Strategic Implications of India's ABM Test

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54683
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 05 Dec 2006 11:16

JCage Its time to gather all the press reports about the PAD and write a summary article. Might want to get in touch with Arun.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 05 Dec 2006 11:38

sanjaykumar wrote: ( wouldn't be surprised if there is a desi on the moon, now that they have articulated a possible mission for 2020).


A widely known but ruthlessly suppressed fact is that Neil Armstrong found a mallu running a Nayar tea-kadai (tea-shop) on the moon and was offered a cup of tea that he accepted - ordering a small "single-tea" for himself and a large glass for Aldrin

The only hint of this comes from the garbled and much misquoted message we have all heard:
One small cup for me and a giant tea for Aldrin.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Postby negi » 05 Dec 2006 11:41

I am not for NFU our ABM capabilities notwithstanding.
And oh yes Dileep and Alok_N your discussions on RV's was enlightening

Dileep>>
It will be difficult for a sea based platform to have enough stability for long distance tracking.

Sir what if we anchor the ship and have the tracking radar placed on a 'DHANUSH' like stabilizer wont it serve the purpose ? (I assume ship based tracking would certainly have some advantages but whether they are worth the cost and effort involved I dont know).

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 05 Dec 2006 11:54

Dileep wrote:What about the modules for the radar? Did they use the same radio or different?
It must not have gone unnoticed to DRDO that millimeter wave radar is most suited in this situation with highest possible gain and angular accuracy (within available cone space), and all the range handicap of milli-meter wave in ground range is not applicable at such high altitude (with negligible oxygen & water vapor). Not to mention the very high Doppler sensitivity (read accurate measurement of velocity, so crucial for intercept computation).

It is not for nothing that Nag's mm wave radar has not seen published progress. :wink: What did all that effort budgeted over last 10 years go?

http://www.drdo.com/pub/nl/oct2002/recent.htm
Microstrip Patch Antenna Arrays at Ka-Band
... . . .Microstrip patch antenna arrays have been designed and developed at a centre frequency of 35.5 GHz with a bandwidth of 1 GHz. 12 X I0, element array has been designed for Ka-band communication system while a 20 X 18 element array has been designed for millimeter wave sensor applications.
Last edited by Arun_S on 05 Dec 2006 12:20, edited 1 time in total.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 05 Dec 2006 12:00

It will be difficult for a sea based platform to have enough stability for long distance tracking.

how come sea based radars have been efficiently tracking all manner of missiles for decades now ? the US navy TBMD pgm will use SPY3 radar and Euros will upgrade their apar/empar for same purpose.

standard solns must certainly be proven and existing to the stability problem.

even civilian space progs have large tracking radars based on ships.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 05 Dec 2006 12:10

Dileep wrote:It will be difficult for a sea based platform to have enough stability for long distance tracking. But I fail to understand WHY you need it? A 500km range radar can easily see anything goes above 20 km at the extreme range. And tracking is best done by something with its legs solidly on the ground.
Surface based Long Range ABM radar operate clutter-free. As for phase stability I do not see what is the problem? Push comes to shove secondary chrono references (atomic) are dime a dozen. :roll: Again for moving ship I do not see any issue there after all it is Doppler detection processing.

OTOH a flying radar (AWAC or F18) or Space based can see the missile at lower altitude but then it has big handicap of ground clutter (Read dynamic range of the RF frontend & digitizer). So you see why chaha has having trouble due to technological barrier on available electronics and computing horsepower and electric power.
Last edited by Arun_S on 05 Dec 2006 12:13, edited 1 time in total.

saty
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 20 Jan 2005 17:07
Location: Delhi, India

Postby saty » 05 Dec 2006 12:13

Ah the strat thread keeps turning into the tech thread and the tech one into strat. Guys, can we please keep the two seperate, I really dont want to have to cross post you know :wink:

saty
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 20 Jan 2005 17:07
Location: Delhi, India

Postby saty » 05 Dec 2006 12:38

Tech topic but since we are discussing detection here any way.

