Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Indian nuke arsenal dwarfs Pakistan's : Jane's
The Times of India ^ | FRIDAY, MAY 31, 2002 4:25:50 AM | AFP

Posted on 05/30/2002 7:34:52 PM PDT by AM2000

WASHINGTON: India has up to 150 nuclear warheads while Pakistan could only call upon a third of that total at most, Jane's defense publications said Thursday, as fears persisted the two rivals were slipping towards a disastrous war.

Although both sides have declined to give details of the size or capability of their arsenals since shocking the world with rival nuclear weapons tests in 1998, a survey by Jane's Strategic Weapons Systems has estimated their destructive potential.

India may be able to deploy a 20 kilotonne device from a MiG, Jaguar or Mirage aircraft, and could be able to deliver a bomb of a similar size on Prithvi, Dhanush and Agni ballistic missiles, the article said.

"It is estimated that India probably has between 50 and 150 nuclear warheads available," the survey, released by the London-based group here Thursday, said.

"Analysis from some sources suggests that there is sufficient weapons grade uranium and plutonium available to India to build more warheads."

Pakistan's program is less advanced, but it probably has between 25 and 50 nuclear warheads available, the report said.

"Pakistan's planned yield for its larger nuclear weapons design was 20 to 25 kilotonnes providing a warhead that would probably be fitted to Shaheen and Ghauri ballistic missiles.

Pakistan last weekend triggered international condemnation when it test fired Abdali, Ghauri and Ghaznavi nuclear capable missiles.

It could also probably deploy a smaller device by aircraft, the report added.

The report warned that even 10 to 20 warheads could inflict devastating death tolls on any of India and Pakistan's teeming cities, following other assessments this week that reached a potential of millions of deaths in any nuclear conflict in South Asia.

It also warned that for both sides any nuclear conflict would be essentially self defeating, as bombs would inflict terrible casualties on home populations as well as targeted cities.

"A nuclear strike by either country could turn out to be a pyrrhic victory since, due to the close proximity of several cities on either side of the Indo-Pakistani border, the resulting fallout could easily be blown over the attacking country."


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: india; nuclear; pakistan; southasialist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

1 posted on 05/30/2002 7:34:54 PM PDT by AM2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sawdring;Dog Gone;mikeIII;swarthyguy;aristeides;OrthodoxPresbyterian;keri;Aaron_A;abwehr...
ping
2 posted on 05/30/2002 7:36:06 PM PDT by AM2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AM2000
"A nuclear strike by either country could turn out to be a pyrrhic victory since, due to the close proximity of several cities on either side of the Indo-Pakistani border, the resulting fallout could easily be blown over the attacking country."

If they're willing to use nukes, then worry over fallout isn't going to cocern them too much. It's better than being at ground zero.

3 posted on 05/30/2002 7:40:18 PM PDT by Brett66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AM2000
Sheesh, it only takes one.
4 posted on 05/30/2002 7:42:43 PM PDT by Ciexyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AM2000;Dark Wing
Jane's statement here is such a bunch of hooey that it makes the whole article suspect:

"A nuclear strike by either country could turn out to be a pyrrhic victory since, due to the close proximity of several cities on either side of the Indo-Pakistani border, the resulting fallout could easily be blown over the attacking country."

City-busters are always airbursts to maximize the blast wave and thermal pulse, and airbursts don't produce short-term fallout.

I wonder if this is disinformation, sloppy journalism or the usual lefty propgaganda.

5 posted on 05/30/2002 7:45:42 PM PDT by Thud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thud
These are baby nukes in any event. I don't want to minimize the damage or casualties, which would be high, but in the city where I live, you could drop 10 of those pups downtown, and here in the suburbs I'd be fine.
6 posted on 05/30/2002 8:14:20 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Brett66
If the Third Indo-Paki War starts and goes atomic, I expect each side to use two A-bombs. At that point each side will recoil and ask for a suspension of hostilities. After prolonged negotiations, the war government of each will be replaced by a peace government and a truce will be signed. The side that went atomic first will have to pay some reparations.

The horror may have a benefit. The Iranians and the Arab states with A-bombs may see the non-benefit of this type of war and stick with the sponsorship of terror groups, rather than trying atomics.

7 posted on 05/30/2002 8:18:30 PM PDT by RicocheT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AM2000
150 to 50 nukes
What the hell does it matter
There ain't no winners
8 posted on 05/30/2002 8:22:58 PM PDT by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thud
City-busters are always airbursts to maximize the blast wave and thermal pulse, and airbursts don't produce short-term fallout.

All nukes, no matter where detonated, produce "short-term fallout" (as well as long term).

The Hiroshima and Nagasaki nukes were air bursts, and there was plenty of lethal fallout from them.

Air bursts don't produce as much as ground bursts, it's true, but there's still enough to kill many, many people.

9 posted on 05/30/2002 8:28:02 PM PDT by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AM2000
I remember when I was a kid in the 50's and there were above ground Nuke tests in the US? and Russia?, maybe, there was some concern about the safety the milk we were drinking, due to radiatioactive particles being carried in the atmosphere and then setlling in the US where cows ate grass crops that those particles settled on.

Other than the obvious geopolitical concerns if India and Pakistan start lobbing a few nukes at each other, do any FReepers have an idea of the possible radioactive fallout effects on US citizens, livestock, food crops, etc?
10 posted on 05/30/2002 8:39:31 PM PDT by BansheeBill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BansheeBill
Bill, check out this thread - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/692171/posts. They've been talking about that for a while.
11 posted on 05/30/2002 8:44:05 PM PDT by AM2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AM2000
Thanks for pointing me to that thread. A lot of my questions were answered in a link someone posted there:

LINK
12 posted on 05/30/2002 9:01:29 PM PDT by BansheeBill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dan Day
Airbursts don't produce short-term fallout, i.e., that which precipitates out in two days or less, unless they are of such low yield that their fission by-products lack enough energy to be a significant hazard.
13 posted on 05/30/2002 9:04:23 PM PDT by Thud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: *southasia_list

14 posted on 05/30/2002 9:10:05 PM PDT by Libertarianize the GOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Thud
Janes is usually pretty reliable, and they are definaltey not the usual left crap. There pretty much to the point, and considering how many former military personal work for them, its not likely they are over run by liberals.
15 posted on 05/30/2002 9:18:15 PM PDT by Sonny M
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BansheeBill
I'm not sure, but I think its pretty safe to say, thinking weather wise and stuff. Its can't be good for americans. I'd bet that you'd probably see a cancer boom in california and along the west coast.
16 posted on 05/30/2002 9:19:50 PM PDT by Sonny M
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Thud
The FYEO Military newsletter had a much better article on this after the rival Indian/Pakistani nuclear tests.

It looks like Janes has 'Gone European,' AKA Politically Correct, on nuclear issues.

17 posted on 05/30/2002 9:19:54 PM PDT by Dark Wing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AM2000
devastating death tolls

Only part of the story.

Just as many will need medical attention, which will be in short supply. At the same time just as many again will need other things such as food. The entire country will have to mobilize just to deal with that, and it won't be over in a week or a year. Any country that takes even 3 hits on pop centers will be out of commission for a long time. 50 or 150 such hits would ruin the country for decades or longer. The immediate death toll is only the beginning, the tip of the ice-berg.

18 posted on 05/30/2002 10:53:40 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson