India Not Developing Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile

[PERSIAN GOD KING]

For 2nd strike from submarines.

That true, but for the time being india should concentrate on being able to handle problems at hand and they are doing very well.

 

[Black Widow]

United States talks Shoulder to Shoulder only with 2 Countries in the World - Russia and China!

Both have 12,000 KM ICBMs capable of striking the Continental America.

If India wants the same respect and wants to be counted as a Serious Player in Security Politics, ICBM like the touted Surya's are needed within the next 5 Years!

USA already respect India. 45% of H1B is given to Indians (Unofficial report). We are not hatemongers. We concur China (Not communist china) without sending a troop. Indian-ism lies in peace and talent.

We don't want ICBMs (Officially any misslie that hit >5500 km is ICBM.). If at sometime USA will threat us (Which will never happen coz me and Gambit are good friend ). we will make it.

 

[PERSIAN GOD KING]

USA already respect India. 45% of H1B is given to Indians (Unofficial report). We are not hatemongers. We concur China (Not communist china) without sending a troop. Indian-ism lies in peace and talent.

We don't want ICBMs (Officially any misslie that hit >5500 km is ICBM.). If at sometime USA will threat us (Which will never happen coz me and Gambit are good friend ). we will make it.

......

 

[Observer7]

There is no point of India Making ICBM. As we are not having any threat beyond 5000 kms. Instead India should complete the existing projects quickly and should induct the missiles asap. And also should have a large stock of its missiles at easy deployable state near to hostile nations.

 

[pmukherjee]

We do not need ICBMs now. Our security needs for nuclear deterrence are adequately met by missiles of the range of 5000KM/6000KM. MIRVS are on the cards, it is enough. Our enemies are located nearby. Longer range missiles which bring other nations within range are counter productive unless those countries are hostile which they are not. An 8000KM ICBM would bring Russia within range, Russia is a long term friend why should we wish to alarm them? When they wish us no harm? It is not a question of being afraid or not being afraid. The point is do we need them? If the answer is no, then why go for them? Why waste billions in developing, testing, inducting them when they will never be needed. The other reason is that we are going for SLBMs. To start with, these SLBMs will carry 750 KM missiles on their deterrent patrols. In due course, these will be replaced by K-4s with ranges upto 3500KMs. All we have to do to bring the North American/South America continents within range (if ever the need arises) is for our SLBMs to cross the Malacca and locate themselves suitably in the Pacific. Just crossing the Suez would bring all of Europe within range. However, I do not see any future scenario wherein we may have to launch a nuclear attack on either the Americas or Europe or Africa for that matter. Then why waste money and alarm our friends?

 

[tvsram1992]

what is pakistanis ask we made 5000km missile and u are unable to proceed.
come on we need a answer then, so make up to 16,000km missile.
that can be modified to 5000km missile with 20 mirvs!!!
and we need to make slbm version for which land version acts as base platform.like k4 instead of agni 4
and cooperation b/w drdo and isro can be increased by concentrating on long range missiles.
see and learn from nato how its making 6g aircraft whose tech can be transferred to lm any time.

 

[deckingraj]

The more the nuclear weapons a country has more respect a country earns. Just imagine how everyone will treat us if we will also have ICBM's, long range cruise missiles. ASAT, BMD ? We don't need these weapons but to meet our ambitions to be a global power we should have them.

Sorry tp say but this is absurd logic....What is the intention of having a 8000Km missile...Either you are have hegemonic designs or you have a threat perception that suggests you need such missile.

Did you notive no one is making any hue and cry about a 5000KM missile...reason is simple...we have a potential adversary in the name of china which simply justifies a missile of this range...There is no justification for anything above that...

So honestly apart from making some neutral/friendly/close countries wary of our intentions i honestly don't see any use...

