I know Pakistani Government keeps talking about minimum nuclear detterent but what's that in numbers? Hundereds of ballistic missiles with various ranges capable of carrying nuclear devices or would that be in thousands?
2000 for india, 200 for israel and 5000 for usa. that is enough. pakistan is going ahead.. we now can build 400 ballistic missile per year.
- Deleted -
QUOTE(JF 17 Thunder @ Feb 17 2008, 11:16 AM) 
I know Pakistani Government keeps talking about minimum nuclear detterent but what's that in numbers? Hundereds of ballistic missiles with various ranges capable of carrying nuclear devices or would that be in thousands?
Also, how many ballistic missiles would Pakistan need to completely annihilate Hindustan rendering it as a defunct state?
Also, how many ballistic missiles would Pakistan need to completely annihilate Hindustan rendering it as a defunct state?
Three successfull hits will more then enough for India.
One for Mumbai.
One for New Delhi.
One for Calcutta.
On the other note: God forbids that may it never come to this. Personally I believe, India and Pakistan are in a useless arms race which is only forcing each other to do wrong to their own population. India wants complete edge based on the fact that is so much stronger in every sense now and Pakistan is not letting attain that edge by always trying to match India's acquisitions with her own.
War between the two ? Highly unlikely as long as both have Nuclear Weopons in their own control.
QUOTE(2 aliph 5 @ Feb 17 2008, 04:39 PM)
Three successfull hits will more then enough for India.
One for Mumbai.
One for New Delhi.
One for Calcutta.
On the other note: God forbids that may it never come to this. Personally I believe, India and Pakistan are in a useless arms race which is only forcing each other to do wrong to their own population. India wants complete edge based on the fact that is so much stronger in every sense now and Pakistan is not letting attain that edge by always trying to match India's acquisitions with her own.
War between the two ? Highly unlikely as long as both have Nuclear Weopons in their own control.
One for Mumbai.
One for New Delhi.
One for Calcutta.
On the other note: God forbids that may it never come to this. Personally I believe, India and Pakistan are in a useless arms race which is only forcing each other to do wrong to their own population. India wants complete edge based on the fact that is so much stronger in every sense now and Pakistan is not letting attain that edge by always trying to match India's acquisitions with her own.
War between the two ? Highly unlikely as long as both have Nuclear Weopons in their own control.
Excellent statement Aliph couldnt have agreed more with you, unfortunately their will be an Arms race just see Indian military has many contracts including helicopter tenders,MRCA, subs and what not from my information all these would be matched by us in our own way so i dont see how they would get an edge when their actions ae forcing us to arm.
QUOTE(JF 17 Thunder @ Feb 17 2008, 03:47 PM)
Based on what?
read from pakdef.
Aoa
I disagree, if we are able to sucessfully nuke these three cities we wouldnt' achieve the objective outlined by the topic starter i.e. to completely annihilate Hindustan rendering it as a defunct state. It will kill a lot of people, but that is about it. They will temporarily be faced with some crisis, however, it wouldn't kill more then a large percentage of thier population or rather large enough percentage. Then you have to take into account the fact that there are other countries in the world as well, and imagine the aid that would start pouring in and what have you. It would be a loss, but not something that will 'completely annihilate them and render them as a defunct state'. It could even bring them back stronger. A good example is Japan, they got hit in two cities, major ones, they are the second largest economy now. And India being hit in three, considering it's population size, would be in a much better position to come back.
As far as I know, you have to take out more then 50 % of the total population to destroy the social structure of a society completely. Three cities are nothing close to that target.
So in view of that, if we must prepare to achieve that objective, we have to develop Hydrogen bombs, with high yeild, thier area of destruction is much larger and we wouldn't need too many to achieve the objective outlined above.
And Allah knows best.
w/salaam
QUOTE(2 aliph 5 @ Feb 17 2008, 05:39 PM)
Three successfull hits will more then enough for India.
One for Mumbai.
One for New Delhi.
One for Calcutta.
On the other note: God forbids that may it never come to this. Personally I believe, India and Pakistan are in a useless arms race which is only forcing each other to do wrong to their own population. India wants complete edge based on the fact that is so much stronger in every sense now and Pakistan is not letting attain that edge by always trying to match India's acquisitions with her own.
War between the two ? Highly unlikely as long as both have Nuclear Weopons in their own control.
One for Mumbai.
One for New Delhi.
One for Calcutta.
On the other note: God forbids that may it never come to this. Personally I believe, India and Pakistan are in a useless arms race which is only forcing each other to do wrong to their own population. India wants complete edge based on the fact that is so much stronger in every sense now and Pakistan is not letting attain that edge by always trying to match India's acquisitions with her own.