Googling tells me (as I expected) that space based detection is not radar based but more like visual identification, the proposed US system seems to be IR based and was primarily to be used for threat detection such that other long range radars could be directed towards the threat for greater accuracy.
http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/warning/sbir.htm

http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/nmd/

As such most of such measures really make sense in context of ICBMs or IRBMs. Sr. Sawarsat is on record that Pak missile are no threat, that statement can either mean that missiles launch from Bakistan or any pakistani missile. If it means any pakistani missile it means the system can counter Shaheen II / M11 with 2000 KM range and it means we have a potenitally working system against IRBMs as well. Which only leaves ICBMs at the moment.

As such I expect LR radars to be too cumbersome to be satellite mounted. Presuming you could have one mounted on a space station size satellite, there would be issues in ensuring that the enough such are in place to cover most terriority.

There would be issues of ground clutter and range of the same from space, and the most important one would be power.

Long range radars would drain power like a small shopping mall I guess, where in space would the satellite get access to so much power over a long range time.

Nope I see too many isses in a space based radar at the moment I general let alone from India's perspective.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 05 Dec 2006 18:32

Aside:

Space based can see the missile at lower altitude but then it has big handicap of ground clutter


One of the lastest AWST has a nice pic of a US launch captured by a US sat.

Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Postby Alok_N » 05 Dec 2006 19:26

Arun_S wrote:As for phase stability I do not see what is the problem? Push comes to shove secondary chrono references (atomic) are dime a dozen. :roll: Again for moving ship I do not see any issue there after all it is Doppler detection processing.


Hi Arun,

This discussion will go the way of the CNC saga unless there are hard numbers and specs included ... in principle, anything is "doable" if doable is not well-defined ... let us assume that your are working with a 35 GHz or 1 cm wavelength ... what will be the frequency of updates from the "GPS" type constellation of satellites? ... how much will the ship move in between updates? ... during the period between updates, there will be an uncertainty in the radar's position due to interpolation errors ... ok, that's the error aspect ... the second issue is complexity in firmware ... typically, front-end devices can perform fast transforms that help in tracking ... if the transforms have a "variable" radar position, then they will have to be constantly updated ... this may be ok for DSP's but not for massively parallel gate-array type of device ...

again, apologies for continuing with this topic, but I am hoping to learn more about this radar system ... my gut feeling is that something like this takes a long time to install and *tune* ... a moving platform is in the mode of *continuous tuning* which seems scary ... systems that make decisions in very short time intervals need to be very stable ...

Vijay J
BRFite
Posts: 130
Joined: 19 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: India

Postby Vijay J » 05 Dec 2006 20:06

China is afraid that Pakistan will give Chinese ABM to America and Americans are afraid that Pakistanis will give American ABM to China. Pakistan has not ABM.

Pakistanis are angry at China because China does not want to share ABM with Pakistan for the same reason America does not.

Without America or China to prop up this corrupt military class a fall is inevitable.

Rejoice, Rejoice, and sing Hosannas, Democracy will come to Pakistan.

In the words of Avtar Singh Dulat,

“Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf seems keen to show a way out before stepping down next year"

Taking a page from Dr. Saraswat's book!

The only correct name for the PAD missile is Ibrahim after Ibrahim Khan the Gardi, Peshwa Sadashivrao's mir-e-atish at Panipat III or if you prefer in the honour of Ibrahim, Khalil Allah, the maker of the Qaaba Sharif.

Vijay J
BRFite
Posts: 130
Joined: 19 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: India

Postby Vijay J » 05 Dec 2006 20:16

PADE Exo - Ibrahim (after Ibrahim Khan Gardi, Peshwa Mir-e-Atish at Panipat III)

PADE Endo - Hakim (after Hakim Khan Suri, Rana Pratap's deputy commander who attained martyrdom at the Battle of Haldi Ghati)

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5843
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Postby Dileep » 05 Dec 2006 20:55

How does the radar track a target? And what constitute a vector? The radar can read a target's angle with respect to itself and the range to the same. The doppler measurement will give you the velocity component straight towards itself. That is all a radar can read.

