Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist - Part-2

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 20 Sep 2009 13:26

M K Narayanan wrote:"We have thermonuclear capabilities. I am absolutely sure. We are very clear on this point. If you hit a city with one of these you are talking about 50,000 to 1,00,000 deaths," the NSA said.

The highlighted figures are more in line with the casualties at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The estimates for a TN weapon should have been higher.

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 20 Sep 2009 13:27

Kanson wrote:
"We have thermonuclear capabilities. I am absolutely sure. We are very clear on this point. If you hit a city with one of these you are talking about 50,000 to 1,00,000 deaths," the NSA said.
I asked this to Sanjay here yesterday: How we will proceed further, i a govt official declares we have TN bums.

Santhanam so far not produced any substantial evidence. He is only beating around the bush. Now it is going to boil down to one's word against the other.

And what evidence has NSA produced apart saying that there shouldn't be public debate. A core team member with physicist background, and responsible for yield measurement, has come out and stated that it was a fizzle. Just this fact should raise questions on our capabilities. The clown NSA is countering by stating that KS doesn't know anything....
what kinda moronic stance is that...

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 20 Sep 2009 13:28

vera_k wrote: But what we come to know is that their scientists have informed their governments that the TN test was not a success - by their assessment - a long time ago.

Govt wont take decision based on scientist's views alone. They use intelligence to verify. Official position will be based on complete assessment.

archan · Post by **archan** » 20 Sep 2009 13:29

vera_k wrote:
M K Narayanan wrote:"We have thermonuclear capabilities. I am absolutely sure. We are very clear on this point. If you hit a city with one of these you are talking about 50,000 to 1,00,000 deaths," the NSA said.
The highlighted figures are more in line with the casualties at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The estimates for a TN weapon should have been higher.

Wouldn't it depend on the population density of the city?

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 20 Sep 2009 13:31

Kanson wrote:
Raj Malhotra wrote: My theory is supported by posts of Arun_S and (ravi-cv?) on BRF during that time.
Sorry for being mischievous here. Which post, the one before 2007 or afterwards or now. Becoz, the posts and the message are constantly changing. Yesterday sizzle, today fizzle. Yesterday 15 kt, then 8 kt and now 25 kt. I'm so confused. So you theory should also be changing i guess.

Theories and thoughts should keep changing with more data and understanding, else we will all be like stagnated Arab civilization...

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 20 Sep 2009 13:34

Kanson wrote:
vera_k wrote: But what we come to know is that their scientists have informed their governments that the TN test was not a success - by their assessment - a long time ago.
Govt wont take decision based on scientist's views alone. They use intelligence to verify. Official position will be based on complete assessment.

Surely it is understood that there are many sources for information and there are many possible actions to take based on the information obtained. IMO, the PRC's activities to dispute Arunachal Pradesh at this point corroborates that they are not deterred by the weapons or policies we are using.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 20 Sep 2009 13:39

milindc wrote: And what evidence has NSA produced apart saying that there shouldn't be public debate. A core team member with physicist background, and responsible for yield measurement, has come out and stated that it was a fizzle. Just this fact should raise questions on our capabilities. The clown NSA is countering by stating that KS doesn't know anything....
what kinda moronic stance is that...

You, me and infact K. Santhanam could very well agree on the fact that "public debate" wouldnt solve this. As public we wont be equipped to deal with the technical aspects of this problem. And, if i'm right, Santhanam said the same thing. As the information is classified let that be discussed by a committee and only sanitized version of the finding be released to public - his remark.