War between the two ? Highly unlikely as long as both have Nuclear Weopons in their own control.
I disagree, if we are able to sucessfully nuke these three cities we wouldnt' achieve the objective outlined by the topic starter i.e. to completely annihilate Hindustan rendering it as a defunct state. It will kill a lot of people, but that is about it. They will temporarily be faced with some crisis, however, it wouldn't kill more then a large percentage of thier population or rather large enough percentage. Then you have to take into account the fact that there are other countries in the world as well, and imagine the aid that would start pouring in and what have you. It would be a loss, but not something that will 'completely annihilate them and render them as a defunct state'. It could even bring them back stronger. A good example is Japan, they got hit in two cities, major ones, they are the second largest economy now. And India being hit in three, considering it's population size, would be in a much better position to come back.
As far as I know, you have to take out more then 50 % of the total population to destroy the social structure of a society completely. Three cities are nothing close to that target.
So in view of that, if we must prepare to achieve that objective, we have to develop Hydrogen bombs, with high yeild, thier area of destruction is much larger and we wouldn't need too many to achieve the objective outlined above.
And Allah knows best.
w/salaam
QUOTE(noxiouspython @ Feb 18 2008, 05:48 AM)
Aoa
I disagree, if we are able to sucessfully nuke these three cities we wouldnt' achieve the objective outlined by the topic starter i.e. to completely annihilate Hindustan rendering it as a defunct state. It will kill a lot of people, but that is about it. They will temporarily be faced with some crisis, however, it wouldn't kill more then a large percentage of thier population or rather large enough percentage. Then you have to take into account the fact that there are other countries in the world as well, and imagine the aid that would start pouring in and what have you. It would be a loss, but not something that will 'completely annihilate them and render them as a defunct state'. It could even bring them back stronger. A good example is Japan, they got hit in two cities, major ones, they are the second largest economy now. And India being hit in three, considering it's population size, would be in a much better position to come back.
As far as I know, you have to take out more then 50 % of the total population to destroy the social structure of a society completely. Three cities are nothing close to that target.
So in view of that, if we must prepare to achieve that objective, we have to develop Hydrogen bombs, with high yeild, thier area of destruction is much larger and we wouldn't need too many to achieve the objective outlined above.
And Allah knows best.
w/salaam
I disagree, if we are able to sucessfully nuke these three cities we wouldnt' achieve the objective outlined by the topic starter i.e. to completely annihilate Hindustan rendering it as a defunct state. It will kill a lot of people, but that is about it. They will temporarily be faced with some crisis, however, it wouldn't kill more then a large percentage of thier population or rather large enough percentage. Then you have to take into account the fact that there are other countries in the world as well, and imagine the aid that would start pouring in and what have you. It would be a loss, but not something that will 'completely annihilate them and render them as a defunct state'. It could even bring them back stronger. A good example is Japan, they got hit in two cities, major ones, they are the second largest economy now. And India being hit in three, considering it's population size, would be in a much better position to come back.
As far as I know, you have to take out more then 50 % of the total population to destroy the social structure of a society completely. Three cities are nothing close to that target.
So in view of that, if we must prepare to achieve that objective, we have to develop Hydrogen bombs, with high yeild, thier area of destruction is much larger and we wouldn't need too many to achieve the objective outlined above.
And Allah knows best.
w/salaam
Don't forget:
And hope that we never have to use them...
QUOTE(noxiouspython @ Feb 18 2008, 05:48 AM)
Aoa
I disagree, if we are able to sucessfully nuke these three cities we wouldnt' achieve the objective outlined by the topic starter i.e. to completely annihilate Hindustan rendering it as a defunct state. It will kill a lot of people, but that is about it. They will temporarily be faced with some crisis, however, it wouldn't kill more then a large percentage of thier population or rather large enough percentage. Then you have to take into account the fact that there are other countries in the world as well, and imagine the aid that would start pouring in and what have you. It would be a loss, but not something that will 'completely annihilate them and render them as a defunct state'. It could even bring them back stronger. A good example is Japan, they got hit in two cities, major ones, they are the second largest economy now. And India being hit in three, considering it's population size, would be in a much better position to come back.
As far as I know, you have to take out more then 50 % of the total population to destroy the social structure of a society completely. Three cities are nothing close to that target.
So in view of that, if we must prepare to achieve that objective, we have to develop Hydrogen bombs, with high yeild, thier area of destruction is much larger and we wouldn't need too many to achieve the objective outlined above.
