India prepares for Nuclear Attacks, plans Underground Bunkers in major cities

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

most of pakistan is mountaneous area with god gifted shelters. come to my village and i will show you 500 meter deep natural shelter with steep mountains on all four sides.only a very small path is there to get in. unless there is direct hit. you are saved.

 

[MagicMarker]

BMD is an offensive weapon. Don't be fooled by its moniker.

A BMD battery is equivalent of having a dozen extra nuclear bombs.

Probably you would agree with post #40 of mine on this page: https://defence.pk/threads/can-pak-...-much-so-that-india-gives-it-up.456849/page-3

BMD are not offensive weapons, stop believing in your own propaganda.

The best of shield or armour is still no t a satisfactory defence against a sword. Fear of the enemy is always the best defence. The question you need to ask is do we inspire enough fear ? If the answer is 'No' then we are not doing enough.

If the answer is 'yes' then you are in denial.

If the answer is " I don't know" then count the number of Indians who died in year from enemy action to know the answer.

 

[RoadRunner401]

Much of India is already spread out with far flung factories, small scale industries and massive rural population

Almost 75 % of India live in villages.

Not to mention according to Times of India in case of nuclear attack just go into subway and wait it out, so in conclusion between 75% of Indians living in rural areas and city folks walking into subway nothing to worry about.

 

[Hassan Guy]

Please stop quoting indian defence blogs from those fanboys on this Forum

 

[RoadRunner401]

most of pakistan is mountaneous area with god gifted shelters. come to my village and i will show you 500 meter deep natural shelter with steep mountains on all four sides.only a very small path is there to get in. unless there is direct hit. you are saved.

Only one safe from nuclear strikes are the dead one, every living thing inside or outside caves will not survive.

 

[AMCA]

barhamos can be shoot from sub?

Yes It can. Brahmos has a Submarine Launch variant too.

 

[A_Poster]

BMD are not offensive weapons, stop believing in your own propaganda.

The best of shield or armour is still no t a satisfactory defence against a sword. Fear of the enemy is always the best defence. The question you need to ask is do we inspire enough fear ? If the answer is 'No' then we are not doing enough.

If the answer is 'yes' then you are in denial.

If the answer is " I don't know" then count the number of Indians who died in year from enemy action to know the answer.

(1) BMDs were envisioned as offensive weapons. They were not supposed to take whole burnt of Soviet nuclear attack, but were supposed to shield against an attenuated counter-attack after USA have done a counterforce strike on Soviet nukes. It is not just limited to BMDs. BMDs, SSBNs, and MIRVs; all were designed in order to hit opponent before he could get the wind of incoming strike or to survive a attenuated one under BMD shield.

(2) If you want to win a nuclear war (rather than get mutually annihilated), you need technologies like BMD. With the kind of arsenal that Pakistan could field (due to limits of fissile material with Pakistan), India could field a credible BMD. It is not like Pakistan could produce 80,000 nukes like USSR (Which had access to Uranium mines of Kazakastan). Maximum nukes that Pakistan could field is between 190-210 based on availability of fissile material to Pakistan.

(3) Every nuke that a BMD stops is the one that would not be falling on you.

(4) BMD (a demonstrably potent one) would by itself have deep psychological impact on enemy, even if does not live up to its claim. With a deployed BMD, enemy would be circumspect in its activities against you. Pakistan current terrorist behavior is a classical bully "Kya ukkhad lega" behaviour, in which they do terrorist strikes and then hide behind their nukes. A working BMD would make them circumspect of their actions as they do not know how many ,if any, of their missiles would go through Indian BMD.

(5) Nukes have a diminishing value of return as ,after a certain number, having more does not provide you with commensurate benefits. This is the reason why USA and Russia both agreed to reduce their arsenal drastically.

(6) Weapons like BMD, in conjugation with SSBNs and MIRVs, give operational flexibility to GoI, as it could (if it want) try to neutralize Pakistani arsenal, without worrying about what would happen if few Pakistani nukes survive.

 

[MagicMarker]

(1) BMDs were envisioned as offensive weapons. They were not supposed to take whole burnt of Soviet nuclear attack, but were supposed to shield against an attenuated counter-attack after USA have done a counterforce strike on Soviet nukes. It is not just limited to BMDs. BMDs, SSBNs, and MIRVs; all were designed in order to hit opponent before he could get the wind of incoming strike or to survive a attenuated one under BMD shield.

(2) If you want to win a nuclear war (rather than get mutually annihilated), you need technologies like BMD. With the kind of arsenal that Pakistan could field (due to limits of fissile material with Pakistan), India could field a credible BMD. It is not like Pakistan could produce 80,000 nukes like USSR (Which had access to Uranium mines of Kazakastan). Maximum nukes that Pakistan could field is between 190-210 based on availability of fissile material to Pakistan.

(3) Every nuke that a BMD stops is the one that would not be falling on you.

(4) BMD (a demonstrably potent one) would by itself have deep psychological impact on enemy, even if does not live up to its claim. With a deployed BMD, enemy would be circumspect in its activities against you. Pakistan current terrorist behavior is a classical bully "Kya ukkhad lega" behaviour, in which they do terrorist strikes and then hide behind their nukes. A working BMD would make them circumspect of their actions as they do not know how many ,if any, of their missiles would go through Indian BMD.

(5) Nukes have a diminishing value of return as ,after a certain number, having more does not provide you with commensurate benefits. This is the reason why USA and Russia both agreed to reduce their arsenal drastically.