For a regular beam, the resolution of angle is limited by the beam width, which is too wide for any useful tracking purpose. So, for tracking two beams close together with opposite polarization is used. It is called monopulse. The beam pair is then aligned to give maximum return on both channels. This will give very accurate angular measurement.

The angles are measured with respect to the radar platform itself. So, in order to report that information to an entiety outside that frame of reference, you need to ascertain the bearings of the radar platform itself. Any error in that would get added up to the vectors. You can do this two ways. One, stabilize the radar platform or continuously measure bearings and do the math. In either case, there is an element of error. In the latter, the tracking operation, ie moving the beam around to find the sweet spot, would be a little bit more complicated. And as the range increases, the distance error increases for a given error in angle.

It is a tough job, not impossible. Ground based is much easier, that's all.

Alokji, the phase is not a problem, because you always compare the phase of the transmitted and received pulses. The movement between those events will be minimal, so the error is negligible.

Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Postby Alok_N » 05 Dec 2006 21:17

Thanks, Dileep. That helps a lot. The "phase" that I was talking about had to do with transmission distances, because I was (incorrectly) assuming that a triangulation was involved ... from what you have written it would appear that some sort of a "sweep" is used ... the polarization approach is good, but ultimately what limitss the angular resolution? ... I am not clear as to why it is superior to triangulation ...

Also, if a triangulation is used in the Doppler measurement also, then 3 components of the velocity are measured ... this will helps in trajectory calculations as well ... comments?

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Postby TSJones » 05 Dec 2006 21:47


Rejoice, Rejoice, and sing Hosannas, Democracy will come to Pakistan.


You mean a wahabi/deobandi theocracy I think. A sub state of Saudia Arabia. Inshallah, as it were.

Vijay J
BRFite
Posts: 130
Joined: 19 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: India

Postby Vijay J » 05 Dec 2006 21:51

Democracy isn't supposed to be easy.

The choice is democracy or selling them PAC III.

You decide.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5843
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Postby Dileep » 05 Dec 2006 23:00

Alokji, let's take this to the techforum.

Raju

Postby Raju » 05 Dec 2006 23:02

Pakistanis are angry at China because China does not want to share ABM with Pakistan for the same reason America does not.


If I remember correctly they had installed a battery of HQ-9s over Rawalpindi after Indian Foxbats whizzed about at some exo-atmospheric level over Islamain't bad in the 80s. But gossip has it that the HQ-9s were ill-maintained and fell into disrepair in a few years.

pradeepe
BRFite
Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Postby pradeepe » 05 Dec 2006 23:05

Vijay, PAC3 it may not be, but IMO the current powers that be will not let bakistan go democrazy. IMHO its best that we dispel that notion.
Too many perils in that path-
1. A repeat ala hamas
2. Cant leave Yindoos unrestrained without grooming another pair of shakles..
3..

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Postby abhischekcc » 06 Dec 2006 00:08

Did anyone notice this news???

Pake Ready to Give up Kashmir : Mushy 8)

So, the U-turn has begun. Pakistan is actually sueing for peace. Unbelievable. And all this while I was thinking that they would remain their usual irrational self, and try to escalate conflict. :D

SO, the test has had a positive effect on our security after all. At least that's what it looks like. It seems that pakistan has exhausted all its military options.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Postby Victor » 06 Dec 2006 02:59

After Indian ABM demonstration, the only option pakis had left to maintain their first-strike position was to field MIRV. Now it is evident even to the Chinese that 99.8% boost phase intercept from AXO-Endo means check-mate.

They are already polishing the lampposts in Pindi. When Mushy skips town, he better pray there isn’t a crate of bad mangoes on board.