I guess, for that, NSA replied. Seriously, i dont know what Santhanam or anyone know on this topic. Santhanam claims that due to his indulgence with some scientist he know abt the design. I ask Santhanam, let stop beating around the bush. If this is indeed a grave matter which he things detrimental to national security then let him come open and share the details or if the scientist feels the same things let him come fwd. Why everthing is hunky and donkey. We are hearing the same sound bites from the same players again and again.

archan · Post by **archan** » 20 Sep 2009 13:41

Pin pricks are one thing. Nations don't throw n-bombs at each other because some soldiers of nation X occasionally cross over a poorly marked border of nation Y. The Chinese know that. As many have pointed out, the recent Chinese antics are most likely to divert attention from TSP which seem to be uneasy being put in the spot. China knows it is more powerful than India in every way and presence/absence of N-bombs have little to do with such diversionary tactics IMO.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Sep 2009 13:41

Kanson wrote:
vera_k wrote: But what we come to know is that their scientists have informed their governments that the TN test was not a success - by their assessment - a long time ago.
Govt wont take decision based on scientist's views alone. They use intelligence to verify. Official position will be based on complete assessment.

The officials can also lie.

The nation has the right to know if TN is indeed military usable weapon or a fizzle , if they have nothing to hide , let them conduct a peer review involving serving scientist , ex AEC chairman and military.

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 20 Sep 2009 13:48

I was trying to find any political motives within AEC/BARC for claims/counter-claims. Here is an interesting article right after POK-II
Read it all...
AEC stuck in a mire as uncertainty prevails over Chidambaram's successor

``How do you expect Chidambaram to go quietly after what Pokharan II generated in his favour among government circles,'' an associate of the AEC Chairman asked The Indian Express. ``After the May tests, he has emerged so powerful and influential that one cannot see him retiring to his flat in Juhu-Versova or his new bungalow in Chennai,'' he said.

Chidambaram's role as AEC chairman went further than administrative and scientific supervision of the weapons programme, according to some of his high-ranking colleagues, and included efforts to promote the programme with the political executive. In the last two years he succeeded in bringing three prime ministers to visit BARC - something unprecedented in DAE history

Chidambaram was definitely politically suave and would lose face if TN fizzled.

When this reporter spoke to a wide section of scientists and engineers in BARC and some DAE centres in the country, opinion favoured Kakodkar. The likelihood of DRDO's Santhanam taking over the AEC after Chidambaram is also mentioned but it is a remote possibility.

Santhanam also might have axe to grind...

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 20 Sep 2009 13:49

milindc wrote: Theories and thoughts should keep changing with more data and understanding, else we will all be like stagnated Arab civilization...

Very true. So tell us what is the status and what is the weapon yield. If you believe Arun then Santhanam is wrong. And BK is wrong. If you believe Santhanam the Arun is wrong. There in fact two versions of Santhanam. Some time Arun was telling there is scallable FBF. Now that is also wiped out by him. It is more like Circus now. To me, considering the state we are, Arabs looks much better.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Sep 2009 13:53

The NSA is a funny man - and may be as "vaaazha-vaazha- kozha-kozha" as Santhanam

Just read his words.

"The thermonuclear device had a yield of 45 kilotons. I have chosen my words carefully 45 kilotons and nobody, including Mr Santhanam who has absolutely no idea what he is talking about, can contest what is proven fact by the data which is there," Narayanan said.

He says "The thermonuclear device had a yield of 45 kilotons.". He does not say design yield or actual yield.

He is certainly telling the truth and has chosen his words very carefully.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 20 Sep 2009 14:00

archan wrote:Wouldn't it depend on the population density of the city?

The required bomb yield only gets smaller if you consider modern day population densities, since a smaller yield should cause more casualties.

For e.g.

Wiki says population density of Beijing is 7400/sq.km.

Taking data from this table, assuming a surface explosion of 20KT and counting 100% casualties in the Moderate Damage Radius, we can expect ~67,000 casualties.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Sep 2009 14:14

vera_k wrote: Taking data from this table, assuming a surface explosion of 20KT and counting 100% casualties in the Moderate Damage Radius, we can expect ~67,000 casualties.

Thx for the link.

Note that 150% increase in yield @ 50kt increases area by only 33%. approx.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 20 Sep 2009 14:24

NSA has been handpicked by the puppet and he is doing his duty but putting his foot down on nationalists.

