India Says It Successfully Tests Nuclear-Capable Missile

[alp227]

Source: NY Times

India said Thursday it had successfully launched a missile with nuclear capability and a 3,100-mile range, giving it the ability to strike Beijing and Shanghai.

With the successful launching of the missile, called Agni 5, India joins a small group of countries with long-range nuclear missile capability, including China, Britain, France, Russia and the United States.

"Agni 5 will give India complete coverage of targets in China," Poornima Subramaniam, an Asia-Pacific armed forces analyst at IHS Jane's, said in an e-mail. "Agni 5 technologically narrows the missile gap between India and China, while the strategic balance between the two rivals is still tipped in China's favor."

The launching of the Agni 5, which occurred at 8:07 a.m. from an island off India's east coast, is part of the country's decades-old missile program. India has a policy of no first use.

Read more: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/04/20/world/asia/india-says-it-successfully-tests-nuclear-capable-missile.xml

[DonCoquixote]

1. Greeeaaaatt...

"Agni 5 will give India complete coverage of targets in China," Gee, sounds like India and China are in a race to see who can be the new ass__les of the planet after we lose or give up the crown.

[Vehl]

2. video

Last edited Thu Apr 19, 2012, 03:14 AM - Edit history (1)

I guess now India has a viable MAD option against any Chinese aggression/first strike. For the past decade or so, the Chinese have stationed BM's on Tibet, targeting India. This is India's way of ensuring that China will not be tempted to carry out a first strike. Informed forces tell me that the main goal is for the Indian Nuclear Subs (2 operational and 3 being built)to eventually equip even longer ranged SLBM's and be stationed in mid pacific/Arctic/South East Asian oceans. MAD ensures that no one will try anything funny. India and China being responsible countries(unlike some of the religiously fanatical ones), there is no chance of these missiles getting fired due to rash actions of some deranged individuals.


Also as the article correctly points out, India and China are the only nuclear powers with the policy of "No first Use"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_first_use


PS: On un-related news, today India overtook Japan to become the third largest economy in the world, in PPP terms.

India overtakes Japan to become third-largest economy in purchasing power parity
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/indicators/india-overtakes-japan-to-become-third-largest-economy-in-purchasing-power-parity/articleshow/12722921.cms

[Javaman]

3. Nuclear armed N. Korea tests and fails a 3 stage rocket and the world gets pissed...

Nuclear armed and much more capable India does it and the world is quiet.

[Phoonzang]

4. Well...to be fair, India's not an weird semi-cultish dictatorship.

I trust India with ballistic missiles as much as I trust the US. Oh...wait...nevermind.

[hack89]

5. India does not have a history of selling nuclear and rocket technology to anyone with a checkbook.

The reason the world is pissed at NK is that they are notorious for helping some of the world's most despotic regimes obtain WMDs.

[Javaman]

6. Anyone that has nukes is not to be completely trusted. nt

[hack89]

11. Countries that deliberately ignore international law regarding nuclear proliferation

Last edited Thu Jul 24, 2014, 01:45 PM - Edit history (1)

are to be trusted even less.

[Javaman]

12. Either you trust someone or you don't.

I don't know how you can trust someone less.

[hack89]

13. Adherence to international treaties, laws and norms are good ways to build trust

wouldn't you think?

[Javaman]

15. It's a logic question.

either you trust someone or you don't.

It's impossible to trust someone less then you already distrust them.

[hack89]

16. But trust is constantly being earned or lost.

of course it is possible to trust someone less then you already distrust them - if an employee I trusted turned around and stole something from me I would immediately trust them less. On the other hand, if I hire a good employee over time I would learn to trust him more and would give them more responsibilities.

Trust is not static - of course it can be earned or lost.

[Javaman]

28. This isn't about earning trust, you are now claiming that.

You either trust someone or you don't.

You can't trust someone less nor can you trust them a little.

You either trust them or you don't.

There aren't shades of trust.

If someone is little trust worthy, it's only fair to say via logic, they they are without trust.