(6) Weapons like BMD, in conjugation with SSBNs and MIRVs, give operational flexibility to GoI, as it could (if it want) try to neutralize Pakistani arsenal, without worrying about what would happen if few Pakistani nukes survive.

1. A shield is a shield is a shield. It is not a sword.

2. If we are contemplating winning a nuclear war, then we have already lost. The idea is to make the idea of ANY war against India negligible. You think the US worries about anybody attacking the US ? (even terrorists think twice)

3. point 1

4. The BDM will only inspire them to work harder at beating the BMD and developing tactics, strategies, technologies and capacities to defeat the BMD. Its a simple thing called EVOLUTION. You cannot beat evolution, EVER.

5. We are no where close to reaching even critical mass, forget about diminishing returns.

6. lol. We have not even tested a simple drop bomb nuke in any live test. And here you are talking about missile delivery and MIRV. This is why I warned you about not believing your own propaganda.

Let me know when India has conducted a live nuke test bombing run using at least their aircrafts. THEN we can talk big.

 

[A_Poster]

1. A shield is a shield is a shield. It is not a sword.

2. If we are contemplating winning a nuclear war, then we have already lost. The idea is to make the idea of ANY war against India negligible. You think the US worries about anybody attacking the US ? (even terrorists think twice)

3. point 1

4. The BDM will only inspire them to work harder at beating the BMD and developing tactics, strategies, technologies and capacities to defeat the BMD. Its a simple thing called EVOLUTION. You cannot beat evolution, EVER.

5. We are no where close to reaching even critical mass, forget about diminishing returns.

6. lol. We have not even tested a simple drop bomb nuke in any live test. And here you are talking about missile delivery and MIRV. This is why I warned you about not believing your own propaganda.

Let me know when India has conducted a live nuke test bombing run using at least their aircrafts. THEN we can talk big.

1. A shield increases efficacy of a sword. Sometime only way you could use your sword ,without getting yourself killed, is by having a shield.

2. Neither does USA dare attack China or Russia. Nukes engender stalemate. If you have to break that stalemate, you need disruptive technologies.

4. Yes, it would inspire them to work harder, but the pertinent point is whether they could overcome BMD or not. As time progresses, weapons (and by extension their counters) are becoming costlier and technologically sophisticated. For BMD to work, Pakistan need to remain in state of economic stagnation (or low growth).

5. True.

6. It provides an option. If you do not have BMD, you do not have that option.

 

[Jobless Jack]

1. A shield increases efficacy of a sword. Sometime only way you could use your sword ,without getting yourself killed, is by having a shield.

2. Neither does USA dare attack China or Russia. Nukes engender stalemate. If you have to break that stalemate, you need disruptive technologies.

4. Yes, it would inspire them to work harder, but the pertinent point is whether they could overcome BMD or not. As time progresses, weapons (and by extension their counters) are becoming costlier and technologically sophisticated. For BMD to work, Pakistan need to remain in state of economic stagnation (or low growth).

5. True.

6. It provides an option. If you do not have BMD, you do not have that option.

while most of your point is true , i would like to point out that even though tech is getting more sophisticated its not nessacarily geting expensive. if a watch comes out today it is expensive. wait 7 days its a little cheap. wait 3 months even more cheap. wait 3 years cheapest. its all about timing . and there will always be something cheap around to counter something expensive. take the klashinov as an example.

 

[Mrc]

Sounds like a great plan... like surgical strike

 

[saurav jha]

It's need of hour. We have got one insane neighbour with nukes.

 

[danger007]

most of pakistan is mountaneous area with god gifted shelters. come to my village and i will show you 500 meter deep natural shelter with steep mountains on all four sides.only a very small path is there to get in. unless there is direct hit. you are saved.

And you think it is going to save? You don't have depth to escape..

 

[MagicMarker]

1. A shield increases efficacy of a sword. Sometime only way you could use your sword ,without getting yourself killed, is by having a shield.

2. Neither does USA dare attack China or Russia. Nukes engender stalemate. If you have to break that stalemate, you need disruptive technologies.

4. Yes, it would inspire them to work harder, but the pertinent point is whether they could overcome BMD or not. As time progresses, weapons (and by extension their counters) are becoming costlier and technologically sophisticated. For BMD to work, Pakistan need to remain in state of economic stagnation (or low growth).

5. True.

6. It provides an option. If you do not have BMD, you do not have that option.

1. you are factually wrong. A shield decreased the efficiency of a swordsman. That is why master swordsmen never carry a shield. They might do it in battle to sacrifice efficiency for safety.

2. Yet pakistan contnue to attack us and wage a proxy war. No BMD is going to change that. To change that they need to FEAR us.

4. China would provide what pakistan cannot develop. Its evolution by ingesting a gene from a separate species like a virus.

6. Again, if you are seeking options then the war is already lost. The first and last battle and war should be fought in the enemies mind. The way to win that war is to inspire FEAR. That is what keeps the dogs away from the Tigers den.

 

[maximuswarrior]

Better to have a massive offensive capability that will make any enemy $hit in their pants. Offence is always the best defence.

LOL you think we don't have offensive capability? You think we are sitting idle? You just wait till we get our subs. We are going rain missiles on you when the day comes. Try stepping on our soil and we will turn you into fume. It is better for you to have more bunkers to protect your elite. Take some advice from your extremist Jewish and American friends on this forum. We are not going to fear a nation that cannot feed more than half of its population. Cowardice is in your blood and we smell it daily.