How to counter nuclear weapons ?

[JayAtl]

Best way for you Indians to counter Nukes is to give Kashmiris the right to self determination.

not only an appalling statement but what is more appalling is the administrator on this site gave it a thank you on the comment.

the logic he agreed to is, if Kashmir wont get the rights Pakistan thinks they should ( their way or highway), then pak will nuke India.

 

[JayAtl]

I am quite amazed at the stir up black blood's idiotic comment has brought amongst the Indian community. Seems to me that he just pulled off a successful troll operation.

well , maybe because it was endorsed by an administrator of this site. see who gave him the " thumbs up/ thank you"

 

[hembo]

Best way for you Indians to counter Nukes is to give Kashmiris the right to self determination.

That is what you Researcher researched and concluded ON THE THREAD TOPIC:

One line sly remark completely out of topic.

Post reported.

 

[ambidextrous]

hey what about an interceptor missile...i read somewhere earlier that US is trying to build a 5-layer shield system in which the radars and other high tech systems will quickly gather information about that missile and its trajectory and then fire a long range interceptor missile..but if it misses the second layer will come in action....

any views??

 

[Dr sim]

one of the reasons behind starting this thread was to understand what options India has incase of another 26/11 . will we sit and do nothing due to the nagging fear of Pakistan launching a nuclear strike or are there anyother options available.
India has a huge edge over Pakistan in conventional weapons but i sometimes feel all that is useless if we always live with the fear of Pakistan going nuclear

 

[Kinetic]

one of the reasons behind starting this thread was to understand what options India has incase of another 26/11 . will we sit and do nothing due to the nagging fear of Pakistan launching a nuclear strike or are there anyother options available.
India has a huge edge over Pakistan in conventional weapons but i sometimes feel all that is useless if we always live with the fear of Pakistan going nuclear

Why everyone else fear about Pakistani nukes?

 

[jagjitnatt]

one of the reasons behind starting this thread was to understand what options India has incase of another 26/11 . will we sit and do nothing due to the nagging fear of Pakistan launching a nuclear strike or are there anyother options available.
India has a huge edge over Pakistan in conventional weapons but i sometimes feel all that is useless if we always live with the fear of Pakistan going nuclear

That my friend is what we all call "DETERRENCE"

 

[VCheng]

Guy I found This !!

So who wins in case of nuclear war..let us do an analysis

one kiloton explosion : -

effected explosion area is 1/3rd of mile + Fallout effect extended to 1 square mile

For 10 kiloton explosion

explosion area 2/3rd of a mile + Fallout effect about 10 square miles

an assumption that both neigbours uses their entire nuclear arsenal against each other

Let us assume india and pakistan has 200 kiloton ready material

Target cities in Pakistan

Karachi , Sargodha , Lahore, Bahawalpur , Faisalabad , Sialkot , Rawalpindi , Sukkur , Multan, Larkana , Hyderabad , Shekhupura , Gujranwala , Jhang , Peshawar , Mardan , Quetta, Rahim Yar Khan Islamabad, Gujrat..........constitutes 36366181 people comes to .....................................
36 million people

it comes to roughly about 1622 persons per square miles take both the explosion and fallout effect...95% people will succumb......1540 people will be evaporated......in pakistan.....

thats deadly

now compare the indian cities...

it comes to about 42 major indian cities.......

so roughly the population comes to 105373521 with a square mile area of 274468.....so roughly it comes out to be 383 person per square mile.


take both the explosion and fallout effect...95% people will succumb ....363 people are evaporated .....thats rougly 1/5th of pakistani casualities.......

so vis s vis comparing both pakistan and india with a 200 kiloton warhead........for every 5 pakistani 1 indian will evaporate.....

it means...taking on pro-rata basis if india has a population currently to be 1,147,995,904 it means if we divide it by 5...the population of pakistan mathematically should be currently 229599181........but presently as per July 2008 census it is 172,800,048 which is a shortfall of 56799133 people.....

so in the worst case scenario..that is second strike capabilites of both the countries......india can evaporate pakistan 5 times before every indian evaporates ........mathematically it comes out India will win the Nuclear war .........................

solution for pakistan to win the nuclear war...to build atleat 5 times the nuclear warhead that india has at any given point of time ..........which i believe pakistan is doing right now or on this track....logically........however....we are not comparing any damages that has already occured pre-emptively because of the use of conventional weapons...before this scenario of nuclear war is taking place in both the countries........

For india the solution is to damage as much as possible through conventional weapons before nuclear war is started....that is logically what india is doing right now.... both countries are on the right track.....


have your say......

The post above counting casualties is too simplistic.

Large scale nuclear exchanges cause, in addition to the primary casualties, all sorts of secondary damages to the economy and the environment, both short and long term.

Only fools will rush in where the wise fear to tread.

Nuclear weapons are no joke. Please DO NOT discuss them without real knowledge of their consequences.

 

[JayAtl]

The post above counting casualties is too simplistic.

Large scale nuclear exchanges cause, in addition to the primary casualties, all sorts of secondary damages to the economy and the environment, both short and long term.

Only fools will rush in where the wise fear to tread.

Nuclear weapons are no joke. Please DO NOT discuss them without real knowledge of their consequences.

I think he was going for sarcasm and not a literal interpretation of all its effects