Nuclear deal was done purely under pressure of Indian American business lobby, which bankrolls Congress and Sonia. This lobby is full of blind west-apers who lack nationalist and independent mindset.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Sep 2009 14:28

^^^^^

Raj Malhotra wrote: It is clearly evident some eminent posters want to get thread locked.

It does appear that way no?

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 20 Sep 2009 14:57

shiv wrote:
vera_k wrote: Taking data from this table, assuming a surface explosion of 20KT and counting 100% casualties in the Moderate Damage Radius, we can expect ~67,000 casualties.
Thx for the link.

Note that 150% increase in yield @ 50kt increases area by only 33%. approx.

Actually the moderate damage radius increases by 35.7% and the moderate damage area would increase by 84%

Added later: Nevertheless, it goes to show how important accurate delivery is.

amit · Post by **amit** » 20 Sep 2009 15:52

vishwakarmaa wrote:NSA has been handpicked by the puppet and he is doing his duty but putting his foot down on nationalists.

Nuclear deal was done purely under pressure of Indian American business lobby, which bankrolls Congress and Sonia. This lobby is full of blind west-apers who lack nationalist and independent mindset.

Interesting point Vishwakarmaa.

I would also like to know your view of why the NSA of the Nationalist government, BM, also overruled what KS said?

Surely he and the government that he represented were/are not blind west-apers?

I would also like to point out the the genesis of the nuclear deal was started during the nationalist government's time. Remember Jaswant-Talbott talks?

amit · Post by **amit** » 20 Sep 2009 16:10

Austin wrote:The officials can also lie.

The nation has the right to know if TN is indeed military usable weapon or a fizzle , if they have nothing to hide , let them conduct a peer review involving serving scientist , ex AEC chairman and military.

Sure Austin officials can lie. As can all those scientists who are claiming fizzle like KS, PKI etc.

The ability to lie or lying with an agenda is not something which only currently serving officials/scientists can do. In fact anyone can do that for whatever reasons.

Regarding the peer review, what makes you think that you, me or anyone else on BRF will get to know that the peer review has been or not been conducted?

Do you think the government is going to issue a press release or call a conference? I doubt it.

Look let's be realistic. For folks who come on BRF this is a life and death issue and the most important national issue. However, BRF is not India and do you think there's a large degree of awareness outside? Do you think the vast majority of Indians understand the difference between a TN weapon or a fusion boosted weapon or what have you?

There is no mass hysteria with people on the streets crying for information on whether the TN works and so the GoI has no imperative to make public a peer review or announce the results of such a review.

That is not to say that there are not concerned stake holders. Surely the military is not sitting idle and not asking questions. And in fact if there is indeed a major problem with the deterrent it is quite unlikely that the military only got to know about it after KS' statement?

They must have been aware much earlier. And do you think they have been sitting on their haunches all this while?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Sep 2009 16:12

I clearly remember ( etched in my memory ) RC in an interview given on DD post POK -2 mentioned that the TN device has a scalable yeald of upto ~ 300 kT

Infact he even spoke of 4th Gen nuclear weapons which do not need fission trigger for fusion and mentioned areas like conventional high explosive and laser can be used that BARC was working on it.

amit · Post by **amit** » 20 Sep 2009 16:19

archan wrote:Pin pricks are one thing. Nations don't throw n-bombs at each other because some soldiers of nation X occasionally cross over a poorly marked border of nation Y. The Chinese know that. As many have pointed out, the recent Chinese antics are most likely to divert attention from TSP which seem to be uneasy being put in the spot. China knows it is more powerful than India in every way and presence/absence of N-bombs have little to do with such diversionary tactics IMO.

Archan,

Glad to see your very sensible post. The idea that China is moving on Arunachal now because it know the TN doesn't work is laughable hysteria.

The Chinese are moving now because they think the global geopolitics is in their favour. India is growing but still no match of China militarily or economically. But this situation is not going to persist for long, in fact I reckon it gives China a 5-6 year window of opportunity. Add to that the fact that the Chinese have a tight grip on the place that hurts as far as the US is concerned.

This is an opportune point for them. However, if a clash in Arunchal escalates into a situation where a nuclear exchange is likely then the entire advantage that China currently enjoys goes putt as that immediately gives the US the kind of leverage that China is desperate to prevent.

A clash between India and China is not like a neghibourhood fight between two gangs. It has a major geo political implications. Nuclear standoff will simply not happen, IMO.

Sorry for the OT post but I think this scare mongering only dilutes from the real question about what next after KS' revelation.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 20 Sep 2009 16:20

After reading the 61+27=108 MegaThreads of ThermoNuclear GH here, I see that the GOI has achieved its goals:

What would be those goals?
WITHOUT ANY change in position from itself, convey to the duniya that

1. India is a peaceful, SDRE, Baniya nation with no ambitions to bully anyone, specifically anyone beyond TSP and PRC.
2. Get at least 100 desis who waste time on BRF plus 1,700,000,000,000 readers of The HUNDI who normally care only whether they should start taking Mandarin and Urdu courses to get the good bureaucrat jobs in the new government, to spend a few seconds worrying, and to get them to decide that India in fact does not have any "MegaTon" bombs, and basically no nuclear deterrent, the Arihant is mainly intended for Sonia Gandhi and MMS to exit to Italy when the PRC comes marching in, etc.
3. Convey to BO and his NonProllotullahs that desi public will fully support another series of tests, completely blowing the New Whirled Odor and EnPeeTee and CeeTeeBeeTee to houristan. "Pressure is mounting on the Indian Government to restore credibility of its Minimum Credible Deterrent" etc.

3. Change nothing in the knowledge of TSP and PRC that adventurism will trigger the same "Befitting Replies" and "Meeting of Any Eventualities" that GOI is so famous for doing.

IOW, they are following exactly what I asked them to do in one post buried among 250,000,000,000,000 here at BRF, on what should be done to generate some awareness among the desi chalta-hai, cell-phone-in-all-ears generation of security and strategy issues, so that they MAY consider putting up with the dire shortage of "Revlon jeans and Levi's Lipstick" that Moni Basu predicted as the disaster to happen with the Sanctions in 1998.

The Deterrent is what it always was. Any invader will have to put up with 1.116487358 Billion yada-yada-yada experts arguing whether masala chai and Parle Gluco Biscoot will be enough.

amit · Post by **amit** » 20 Sep 2009 16:22

Austin wrote:I clearly remember ( etched in my memory ) RC in an interview given on DD post POK -2 mentioned that the TN device has a scalable yeald of upto ~ 300 kT

Infact he even spoke of 4th Gen nuclear weapons which do not need fission trigger for fusion and mentioned areas like conventional high explosive and laser can be used that BARC was working on it.

If what he said was true (note I do not say he is not capable of lying, just like anyone of the actors in this drama) then they've had almost 11 years to perfect whatever they were designing right?

Of course if the entire premise is that RC and the entire team was lying then...

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Sep 2009 16:34

amit wrote:Sure Austin officials can lie. As can all those scientists who are claiming fizzle like KS, PKI etc.

The ability to lie or lying with an agenda is not something which only currently serving officials/scientists can do. In fact anyone can do that for whatever reasons.

Regarding the peer review, what makes you think that you, me or anyone else on BRF will get to know that the peer review has been or not been conducted?

They must have been aware much earlier. And do you think they have been sitting on their haunches all this while?

Yes I agree there , if RC or APJ or any one can provide sexed up report ( I do not want to use the word lie or call any one a lier without giving the person a fair chance to prove himself ) to prove they got it right , so can people like Santy or any one who are nay sayers.