 

[misterme2]

Great idea but only one question-where's the need of an 8000+ km range ICBM right now??I mean,our biggest enemy,PRC is right on top of us and we don't need an ICBM to hit them!!A 5500-6000 km range IRBM with 3+ ton payload capacity should be more than enough to counter China.GoI should use the fund elsewhere like developing the IMRH as our armed forces are lacking adequate number of medium lift helos.Don't you agree????

Heli's are important as well as a lot of other equipment. The problem is that India's military is handicapped by a miniscule budget which affects its fighting ability. You can't expect to be prepared to fight a war on a shoe string budget. As for missile range, as I stated a long time ago, you have to be able to fight a war from anywhere. If the missile range is so and so, then it is limited by that range to strike from such a distance. If the missiles are on the ground, then the Chinese will target the entire area with a nuke and destroy it. Nukes on subs near the Eastern African coast should be able to launch a nuke missile on China it the need ever arrived. That is tactical strategy. If its on land, its going to be found, marked, tagged and taken out. Simple. The same with any ocean capability but at least it more vast, thus harder to find..

 

[misterme2]

Sorry tp say but this is absurd logic....What is the intention of having a 8000Km missile...Either you are have hegemonic designs or you have a threat perception that suggests you need such missile.

Did you notive no one is making any hue and cry about a 5000KM missile...reason is simple...we have a potential adversary in the name of china which simply justifies a missile of this range...There is no justification for anything above that...

So honestly apart from making some neutral/friendly/close countries wary of our intentions i honestly don't see any use...

For me, it has nothing to do with potential adversaries. The problem is the lack of Indian vision. Here, the scientists state at this time there is no need for greater range due to threat perception and if so, can easily be created by putting a bigger rocket and more fuel stages. Well, think about that? The trend is to develop smaller faster missiles....a big fat missile is a big fat target! In a future war, the moment a missile like that is built and launched, the entire area will be destroyed which will end the production of such missiles and tech unless we build factories all over secretly. Brahmos just announced to make a second factory, which just shows the stupity of the gov;t by announcing it to the world. Plus, there are only 2 sites.....if a potential enemy went to war, they would bomb those two factories and handicap India Brahmos capability. Of course, most countries would have contingency plans, but with IndiaI ahve my doubts for more than obvious reasons. Due to only politics, you can see how India suffered in a variety of ways from training, intelliegence gatherng, lack of strategic vision, etc. Finally, with MMS the gov;t is rolling forward with much headway but more needs to be done. It should not be stopped but continued. Also, the issue with threat perception is never constant and completely fluid, just look back for the past 30 yrs. India has shown it has made mistakes in perceiving threats, maybe not intelligence failures but the failures of the politicans has come to light numerous times. In case of war, the best missile India has is the one that is furthest away, hidden yet able to hit China when then need arises and it is not limited or handicapped by range. Look at how big and large the ocean is? Compare China's subs to India's? Ships? Heli's? Asat weapons? Missile range is crucial, don;t fool yourself into a slumber.


I hope India just states this, to leave a false sense of security in other countries perception but continues to develop, research and update their tech. No need to stop. India should never, ever stop.

 

[misterme2]

USA already respect India. 45% of H1B is given to Indians (Unofficial report). We are not hatemongers. We concur China (Not communist china) without sending a troop. Indian-ism lies in peace and talent.

We don't want ICBMs (Officially any misslie that hit >5500 km is ICBM.). If at sometime USA will threat us (Which will never happen coz me and Gambit are good friend ). we will make it.

If India became a threat, what do you think the USA will wait and watch? First off, India is not perceived as an enemy, but as a friend and ally. India hs proven it stands on certain priniciples over and over again at the UN. Look at Libya, Iraq, Syria and now Iraq when they tried or try to obtain nukes and missiles.... H1B has nothing to do with respect and everything to do with money, India provides a cheap educated labor source....are you dreaming...