Vijay J
BRFite
Posts: 130
Joined: 19 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: India

Postby Vijay J » 06 Dec 2006 03:19

Pradeepe,

The whole point of having a military leader in Pakistan is so that Pakistanis can believe that they are being protected from India.

The only way they can prevent India from doing harm to Pakistan is as Gen. Musharraf said, to threaten India with Pakistan's nuclear bomb if India does something. Musharraf said that the Bomb is the only defence that Pakistan has.

Now if India can prevent Pakistan's bomb from ever hitting India, then there is no way that Gen. Musharraf or anyone else in his military can defend Pakistan and that means the military leadership in Pakistan is at an end.

Can America artificially prolong this madness in Pakistan any further? Yes they can by giving Pakistan PAC III, so that they can claim that they have superior ABM to India but in return for this Musharraf will have to give America something like Osama's head on a spear, if he does that, then Allah's followers will kill him and then Osama will have PAC III and god knows what else.

Or America can take a step back and let democracy come to Pakistan, when that happens, I agree that a Hamas type government will come to power. Yes daily and hourly they will have people shouting death to America in Pakistan's streets but if they want to avoid getting nuked by the Americans right away they will have to say Osama does not have the bomb.

In India we have a saying live and let live, let democracy come to Pakistan gradually and let Musharraf have his place in the history books even if it is only a book he has written and only he will read.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5843
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Postby Dileep » 06 Dec 2006 03:26

Porkies having ABM does not ragain the lost argument. They can't hit us, thanx to OUR ABM. ABM have value only for countries facing FU threat.

MIRV is a different story. The only ways for Mushy to protect his Mush is to fire off another Dongless and claim that has MIRV, or fire off a Nai and claim that is nookular. He can delay the inevitable till we demo a cruise missile defense system.

Mushy is toast, if not tomorrow, day after.

Rampy
BRFite
Posts: 285
Joined: 25 Mar 2003 12:31
Contact:

Postby Rampy » 06 Dec 2006 03:36

I am not an expert but just have a question

remember Mushy's Visit to US early this year. US was almost ready to kick his butt, and last month US and NATO meeting - NATO has taken over Afghan, and now ABM by India,
Seems to be a pattern here. Think something will cook very soon may be Mushy :D

Subramaniam
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 12
Joined: 27 Mar 2005 19:01

Postby Subramaniam » 06 Dec 2006 03:38

Folks-like old mahabharat MIRVs can be met by MIKV (Multi interceptor kill vehicle)!? :lol:This will be an anti MIRV interceptor. The single interceptor shall be HTK if the missile has one warhead but then it has several kill vehicle if the missile separates to independent warheads. Wonder why not? I mean that is a thought.

Infact it would be prudent to work on this now and close that option for TSP thereby increasing the pressure tremendously.
Last edited by Subramaniam on 06 Dec 2006 03:40, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54683
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 06 Dec 2006 03:39

Or the day after. :(

What TSP needs is a catharisis of its elite. There are two ways it can happen.
The democracy way in which case the Allah types will get it or if the Allah types think they are going to become bhakra and set upon the other groups.

Mushy comnig up with 'creative' solutions for Kashmir is a way to stall the catharisis.

Anyway are there any khabarain on Mushy meeting his crore commanders?

SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2045
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Postby SriKumar » 06 Dec 2006 03:55

abhischekcc wrote:Did anyone notice this news???

Pake Ready to Give up Kashmir : Mushy 8)
If you go beyond the headline and see his proposals, at this NDTV link: http://tinyurl.com/ydr4et
the idea of giving up on plebiscite is deja vu all over again. Check this link dated Dec 19, 2003. Daily Times. http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 2003_pg1_1
[quote] “The United States welcomes the proposal by President Musharraf that’s been reported in the press,â€
Last edited by SriKumar on 06 Dec 2006 05:30, edited 9 times in total.

kgoan
BRFite
Posts: 264
Joined: 30 Jul 2001 11:31

Postby kgoan » 06 Dec 2006 04:00

And still not a word from the Mad Madam, whose ranting about the Baroness' Kashmir report or the Group Captain, whose babbling about , get this, the Sachar Report in todays Jang and Nation.

