director general of India’s premier strategic thin-tank Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis (IDSA) Jayant Prasad, said it was opportune time to debate on the issue, following the changing nuclear doctrines and postures of the great powers, especially those of the United States, the Russian Federation, and China.
Significant to mention that both China and Pakistan have not mentioned “No First Use” in their documents. In its National Defence white paper unveiled last year, China also announced to build a strategic missile early warning capability for its nuclear forces, similar to those of the United States and Russia. The United States maintains a network of satellites and land-based radars that can detect and track the launch of an enemy long-range missile heading towards its territory. This capability makes it possible to respond quickly. Instead of India’s “minimum deterrence”, Beijing’s theory of “limited deterrence”, entails development of enough capabilities to deter conventional, theatre and strategic war and to suppress escalation during a nuclear war. This requires a sufficient range of weapons and operational capabilities, especially to respond to any level of attack.
Satish Chandra believes that appointment of a Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) as recommended by the Kargil Review Committee as well upgradation of the NTRO as a capable apex techint organisation would also go a long way to convey a message that any attack on India would ensure swift and massive nuclear retaliation inflicting unacceptable damage. “An indication that we have in place multiple, well camouflaged and well secured vectors which are constantly being further refined in order to enable the country to inflict unacceptable damage even after absorbing a first strike by its adversaries,” says the former Deputy NSA.
Pakistan doctrine is divided into four different thresholds before the weapons are being operationally charged during the conventional and nuclear war with an aggressor state. In an event of war between India and Pakistan, when an Indian military aggression is more likely to penetrate through Pakistan’s defences, which cannot be restored by conventional means, it would order use of nuclear weapons to stabilise the situation, as part of the first strike. While describing political threshold, it has made clear that any attempt to break away any of Pakistan’s province, significant in the wake of current crisis in the province of Balochistan, could invite a nuclear attack, if Islamabad has credible reason to believe that the integrity of the country was at stake. Of late, Pakistan accusing India of its involvement in Balochistan points towards this scenario.
http://idrw.org/experts-tell-pm-drop-no-first-use-nuke-posture/#disqus_thread .
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DROP NFU please...:bounce:
garg_bharat
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2015
- Messages
- 5,078
- Likes
- 10,138
The number of nuclear warheads is limited by number of delivery platforms: which in turn is limited by size of nuclear force.
I think India's nuclear forces will remain small in the short term, even if it is due to limited budget only; and not doctrinal reasons.
It will be interesting to see the postures of our neighbours. It is clear that Pakistan has grown too big for its boots so that Uncle Sam is feeling the heat.
I think India's nuclear forces will remain small in the short term, even if it is due to limited budget only; and not doctrinal reasons.
It will be interesting to see the postures of our neighbours. It is clear that Pakistan has grown too big for its boots so that Uncle Sam is feeling the heat.
sayareakd
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2009
- Messages
- 17,734
- Likes
- 18,953
go through this to get real understanding of our Nuclear police and SFC
very informative and its going to clear lot of doubts.