 

[misterme2]

We do not need ICBMs now. Our security needs for nuclear deterrence are adequately met by missiles of the range of 5000KM/6000KM. MIRVS are on the cards, it is enough. Our enemies are located nearby. Longer range missiles which bring other nations within range are counter productive unless those countries are hostile which they are not. An 8000KM ICBM would bring Russia within range, Russia is a long term friend why should we wish to alarm them? When they wish us no harm? It is not a question of being afraid or not being afraid. The point is do we need them? If the answer is no, then why go for them? Why waste billions in developing, testing, inducting them when they will never be needed. The other reason is that we are going for SLBMs. To start with, these SLBMs will carry 750 KM missiles on their deterrent patrols. In due course, these will be replaced by K-4s with ranges upto 3500KMs. All we have to do to bring the North American/South America continents within range (if ever the need arises) is for our SLBMs to cross the Malacca and locate themselves suitably in the Pacific. Just crossing the Suez would bring all of Europe within range. However, I do not see any future scenario wherein we may have to launch a nuclear attack on either the Americas or Europe or Africa for that matter. Then why waste money and alarm our friends?

You argue about India causing alarm to other countries? Waht about these countries like Russia, CHina, etc. causing alarm to nations with no such weapons and tech? What about their alarm? Do you really think the development of a missile with more range is going to cause heartache? The missile is not a problem as long as India's intentions and policies are clear.

 

[lilaspr]

To become Global power i believe India should have ICBM. As i think India has tech for it and it seems money is not a problem for Indian Military establishments these days.
What's missing is political will. Same in-case of Palestine support. It raises many questions on one hand India is one of the closest ally to Israel but still supports Palestine.

 

[misterme2]

To become Global power i believe India should have ICBM. As i think India has tech for it and it seems money is not a problem for Indian Military establishments these days.
What's missing is political will. Same in-case of Palestine support. It raises many questions on one hand India is one of the closest ally to Israel but still supports Palestine.

Well Ex Mossad official supported Pakistani position and support for their military gov;t....tit for tat..Anyhow, support for Palestine had been there for decades. The problem is that you guys try to equate their cause to Kashmir which is completely different however you try to make it sound logical that it is more or less the same. If Israel gives into Palestine, then India will suffer the same fate on Kashmir. Not at all, Kashmir is currently divided with Pakistan, India, and China. The problem i have no answer to is why are the Israelis are so against Palestine statehood? Plz explain if you have the time.

 

[misterme2]

To become Global power i believe India should have ICBM. As i think India has tech for it and it seems money is not a problem for Indian Military establishments these days.
What's missing is political will. Same in-case of Palestine support. It raises many questions on one hand India is one of the closest ally to Israel but still supports Palestine.

What is funny is how everyone in the West love to point out that " Oh India is a superpower and has money", yet it is third world country with many problems. Money? What money? YOu argue INdia has money, yet allow arms transfers to go with Pakistan and CHina thereby fueling a continous drain on resources for their ppl, in order for them to prop up their defence. The sad reality is that the West is responsible for many problems in the world, yet fails to see the logic or the cold hard facts. Its so obvious, either you are blind, wish to make money and keep your respective power in the West while other countries get bogged down, etc. The so called money India has shouldn;t be used on weapons in the first place ,but it has no choice. It lacks infrastructure and her ppl (at least a huge percentage) still starve and don;t get enough education. There are more ppl in India than in the entire continent of Africa. Remember that next time Western Media and bloggers love to poke how India doesn;t need money and question the aid being given to it.

 

[angeldemon_007]

Sorry tp say but this is absurd logic....What is the intention of having a 8000Km missile...Either you are have hegemonic designs or you have a threat perception that suggests you need such missile.

Dude its not me every strategist believe this. Unless you are powerful enough to strike anyone if attacked not many people are going to listen to u. And believe me my friend we don't really have a voice. I mean not even small countries like finland or portugal listens to us. From time to time Australia or Canada comments on us. If we really wanna be a global power we will have to learn to talk tough, to assert our point of view and that won't happen unless we are powerful enough to frighten others. Just look at China, whatever they wanna do they do. If Iran is able to develop ICBMs i bet they will enter UNSC fatser than us.