And Allah knows best.
w/salaam
I disagree, if we are able to sucessfully nuke these three cities we wouldnt' achieve the objective outlined by the topic starter i.e. to completely annihilate Hindustan rendering it as a defunct state. It will kill a lot of people, but that is about it. They will temporarily be faced with some crisis, however, it wouldn't kill more then a large percentage of thier population or rather large enough percentage. Then you have to take into account the fact that there are other countries in the world as well, and imagine the aid that would start pouring in and what have you. It would be a loss, but not something that will 'completely annihilate them and render them as a defunct state'. It could even bring them back stronger. A good example is Japan, they got hit in two cities, major ones, they are the second largest economy now. And India being hit in three, considering it's population size, would be in a much better position to come back.
As far as I know, you have to take out more then 50 % of the total population to destroy the social structure of a society completely. Three cities are nothing close to that target.
So in view of that, if we must prepare to achieve that objective, we have to develop Hydrogen bombs, with high yeild, thier area of destruction is much larger and we wouldn't need too many to achieve the objective outlined above.
And Allah knows best.
w/salaam
what is exactly the hydrogen bomb? how it is better from atom bomb? how many contry have it? when we will test our own hydrogen bomb?
thank.
note that i said 2000 missile should be ready to hit india and 200 for israel and 3000 for usa. do you agree?
we making 400 a year? wooohaaa! so how many do we have now?
QUOTE(usmanakram @ Feb 19 2008, 04:53 AM)
we making 400 a year? wooohaaa! so how many do we have now?
from this year pakistan started making new extra 200 missle per year upgrading factories. this was quoted by pakdef and another forum.
Aoa
Read the Link below for information on the H-Bomb.
hydrogen bomb
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon
I don't know when we will test our own. We should have the tech to build one.
Search the forum you'll find a few threads on it.
w/salaam
QUOTE(ZJoseph @ Feb 19 2008, 02:48 AM)
what is exactly the hydrogen bomb? how it is better from atom bomb? how many contry have it? when we will test our own hydrogen bomb?
thank.
note that i said 2000 missile should be ready to hit india and 200 for israel and 3000 for usa. do you agree?
thank.
note that i said 2000 missile should be ready to hit india and 200 for israel and 3000 for usa. do you agree?
Read the Link below for information on the H-Bomb.
hydrogen bomb
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon
I don't know when we will test our own. We should have the tech to build one.
Search the forum you'll find a few threads on it.
w/salaam
QUOTE(noxiouspython @ Feb 20 2008, 12:08 AM)
Aoa
Read the Link below for information on the H-Bomb.
hydrogen bomb
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon
I don't know when we will test our own. We should have the tech to build one.
Search the forum you'll find a few threads on it.
w/salaam
Read the Link below for information on the H-Bomb.
hydrogen bomb
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon
I don't know when we will test our own. We should have the tech to build one.
Search the forum you'll find a few threads on it.
w/salaam
We will test on Bharat mata when times come.
QUOTE(noxiouspython @ Feb 19 2008, 05:08 PM)
Aoa
Read the Link below for information on the H-Bomb.
hydrogen bomb
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon
I don't know when we will test our own. We should have the tech to build one.
Search the forum you'll find a few threads on it.
w/salaam
Read the Link below for information on the H-Bomb.
hydrogen bomb
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon
I don't know when we will test our own. We should have the tech to build one.
Search the forum you'll find a few threads on it.
w/salaam
oops! india also have it? i thought we have all types of atom bomb! but its looks hydrogen bomb is the real bomb and more dangerous.
These are known as hydrogen bombs, H-bombs, thermonuclear bombs, or fusion bombs. Only six countries—United States, Russia, United Kingdom, People's Republic of China, France and India—have detonated hydrogen bombs.
who heads our nuke weapons? pm or mushy? in usa its bush and in india its sing.....
QUOTE(2 aliph 5 @ Feb 17 2008, 05:39 PM)
Three successfull hits will more then enough for India.
One for Mumbai.
One for New Delhi.
One for Calcutta.
On the other note: God forbids that may it never come to this. Personally I believe, India and Pakistan are in a useless arms race which is only forcing each other to do wrong to their own population. India wants complete edge based on the fact that is so much stronger in every sense now and Pakistan is not letting attain that edge by always trying to match India's acquisitions with her own.
War between the two ? Highly unlikely as long as both have Nuclear Weopons in their own control.
One for Mumbai.
One for New Delhi.
One for Calcutta.
On the other note: God forbids that may it never come to this. Personally I believe, India and Pakistan are in a useless arms race which is only forcing each other to do wrong to their own population. India wants complete edge based on the fact that is so much stronger in every sense now and Pakistan is not letting attain that edge by always trying to match India's acquisitions with her own.
