Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 5/31/2002 4:49:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2002 5:01:37 PM EDT by Deer-Hunter]
The talk on tonight's News Hour w/Jim Lerher was that since both countries have such small quantities of nuclear missiles and that since the warheads on those missiles are relatively underpowered when compared to those possessed by the US & Russia, India's largest: 2000lb warhead Pakistan's largest: 1500lb both countries feel confident about surviving an all out attack and are thus more likely to use them (since the previous deterrent of "mutally assured destruction" does not apply). Pakistan may use them as a first strike weapon since they're outgunned and have lost the previous three conflicts between the two sides. India on the otherhand may consider Pakistan's inclination and use this as a justification for launching first. What's it gonna be? Yes/No? If yes, who first? Edited to add that India uses Plutonium. Pakistan uses weapons grade Uranium.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 4:55:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2002 4:58:34 PM EDT by Dave_G]
One or two of Pakistan's tests were fissles. Also, it's one thing to pop a nuke resting at the bottom of a deep hole, and another popping an aircraft or missle-delivered one. Not an insurmountable problem...
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 4:56:11 PM EDT
Yes they will launch at each other. I think the Paki's will panic when India starts a ground offensive and do what we planned to do to the Soviets and what the Soviets planned to do to us had the Fulda gap corridor ever been used. This will result in an exchange when India goes tit for tat. As far as the weights of the bombs, you are kidding right? A 150 megaton thermonulear device capable of destroying any city on Earth only weighs in at a couple of hundred pounds max. A nuclear artillery shell weighs about 80 pounds and can take out 75 square miles if airbursted at 2 Km altitude.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 4:59:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2002 4:59:39 PM EDT by Deer-Hunter]
Originally Posted By Dave_G: You forgot "Both". If one side pops one, so will the other.
View Quote
I was assuming that it would be understood that if one fired the other one would fire also; that's a given. That's why I asked: Who FIRST.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 4:59:11 PM EDT
Did they say what the effective YIELD of these weapons is? The weight of the weapon isn't that significant and a 1.5Kt or 2Kt yield is "no big deal", really. I mean I wouldn't want to "catch one" but Hiroshima was 15Kt and nagasaki was 20Kt so we're talking about weapons that are a 10th the size of those?? If the yields actually are 1.5-2.0Kt I have NO idea where the estimates of 12-17 Million casualties are coming from...something just doesn't add up. - CD
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:03:56 PM EDT
As far as the weights of the bombs, you are kidding right? A 150 megaton thermonulear device capable of destroying any city on Earth only weighs in at a couple of hundred pounds max. A nuclear artillery shell weighs about 80 pounds and can take out 75 square miles if airbursted at 2 Km altitude.
View Quote
Those were the numbers listed on The News Hour. I haven't verified them.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:05:59 PM EDT
I think it's time to break out my old copy of the card game "Nuclear War". [}:)] You can get your own copy (get the expansions, too) from here... [http://www.flyingbuffalo.com/nucwar.htm] - CD
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:06:55 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CamperDad: Did they say what the effective YIELD of these weapons is? The weight of the weapon isn't that significant and a 1.5Kt or 2Kt yield is "no big deal", really. I mean I wouldn't want to "catch one" but Hiroshima was 15Kt and nagasaki was 20Kt so we're talking about weapons that are a 10th the size of those??
View Quote
They didn't say but they did state that either would be significantly less than Hiroshima.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:08:08 PM EDT
Let's try that again... [url]http://www.flyingbuffalo.com/nucwar.htm[/url] - CD
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:08:21 PM EDT
Both sides are in the 20kt range IIRC.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:11:39 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CamperDad: I think it's time to break out my old copy of the card game "Nuclear War". [}:)] You can get your own copy (get the expansions, too) from here...
View Quote
Damn, you just had too mention that. Now I'll have to get the booster packs.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:14:37 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Attman: Both sides are in the 20kt range IIRC.
View Quote
Thanks ! I was just wondering about the yield. Neither will use nukes.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:16:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2002 5:18:41 PM EDT by cluster]
Regardless of who lets one off first ans also regardless of the yields. when that moment comes, that is officaly a SHTF senerio. and will act accordinly. how long after that do you invision trouble at home. For the life of me I cant not actualy imagine a modern war that involves nukes. But Ive heard the the dumbasses really expect to survice so whats really stopping them? as far as your question ... I vote Pakistan.. It would take lousy leadership to let it come to that. edited to add ***** also picked pakistan ... because picking "no one" would be boring..
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:21:27 PM EDT
how long after that do you invision trouble at home.