Folks, the *only* time this happens in PakeeLand is when the debate inside PakeeLand is full on and too dangerous to comment on - because they don't know who'll win and everyones terrified of getting on the wrong side of the eventual winner.

Hence the silence. Pindrop silence. It's unbelievable. Which also tells us just how serious things there are if its too dangerous for people like Mazari and Halli to open their mouths.

Vijay:

Musharraf is a survivor. He's outplayed everyone in PakeeLand (and arguably us and the Americans as well) to kept his gaddi.

He gave up Afghanistan and told his people he had to do that to keep the focus on India. Now, given what's happening in Afghanistan, he may well sell himself to the Jernails as the only one capable of getting the Taliban and Afghanistan back for Pakistan even if it means losening up on his eastern border!

So I'd say that it's to early to count him out just yet.
Last edited by kgoan on 06 Dec 2006 04:06, edited 1 time in total.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Postby abhischekcc » 06 Dec 2006 04:04

SriKumar wrote:
abhischekcc wrote:Did anyone notice this news???

Pake Ready to Give up Kashmir : Mushy 8)
If you go beyond the headline and see his proposals, the first proposal to give up on plebiscite is deja vu all over again. Check this link dated Dec 19, 2003.
Daily Times. http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 2003_pg1_1
[quote] “The United States welcomes the proposal by President Musharraf that’s been reported in the press,â€

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 06 Dec 2006 05:02

abhischekcc wrote:He says he is willing to give up harping on the plebiscite. AFAIK, that is one of the cornerstones of paki's kashmir policy. And the fact that he is able to say th words that he will give up kashmir itself is significant.

Maybe I am being too optimistic here, given the fact that mushak has been making such statements since Agra. :P

GOI itself is keen on opening up inter kashmiri bordes, from the perspective of that humanitarianism thingy.


IRoT cannot win the war, they now want to try and win Kashmir through peace.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6845
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Postby CRamS » 06 Dec 2006 05:21

abhischekcc wrote:
He says he is willing to give up harping on the plebiscite. AFAIK, that is one of the cornerstones of paki's kashmir policy. And the fact that he is able to say th words that he will give up kashmir itself is significant.



Wow how significant; giving up one something you had no locus standi or control cover. This is the annual performance evaluation time in my company. I too am willing to give up harping on becoming the CEO of my company provided they make me the chief technology officer from my position as a project manager. What a noble compromise from me :-).

abhischekcc wrote:Maybe I am being too optimistic here, given the fact that mushak has been making such statements since Agra. :P


You are. Please read earlier comments of many posters including mine. Porkis have always wanted the Muslim-dominated valley and the valley alone. That desire or claim has not changed one iota. All their specious proposal are aimed at achieving this obsession of theirs through hook or crook. Please educate yourself and everyone you know who are taken in by Mush's so called 'flexibility'.

abhischekcc wrote:GOI itself is keen on opening up inter kashmiri bordes, from the perspective of that humanitarianism thingy.


MMS is trying to be too nice; I certainly don't trust him as true Indian nationalist for whom Kashmir is sacrosanct, but fortunately, he hasn't given up anything crucial yet. But who knows ...

SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2045
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Postby SriKumar » 06 Dec 2006 05:25

ShauryaT wrote: IRoT cannot win the war, they now want to try and win Kashmir through peace.
IRot has known for decades it cannot win a shooting war with India. So, they send in their jehadis. As for them wanting to win it via peace, I'll believe that when their minions stop blowing up people, trains and temples in India.

enqyoobOLD
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 09 Sep 2004 05:16
Location: KhemKaran, Shomali Plain

Postby enqyoobOLD » 06 Dec 2006 05:53

My interpretation of the Mush stunt is that the ISI no longer needs "Kashmir" excuse to run terrorist camps. Lashkar-e-Toiba Camp in Bhagalpur is running smoothly, and generating terrorists to conduct jehad in Mumbai, Kolkotta and everywhere else down to kerala.