War between the two ? Highly unlikely as long as both have Nuclear Weopons in their own control.
Brother
I agree with your personal opinion above on the uselessness of the arms race between India and Pakistan. Each missile they build is essentially basic civil rights taken away from some poor citizen... But then like you did, I too can only have personal opinions. But the power of the media cannot be underestimated in this regard.
I have known instances where the media after a prolonged string of articles has forced a political leader to give up his / her position. In India, this was championed by the Indian Express which (at least in India) was called investigative journalism - I am sure other parts of the world must have similar notions. I will be happy if my friends across the border can share similar instances.
I would also like to add that this does not always work to the advantage of the political system. It will take us several years before we attain the political maturity and freedom that is available to say, a citizen of the United States. But I think it is good for a start.
Interestingly some of my friends from Pakistan say that they prefer Musharraf's reign to the reign of the current winners of the elections. I am not in a position to offer an opinion as I am far removed from even Indian politics leave along Pakistan! However, what I found very interesting is that people do not necessarily get swayed by proclamations of democracy, freedom and the fifth amendment. Perhaps there is such a thing as power of the people after all!
Peace...
QUOTE(ZJoseph @ Feb 20 2008, 05:46 PM)
oops! india also have it? i thought we have all types of atom bomb! but its looks hydrogen bomb is the real bomb and more dangerous.
These are known as hydrogen bombs, H-bombs, thermonuclear bombs, or fusion bombs. Only six countries—United States, Russia, United Kingdom, People's Republic of China, France and India—have detonated hydrogen bombs.
These are known as hydrogen bombs, H-bombs, thermonuclear bombs, or fusion bombs. Only six countries—United States, Russia, United Kingdom, People's Republic of China, France and India—have detonated hydrogen bombs.
Not Pakistan my friend.
QUOTE(JET_Flash @ Feb 20 2008, 05:00 PM)
Not Pakistan my friend.
We didn't tested, but we have it.
QUOTE(khiladi4you @ Feb 20 2008, 10:05 AM)
We didn't tested, but we have it.
that is correct i heard that in pakdef. we have better nuclear weapons than india.
QUOTE(JET_Flash @ Feb 20 2008, 10:00 AM)
Not Pakistan my friend.
He never said we did. But in all seriousness, we have the tech to make one, so its pretty much guaranteed that we do have one. Lets hope we never have to use it though...
I doubt India or Pakistan has even close to 2000 missiles, this is a guess, I don't know for sure. I doubt India has hydrogen bomb either. To be honest I wouldn't surprised if India hasn't miniaturized its bombs either considering their chronic failures in weapons development. (tejas, arjun, akash, nag, etc. etc. etc.)
QUOTE(Rooh Afza @ Feb 20 2008, 09:31 PM)
I doubt India or Pakistan has even close to 2000 missiles, this is a guess, I don't know for sure. I doubt India has hydrogen bomb either. To be honest I wouldn't surprised if India hasn't miniaturized its bombs either considering their chronic failures in weapons development. (tejas, arjun, akash, nag, etc. etc. etc.)
i also think same.
first we know that pakistan have better weapons and nuclear technology than india but now i heard that india have hydrogen wich is much dangerous than atom bomb. so i think this are complete indian bs from doro.
QUOTE(ZJoseph @ Feb 21 2008, 01:23 AM)
i also think same.
first we know that pakistan have better weapons and nuclear technology than india but now i heard that india have hydrogen wich is much dangerous than atom bomb. so i think this are complete indian bs from doro.
first we know that pakistan have better weapons and nuclear technology than india but now i heard that india have hydrogen wich is much dangerous than atom bomb. so i think this are complete indian bs from doro.
I have a feeling you are Indian and are being sarcastic....
QUOTE(Rooh Afza @ Feb 21 2008, 09:44 AM)
I have a feeling you are Indian and are being sarcastic....
you dream too much and a mfck. read the wiki link it says most of the international sources say that indian attempt is a failed one.
India has 5 Major industrial cities and they are very large in aera and populous
Delhi
Mumbai
Hydrabad
Chennai
Calcutta.
For their complete destruction you need either 4 atomic bombs each
or 1 hydrogen bomb on each city say over 100kilo tonnes
Such an attack wud kill or permantly scare 50 million
Civillian india will be shattered.and is economy ruined.
How ever i think their miliary will stil be intacted.
They are not based in these cities.
They have huge radar network over 40 air bases 5 major Naval bases.
Hundreds of army head quarters
There AGNI missle is rail road based.
TO DESROY THEIR MILTARY NETWORK in one go PAKISTAN needs hundreds of missles nuclear tipped with minature war heads.........
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.