with apologies sir if it was that easy they would have done it by now. Its not that simple and easy sir had iraq a few nuclear weapons back then the us would not have thought of attacking iraq.The presence of deliverable nuclear weapons not only increases the number of variables it also puts lots of unknowns into the equation
I am all for a robust air defence.But as far as abms are concerned the strain it will put on our economy will break its back especially if we choose rabbit pace
It is hard, but not impossible. We all know how they conquered Iraq. They bought out the generals.
With corrupt Western slaves like Nawaz Shareef and Zardari in place who can appoint the most useless army Chiefs when they want and as they want, the following scenarios are all possible:
1. SPD refuses to join the fight.
2. Someone or a group leaks the locations of our assets.
Remember, no one will simply bumble into an all out war with us. There will be a multi-year intelligence gathering operation behind it. There will be subversion and subterfuge involved. This is a high stakes game.
Having a reliable BMD system that is distributed through the Army and Navy not only makes the job of buying out people harder, it ensures those who want to fight CAN pose a credible threat to the enemy.
In general, look at the wider world situation. America is propping up Japan and South Korea against North Korea. And India is being armed to the teeth. At the same time, cooperation between Japan and India is growing. We have no idea what is going on inside American bases in Afghanistan. Finally, UAE is increasing its cooperation with India. And systems like Aegis can be mounted on ships. When and IF you fire the Ababeels, it won't be only Indian BMD that takes a shot at it. You will have BMD systems coming at you from multiple sides at once.
If I read this correctly, once all the pawns are in place, I envisage a simultaneous swift attack to take out the nuclear teeth of both North Korea and Pakistan. And they will do this with an appetite for risk. Just recently an American official released a statement saying there is a chance of a nuclear detonation in South Asia. They won't even care about a few nukes going off.
In this backdrop, take a look at the CPEC and inviting Chinese ships to the Arabian Sea.
The point is, are we going to rely on China forever?
In order to safeguard our interests, we need (not necessarily in any priority order)
a. A friendly Afghanistan WITHOUT any American intervention or Indian influence.
b. An effective air defence system.
c. Full spectrum deterrence.
So I wrote the reply below in the other thread where someone put forth the idea of a LASER based ABMD and how it could be countered. I believe that LASER based system will be very important in future since Kinetic kill vehicles are probably never going to guarantee successful interception (or even an acceptably high probability of it). LASER based systems
could also level the playing field a little in favour of the little guys like us as well, since we have good "basic" resource pool for optics, given its dual use nature.
I'm posting the reply below since it is relevant:
"Hi,
I'd Like to clarify a couple of things
a) The lasing source does not have to be within the atmosphere. Especially true for high altitude/Exo-atmosphere interceptions, which of course is very likely for your ICBM scenario. what I mean to say is, the LASER can be put on a satellite...
However that probably may not be necessary owing to the following:
b) Adaptive Optics has come a long way and ground based lasers can be focused onto very high altitude object with a fairly high accuracy.
EDIT>Start:
http://www.navysbir.com/n13_1/N131-076.htm
EDIT>End
The following is just me thinking out loud:
However, the trick for LASER based interceptors is going to be useful power delivery, assuming tracking and adaptive optics are mature enough. Warheads which are designed to come down from space probably have very good heat-shields to deal with reentry temperatures. So, a LASER weapon will have to deliver very high power to overwhelm the heat shield of the warhead. Pulsed LASERs can, in general, deliver very high instantaneous power, so it is probably not going to be too hard. I'd assume the warhead would be most vulnerable during re-entry given that its taking a beating from the atmosphere which will be generating some serious heat, now if a pulsed laser with high enough power was also delivering energy to it, it would most likely lead to the warhead disintegrating."
Some points
1. The atmosphere acts as a shield against lasers. Not just in terms of decreasing beam energy, but also beam direction. The laser can get reflected off the air molecules.
2. The lasing system will need to deliver multiple beams in quick succession to act as a credible missile defence against simultaneous launches.
3. The laser can simply be reflected off the warhead.
4. I am merely theorizing this point so i may be completely wrong. At high energies, the laser beam can deliver momentum that causes the direction to change rendering the beam ineffective and requiring a corresponding change in beam direction. Lookup solar sails. There is a danger of the war head landing in an unintended location.