If someone loses ones trust, are they a little trust worthy? Or less trust worthy? It doesn't make sense. One can't trust them.

If you want to measure them in degrees, then you can try this: they steal something, are they a little trust worthy? If they lie to you about something they stole or something, does that make them still trust worthy to a degree? No, they no longer possess the ability of trust.

So to remit: either a person is trust worthy or they aren't. There isn't such a thing as a trusting them a little or them being less trust worthy.

[hack89]

29. Certainly there are shades of trust.

I might trust you to drive my car but not if my kid was with you. I might trust you to run my cash register but not to make my bank deposits. I might trust you to pay back a $10 loan but not a $1000 loan. It is not a binary, black and white situation.

In the case of India, there are no know instances of them violating international laws on WMD proliferation - I would trust them more than NK, who is a serial violator of international law.

[closeupready]

33. Well naturally; but they never signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, did they?

So they can't violate a treaty to which they aren't a party.

[hack89]

34. They did sign but withdrew in 2003

NK was also a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency until they withdrew in 1994 when they were found in non-compliance of nuclear safeguards agreement.

In 2001 they sold ballistic missiles to Iran in defiance of UN sanctions.

They have a long history of violating international treaties:

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron

[Javaman]

35. So does that mean we should then trust them?

no. I would think it would be more of a reason not to trust them.

But than again, I trust no nation that has nukes.

[closeupready]

39. That was my point, so we agree.

India should not have nukes. No question in my mind.

[Javaman]

36. While I understand your point, what you are talking about is responsibility, not trust.

to different things.

You could postulate that trust is nothing more than a person living responsibly in a group of people.

if that group deems that person to live responsibly, then they will trust them.

However, if that person gets into car wrecks often or gets speeding tickets, will that same person exhibit responsibility with watching my kid? I wouldn't take that chance, because I can't be sure that the person is a responsible person if they are unable to take personal responsibility for their actions. So therefore, I don't trust them.

See how it works?

[hack89]

37. Degrees of responsibility lead to degrees of trust. nt

[Javaman]

38. It appears as if I didn't explain myself clearly, because your statement...

reads as if you didn't understand my reply.

You don't have degrees of trust, you have degrees of responcibility.

two different things.

We are at a cross roads and it appears as if we don't agree on the concept of trust.

Let's just leave it there.

Cheers!

[smirkymonkey]

40. Except for us, of course.

No wait, never mind.

[Nihil]

7. Who needs a checkbook when you have a fruit-tree?

Bearing in mind that India basically purchased nuclear technology from the USA
for mangoes ... and selling for cash suddenly seems a lot more professional ...

[cosmicone]

8. Pardon me?

India developed its nuclear technology completely indigenously with no help from abroad. There was an embargo against India after the nuclear test in 1974.

The mango deal was not a quid pro quo -- just a contemporaneous deal with the US India Nuclear Cooperation Treaty which was a great accomplishment for both the US and India. To make it sound like "nukes for mangoes" cheapens it and is downright insulting to the Indian scientists and engineers.

[closeupready]

10. LOL, good points.

That was funny...

[obnoxiousdrunk]

14. funny but not true

[closeupready]

24. In a democracy, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

okay, broke my promise, this is really my last post to this thread.

[Vehl]

17. :D

on edit: I misread the post! my bad.
Apologies

[Nihil]

20. The first word was the desired one.

My post was a joke at the expense of the supporters of the double-standards
applied by the self-appointed "guardians of freedom".

Whilst I really don't give a toss about irrational old "Pakistan is teh evul!!" getting
all indignant, I honestly didn't mean to cause offence to you (who I remember
for your help on other forum/group threads) and thought that my use of the evilgrin
smiley would have given the hint that humour rather than historical accuracy
was the goal.



Looks like I was wrong.

Namaste.

[Vehl]

21. my bad!

Last edited Thu Apr 19, 2012, 01:27 PM - Edit history (1)

I missed the significance of the evil grin. My apologies.

<< I have to work on my sarcasm/humor detector

PS: on edit

I do remember you from other threads. my lackluster defense would be that I had just woken up after only a few hours of sleep and was typing from my bed.

[Vehl]

18. +1 nt

[closeupready]

9. Oh good. Indians starve, and the state arms itself

with bigger, badder weapons to kill people. Great sense of priorities.

[Vehl]

19. Lol, Indian DOD gets under 2.5% of the GDP while the US DOD gets about 20%

Awesome case of pot..or should I say Cauldron calling the kettle black

Oh and Btw thanks to 300 years of Colonial robbery, by the time It gained independence India was only 2% of the world GDP (from 25%! of the world GDP before the Brits took over). Yesterday India surpassed Japan to become to the world's 3rd largest economy in PPP terms.

Don't worry about the Indians, they will do fine. Maybe it's time to look at America's own sense of priorities no? like the 20% spent on the DOD. And let us not forget the large chunk from the discretionary spending spent on the military


[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[closeupready]

22. How does India's karma figure in the following:

If there's such a thing as karma and everything happens for a reason, people should consider that China and Japan favor Pakistan over India in cross-border disputes.

China and Pakistan even have a bilateral mutual defense pact.

[Vehl]

25. China and Japan?

people should consider that China and Japan favor Pakistan over India in cross-border disputes.

I don't know which news-source you get your news from, but Japan is actively seeking(and conducting joint operations/conferences with) India as an Ally against a belligerent China. Most of the nations surrounding China(including Japan and India) (along with America) are now part of an unofficial-yet real block that seeks to contain China's aggressive designs on its neighbors.

China and Pakistan even have a bilateral mutual defense pact.

What has this got to do with anything? It's a known fact that Pakistan considers China its protector now, and have even ceded about 10% of its land to China. China illegally occupies Tibet and claims parts of India as its own. India otoh does not have to do anything, but hold onto its land. Good luck for China and Pakistan on invading through the Himalayas and trying to take over parts of India.




Ps: If Karma does exist, its could be argued that Pakistan will do to China what it did to it's once erstwhile ally America. I pity any nation that Pakistan considers its Ally.

PS: on edit...seems like its happening already

China Seeking Counter-Uighur Military Bases In Pakistan?
http://www.eurasianet.org/node/64379

The Chinese desire is meant to contain growing terrorist activities of Chinese rebels belonging to the al-Qaeda-linked East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) that is also described as the Turkistani Islamic Party (TIP).

The Chinese Muslim rebels want the creation of an independent Islamic state and are allegedly being trained in the tribal areas of Pakistan.

Furthermore why would India want parts of Pakistan? the last thing they want is to take over a piece of land teeming with millions of religious fanatics!

[cosmicone]

27. China is just using Pakistan

for its own designs in Africa and the Indian ocean. China uses the "thorn in the side" doctrine and uses Pakistan against India just as it uses North Korea against the USA.

When Pakistan stops carrying baggage and water for a donor, it will get respect. Until then, it is just selling its body to feed itself.

[Vehl]

32. Small correction

The leaders of Pakistan (Who are the generals and the ISI) do this on the backs of their citizens; most of whom do not want to get involved with China..nor engage in hostile activities towards India.

Pakistan had spent more than half its life under military dictatorship, and a majority of the other half under proxy-military/ISI rule.
This can be easily evidenced by the Billions Musharraf accumulated as personal wealth...a tradition preceded by, and will also definitely be succeeded by his counterparts.

[hack89]

30. That should be 4.7% of GDP and 19% of budgeted expenditures for the US DoD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States

[Vehl]

31. I stand corrected.

Thank you for pointing that out.

Yep, India spends about 2.3% of the GDP for defense as oppose to 4.7% by the US.

[CBGLuthier]

41. Careful with that mote there

Those things can be a mother.

[closeupready]

42. Just like assumptions.

nt

[LongTomH]

23. This doesn't help the cause of nuclear non-proliferation!

Even if you consider India a 'responsible' country! We're into a new MAD regime now!

Tensions are rising between: India and China, India and Pakistan, China and the US!

[samsingh]

26. Good for India

This is an important accomplishment and support for Freedom.