Conventional wisdom will tell me that people who are in GOI will have more incentive to lie because they want to toe the GOI line ( political reason ) , because their word was taken as a gospel truth by GOI and they now cannot backtrack ( personal/institutional reason ) or GOI pressuring them not to speak the truth because as a society we are just too shit scared ( duniya kya khengi ) to accept that things can go wrong for a high stake event like a Nuclear test , so we tend to persist with half truth for H&D reasons.

But the only way out is to take the detractors on board for this peer review.

It is important to involve people like PKI/Sethna and the military in this peer review and come up with a correct assessment of TN.

These people headed BARC/DAE at some point in their career and GOI should not shy away from taking their service and taking them into confidence.

As for military doing any thing or saying any thing , the military will do what the GOI will ask them to do , if they are told to shut up and told TN worked they will abide by it atleast till the time these chief are serving period.

This is not a few men claim to glory or few men shameful act , but an event of national importance and credibility of our Nuclear deterrence.

So if things are wrong fix it , there is no shame in accepting the fact that we went wrong and we will get it right this time around , but it is shameful and disgusting not admit the wrong doing and continue to persist , this applies to GOI and Institution and not specific individual , the country is bigger than any individual or institution.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Sep 2009 16:37

amit wrote:If what he said was true (note I do not say he is not capable of lying, just like anyone of the actors in this drama) then they've had almost 11 years to perfect whatever they were designing right?

Of course if the entire premise is that RC and the entire team was lying then...

Who knows if given an opportunity they will get the patched up 3rd Gen TN right and even the 4th Gen conventional fusion weapon the Holy Grail

Some feel good is needed after so many depressing news

amit · Post by **amit** » 20 Sep 2009 16:38

Regarding the call for a peer review, I'd like to reiterate what MKN said in TOI

National Security Adviser M K Narayanan has termed a former DRDO scientist's claims on Pokhran II nuclear tests as "horrific" and
asserted that India has thermonuclear capabilities which have been verified by a peer group of researchers.

He said that the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), which comprises a peer group of scientists, had last week come out with the "most authoritative" statement on the efficacy of the 1998 nuclear tests and no more clarification was required from the government on the matter.

"They (AEC) were satisfied in 1998 and they were satisfied in 2009. Now what are you going to discuss?" he said to a news channel.
Narayanan said that the AEC, an independent Commission and the highest body in such matters, was asked to study the data of the 1998 nuclear tests once again in the wake of the controversy over the efficacy of the hydrogen bomb following the statements of former DRDO scientist K Santhanam.

Now we can say MKN is lying.

But if he's not (I know it's a difficult of some folks to accept this possibility) then the peer review has been done after KS' assertion, nah?

Another possibility could that the peer review was doctored. But how are we to ever know if this is so or not?

It boils down to a question of belief. If we think that the institutional integrity of BARC, AEC and the integrity of scientists in charge is compromised no amount of peer reviews would satisfy would it? This is what happens when a scientific dispute transforms into a question of personal integrity?

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 20 Sep 2009 16:40

narayanan wrote:Abhiti writes:
I am all ears
Dear All Ears:
Wow! Congratulations! I am so happy for you. Do let us know if you grow other organs.
You are totally out of your mind
Thanks for that logical, cogent argument. I am awed. Coming from someone who is "all ears" (presumably ears are entirely outside mind?) that is indeed a great compliment.

Is it a joke or what? We have kids as board moderators! And other moderators like Archan protecting him. Where is archan editing the above post? It is easy to talk ideals like narayanan was doing in lca discussion and others. But I know when I see emotional unstable folks running around reality is different.

amit · Post by **amit** » 20 Sep 2009 16:41

Austin wrote:Who knows if given an opportunity they will get the patched up 3rd Gen TN right and even the 4th Gen conventional fusion weapon the Holy Grail

Some feel good is needed after so many depressing news

Austin,

Nice to see smileys after so long. LOL!

Look whatever they've done over the past 11 years or so needs to be tested at some point of time or other. I'm no scientist or engineer but even I am convinced no reliable arsenal can be built with one test.