Kashmir is irrelevant to getting the Saudi $$$$ for the General's main business. Which brings me to the reason why this is relevant on this thread.

Firstly, ABM has little significance in the Indo-Pak or Indo-China power equation. The Chinese have conventional force superiority, and hence don't need city-busters to terrorize India. The Pakis tried threatening city-busting in 1999 and 2002, and all it got them was the loss of their nuclear weapons. Those happened without ABM.

And no nation, least of all India, will go to first use of strategic nukes on the basis of a few staged flight tests of ABM systems.

This is why I say that the strategic significance of this demonstration is all about the speed, precision, accuracy and reliability of Indian missile, sensor and guidance systems. Maybe the test was primarily done with collaboration with our one or more of the YYY, meant for Iranians and other entities to observe.

The real WMD threats that India faces are on the ground (the bullock cart trundling across the BD border), or the smuggler's motorboat coming ashore on the west coast. If there is a war, then the threat is from artillery with WMD tips. None of these is deterred by the ABM.

But. the ABM has publicly shown the finger to the traditional Paki belief that a flash invasion of Kashmir could be rendered fait accompli using nuclear brinkmanship. Given this demonstration, all hope of military victory in Kashmir just evaporated. So Gola might as well seize the moment and declare his wonderful accomodating nature re: Kashmir.

This will be immediately tom-tommed by the frustrated NPAs and other Paki-lovers as "Solution to the Kashmir Nuclear Flashpoint", ignoring the realities. So it will put India in a corner again to make "concessions" whereas Mush has made absolutely no concession.

The more things change, the more they remain the same. The prescription remains unchanged.

GIVE PEACE A CHANCE. HANG MUSHARRAF AND ALL HIS GENERALS.. AND COLONELS... AND MAJORS
Last edited by enqyoobOLD on 06 Dec 2006 06:06, edited 1 time in total.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 06 Dec 2006 06:01

35 years ago we could have probably traded 93K for Kashmir - we did not even try (for whatever reason).

GoI has rejected Mush's (new?) thinking. GoI should now bargain for extending the border right across.

Needless to state Gwadar and the like needs to be monitored at a low level.

Also, US Gen asks NATO to supply troops to beat up on Taliban!!

saty
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 20 Jan 2005 17:07
Location: Delhi, India

Postby saty » 06 Dec 2006 10:41

It is entirely possible that Musharrafss change of heart has to do with ABM. However ABM or no ABM nukes or no nukes, 93K or no 93K Pakistan will never give it's claim on Kashmir, such is the nature of the beast. Even if we were to give them Kashmir, they would then want Junagadh and then Hyderabad and so on.

The sole reason for existence is that IT IS NOT INDIA.

As long as we exist, unhe takleef hotee rahegi. Any deal/trade/agreement with paksitan can be safely considered NULL and VOID from Baki end. They will break what ever rule they can to spite us if they can.

It is important to understand this to counter them. Their problem is with our existencse itself and not a part of it.

saty
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 20 Jan 2005 17:07
Location: Delhi, India

Postby saty » 06 Dec 2006 10:50

enqyoob wrote:Firstly, ABM has little significance in the Indo-Pak or Indo-China power equation. The Chinese have conventional force superiority, and hence don't need city-busters to terrorize India.


While I agree with N^3 that ABMs will have little effect given Pakistans level of tech (bullock cart) has already surpassed all possible ABMs.

It is w.r.t China I think the biggest advantage comes along. Before going further I would refer folks to works of Humpery Hawksely (Dragon Fire, Dragan Strike) etc. and many other war gaming scenario's many of them on BRF itself.