View Quote
Kind of related..., they were saying that a nuc war would spread fallout (radiation) into neighboring countries like Afghanistan and even into China. I wonder how China feels about all of this. Either way in the end I'm sure someway or another the Bush administration will get blamed by the Liberals for not doing enough to prevent it.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:23:26 PM EDT
Eventually there will be a nuclear war, and this current situation represents the best possibility. Nuc war within one year and Pakistan will launch first.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:30:51 PM EDT
I voted that I don't think either will pop a nuke, but I would really like to see Pakistan get their asses kicked. I think that Pakistan would fire first, India does not need to. They will win and they know it. Besides, if Pakistan does pop a nuke, all that radiation will head east, right over the mountains into the PRC. Don't think they will be too happy with that.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:32:01 PM EDT
Cluster, do you have a CLUE? We set off hundreds of nuclear weapons above ground before the test ban. Everyone is still here. Only having small nukes is one thing that contributes to the eagerness of both sides to use nukes in this case... The other is that neither country gives a rat fuck about the lives of most of their population. One is a military dictatorship and the other, while technically a democracy, has a culture that is still riven by a ancient cast structure. In India, even the people sitting in Congress have little or nothing in common with the people you see on TV living in hovels. Those in the Army, and in the government administration, many of them educated in the West and with European tasts, have even LESS. The mob is just something to be humored and used for votes, and I am not sure how much they would weep if a few million of their countrymen were wiped off the face of the earth...
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 5:35:54 PM EDT
The blast from the largest nuke held by either country will have the following effects: Initial blast: 5mi diameter death zone. Effective fallout: 7mi diameter, death. Pakistan is nuts to make this threat.
Link Posted: 5/31/2002 6:02:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2002 6:08:22 PM EDT by cluster]
ArmdLbrl, this is what scares me...
neither country gives a rat fuck about the lives of most of their population.
View Quote
topped off with how many of these hundreds of tests/above ground detnations have been fired in anger? I would think there is a diffrence in a conrolled blast and one in anger. not only do those poor bastards not care about them selves ,,, they dont give a flying rats fucking ass about us.. Im thinking about all the sec that is involved in gaurding these nukes With either countrys' love of leading by "machismo" I dont think they will be guarded too goddamn well. All we need is for one damn Islamic terrorist to steal just[i]one[/i]. After that I will have trouble sleeping. and we know half the Pakistian army Officers would readily "lose" one to thier dear AlQuida friends... how can you disagree? edited to add *************** I dont have faith in the security of the weapons because I believe that if war does break out.. every swinging dick that is able will want to go [i]front[/i] lines... thats thier mentality.. if Im wromg pls correct me.. if Im right then what is the quality of the "soldier" that stays behind to "guard" the weapons if all the "good fighters" are at the front?
Link Posted: 6/1/2002 4:38:22 AM EDT
i voted pakistan,probably within 6 months. maybe a couple of more terr attacks and india will go rolling across the border full tilt. with the paki's getting there arses kicked,mushariff(sp) will get assasinated due to his reluctance to pop a couple of firecrackers at india,then his replacemnt will give the go ahead. even with out a paki/india war i see mushie gone within a year. rescue93
Link Posted: 6/1/2002 4:46:16 AM EDT
All this global bullshit is wreaking nuclear havoc on my mutual funds. I gotta get into real estate, it's the only sure money maker left. And ammo. Lots of ammo. What? Oh yeah, I vote that niether side will launch cause the US will come in and do something about, God knows what. I hope I'm right.
Link Posted: 6/1/2002 5:21:24 AM EDT
Could not sleep last night so I listened to Art Bell. He had a exmilitary man on(I believe he is the one that sells a Remote Viewing Course,) that said we have aircraft capable of reaching mach 17 to dispatch and knock out their missiles before they lift off.
Link Posted: 6/1/2002 5:26:00 AM EDT
In many other situations I would have said, NA, nuclear war would not happen. This one has, I think, great potential to be just that. Even if neither side is actually crazy enough to launch one (and I think they ARE that crazy in this case)look at the bumblefucks we're talking about here. It is quite conceivable that one side could have an accident leading to an exchange. For example the missile tests. Hmmm, chinese missiles being used by pakistanis. That alone is enough to scare me. They'll be lucky if they don't shoot themselves. My only hope is that if this happens that it stays right there between the two of them. That would be bad enough, we don't need anyone else getting involved. On a side note, how would you like to Rumsfeld (sp?) right now. That is the LAST place I would want to go with possible nuclear war looming. If I were him and got the orders I think I'd look dubya in the eye and say "ARE YOU NUCKING FUTS!?" Mike
Link Posted: 6/1/2002 5:46:10 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: do you have a CLUE? We set off hundreds of nuclear weapons above ground before the test ban. Everyone is still here.
View Quote
Not to mention that if they use their nukes in an air-burst, the fallout is nearly negligible.
Top Top