And so the need of the hour is to ensure that CTBT is not accepted under any circumstances.

Maybe the whole brouhaha is to prevent US pressure on CTBT?

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 20 Sep 2009 16:53

archan wrote:Pin pricks are one thing. Nations don't throw n-bombs at each other because some soldiers of nation X occasionally cross over a poorly marked border of nation Y. The Chinese know that. As many have pointed out, the recent Chinese antics are most likely to divert attention from TSP which seem to be uneasy being put in the spot. China knows it is more powerful than India in every way and presence/absence of N-bombs have little to do with such diversionary tactics IMO.

Again wrong. N-bombs have a lot to do with how nations behave against others. What was the last time American soldiers entered USSR/ Russian territory or vice versa without them being confronted and captured? On numerous occasions over past decades America threatened use of nukes on Russia and vice versa. There were direct concessions given by other nation as a result. The reason China seems so keen to pick up a fight is that it knows it is suicidal for India to threaten nuclear attack when it has so few small nukes. I doubt China will threaten military action against a nation which holds the capacity to destroy half their country, it simply doesn't make sense and Chinese may be a number of things but they aren't stupid.

amit · Post by **amit** » 20 Sep 2009 16:58

abhiti wrote:The reason China seems so keen to pick up a fight is that it knows it is suicidal for India to threaten nuclear attack when it has so few small nukes. I doubt China will threaten military action against a nation which holds the capacity to destroy half their country, it simply doesn't make sense and Chinese may be a number of things but they aren't stupid.

Abhiti,

I think you'll agree that this state of affairs have persisted over several decades? And you'll also agree that India had far fewer bombs in 1998 than it has today and also almost no ability to deliver bombs to Chinese mainland then.

So what is new now? Why didn't China move on Arunachal 10 years ago. Why did it agree to the fact that Arunachal is a part of India during that last border talks and even published maps showing Arunachal (minus Tawang) to be part of India?

Surely you are not suggesting that China got to know about the TN fizzle from KS and so now is moving in Arunachal now because to that?

I'll take the liberty of using a smiley (apologies to Ramana):

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 20 Sep 2009 17:01

amit wrote:Abhiti,

I think you'll agree that this state of affairs have persisted over several decades. So what is new now? Surely you are not suggesting that China got to know about the TN fizzle from KS and so now is moving in Arunachal?

I'll take the liberty of using a smiley:

Great question...what is new is that Chinese now have acquired capability to support large scale battle in Tibet (think railways and roads). What is also new is that USSR doesn't exist. Also that China is emerging super power and America is in no position to threaten it.

arunsrinivasan · Post by **arunsrinivasan** » 20 Sep 2009 17:02

@abhiti - In each of the instance you quote, the opponent knows that the threat is real not just words. Unfortunately that is not the case with us, i.e. India has to be seen to have the guts to follow through on its threats. At the moment India is seen as a wimp, by the rest of the world, so they take us for a ride. It doesnt matter if we have TN or not, unless we change our mindset, having a TN alone wont help! If we learn to play hard-ball, we could put the fear of god in our enemies, even without TN, IMHO.

amit · Post by **amit** » 20 Sep 2009 17:05

abhiti wrote:Great question...what is new is that Chinese now have acquired capability to support large scale battle in Tibet (think railways and roads). What is also new is that USSR doesn't exist. Also that China is emerging super power and America is in no position to threaten it.

Please read my post to Archan. You are saying exactly the same thing. So that begs the question: How is this Chinese posture in Arunachal relevant to this discussion on fizzle vs sizzle?

I would request you to not confuse issues.

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 20 Sep 2009 17:06

arunsrinivasan wrote:@abhiti - In each of the instance you quote, the opponent knows that the threat is real not just words. Unfortunately that is not the case with us, i.e. India has to be seen to have the guts to follow through on its threats. At the moment India is seen as a wimp, by the rest of the world, so they take us for a ride. It doesnt matter if we have TN or not, unless we change our mindset, having a TN alone wont help! If we learn to play hard-ball, we could put the fear of god in our enemies, even without TN, IMHO.

In reality, guts as intentions cannot be measured, capabilities can. That is you will often see countries using known capabilities to make decisions. The people who base it on guts often end up in dooms day scenario example Pakis in 1971 and their theory of guts of "Hindu" army.

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 20 Sep 2009 17:09

amit wrote:
abhiti wrote:Great question...what is new is that Chinese now have acquired capability to support large scale battle in Tibet (think railways and roads). What is also new is that USSR doesn't exist. Also that China is emerging super power and America is in no position to threaten it.
Please read my post to Archan. You are saying exactly the same thing. So that begs the question: How is this Chinese posture in Arunachal relevant to this discussion on fizzle vs sizzle?

I would request you to not confuse issues.

No I am saying a very different thing, I am saying China will take notice once we have sufficient capability to destroy some portion of their country. Fizzle vs sizzle makes all the difference as it changes the law of known capabilities.

amit · Post by **amit** » 20 Sep 2009 17:18

abhiti wrote:No I am saying a very different thing, I am saying China will take notice once we have sufficient capability to destroy some portion of their country. Fizzle vs sizzle makes all the difference as it changes the law of known capabilities.

How would you define sufficient capability? Would that be in terms of number of bombs, tonnage, delivery mechanism (missiles), CEP of missiles, choice of targets, how?

Do note that a 15kt bomb if it hits the Three Gorges dam accurately would probably cause more collateral damage and deaths than a 500 kt bomb burst over Shanghai.

These issues are very complex and people spend their entire lives gaming them. So it is very simplistic to say that China will take notice "after we have sufficient capability" without defining what constitutes "sufficient" in the eyes of Chinese leadership.

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 20 Sep 2009 17:23

amit wrote:How would you define sufficient capability? Would that be in terms of number of bombs, tonnage, delivery mechanism (missiles), CEP of missiles, choice of targets, how?

Do note that a 15kt bomb if it hits the Three Gorges dam accurately would probably cause more collateral damage and deaths than a 500 kt bomb burst over Shanghai.

These issues are very complex and people spend their entire lives gaming them. So it is very simplistic to say that China will take notice "after we have sufficient capability" without defining what constitutes "sufficient" in the eyes of Chinese leadership.

Sufficient is at times defined by what deters the folks you need deterred. America had to build 20,000 nukes to deter Soviet Union. They don't quite need that now for Russia. Under certain circumstances it may be hard to define sufficient. But in case of India we are clearly no where close to having that debate.

amit · Post by **amit** » 20 Sep 2009 17:28

abhiti wrote:Sufficient is at times defined by what deters the folks you need deterred. America had to build 20,000 nukes to deter Soviet Union. They don't quite need that now for Russia. Under certain circumstances it may be hard to define sufficient. But in case of India we are clearly no where close to having that debate.

On the one hand you admit it is hard to define what might be considered by the Chinese as sufficient.

On the other hand you are convinced whatever India has is not sufficient for China to be deterred.

IMHO that's a circular argument, unless you have access to decision makers in China.

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 20 Sep 2009 17:32

amit wrote:On the one hand you admit it is hard to define what might be considered by the Chinese as sufficient.

On the other hand you are convinced whatever India has is not sufficient for China to be deterred.

IMHO that's a circular argument, unless you have access to decision makers in China.

You are missing forests for trees. Clearly what India has today is not sufficient. When we have 1000 TN weapons deployed with ATV carrying SLBMs we may enter the difficult arena of defining sufficient. Today this debate is irrelevant.

amit · Post by **amit** » 20 Sep 2009 17:34

abhiti wrote:You are missing forests for trees. Clearly what India has today is not sufficient. When we have 1000 TN weapons deployed with ATV carrying SLBMs we may enter the difficult arena of defining sufficient. Today this debate is irrelevant.

Abhiti,

It's pointless. Let's just agree to disagree?