China, it seems, despite it conventional force superiority in absolute terms can be held down with unacceptable level of losses inflicted on it, this assumes that China is the agressor (fairly possible) rather than India. This is given the nature of battle theator, level of Chinese tech etc.

The fly in the ointment was China might chose to escalate the War to nuke level confident that India would be too crippled to react.

Now that assumption is gone. And suddenly we have a new level of confidence.

THIS IS BIG.

So irrespective of FU, NFU or FY. India gains a level of protection against a nuke attack.

In any event this considerably expands our start space and I for one will sleep easier in Delhi.

pradeepe
BRFite
Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Postby pradeepe » 06 Dec 2006 12:11

Vijay J wrote:Pradeepe,

The whole point of having a military leader in Pakistan is so that Pakistanis can believe that they are being protected from India.

The only way they can prevent India from doing harm to Pakistan is as Gen. Musharraf said, to threaten India with Pakistan's nuclear bomb if India does something. Musharraf said that the Bomb is the only defence that Pakistan has.

Now if India can prevent Pakistan's bomb from ever hitting India, then there is no way that Gen. Musharraf or anyone else in his military can defend Pakistan and that means the military leadership in Pakistan is at an end.

Can America artificially prolong this madness in Pakistan any further? Yes they can by giving Pakistan PAC III, so that they can claim that they have superior ABM to India but in return for this Musharraf will have to give America something like Osama's head on a spear, if he does that, then Allah's followers will kill him and then Osama will have PAC III and god knows what else.

Or America can take a step back and let democracy come to Pakistan, when that happens, I agree that a Hamas type government will come to power. Yes daily and hourly they will have people shouting death to America in Pakistan's streets but if they want to avoid getting nuked by the Americans right away they will have to say Osama does not have the bomb.

In India we have a saying live and let live, let democracy come to Pakistan gradually and let Musharraf have his place in the history books even if it is only a book he has written and only he will read.


OK, thats a well put scenario and a plausible option if any sense prevails in the bakis mind, not that they have too many choices at this point.

The sticky point is that the ossified not so hot warriors in foggy bottom, will develop deep ulcers at the prospect of a unrestrained India. And they would be in overdrive to work on a replacement. In what shape or form that comes is what India needs to be ever vigilant about.

saty
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 20 Jan 2005 17:07
Location: Delhi, India

Postby saty » 06 Dec 2006 12:15

pradeepe wrote:The sticky point is that the ossified not so hot warriors in foggy bottom, will develop deep ulcers at the prospect of a unrestrained India. And they would be in overdrive to work on a replacement. In what shape or form that comes is what India needs to be ever vigilant about.


To repeat myself for the nth time. The world is changing and so is foggy bottom, while we should be vigilant against all friends in same measure as our enemies, I think the tea leaves clearly point to a integrating world view of US-Israel-India etc.

So IMVHO the risks of future are more from other sources than US trying to restrict us.

PPS> Please please dont quote the entire post when replying

pradeepe
BRFite
Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Postby pradeepe » 06 Dec 2006 12:23

OK..I can see some changes yes. Basmati is looking to lead the way I presume. But still, you will need to forgive me for being a skeptic when it comes to foggy bottom.

Apologies for the full quote, thought about snippng it, but got lazy.
On second thoughts let it be there. Thats a clean message that needs to be conveyed to the bakis (and others) a couple more times, the ones so high on the finest...

saty
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 20 Jan 2005 17:07
Location: Delhi, India

Postby saty » 06 Dec 2006 12:29

pradeepe wrote: But still, you will need to forgive me for being a skeptic when it comes to foggy bottom.


Skepticism is welcome in all Intl. relations, and you are welcome to be one. My humble point is that we should let it overwhelm us to a point that it interferes with our risk taking appetite it context of real politic interests.

Just a facet to be kept in mind as well lest we develop knee jerk responses.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests