The Time of the Bomb

Re:#12
<
there exists no ``EXTENT`` in a nuclear exchange, and there is no empirical evidence in history to suggest as so. Conventional wisdom simply cannot parametrise the damage a nuclear-exchnage can lead to (irrespective of how ever many rhetorical arguments and expertise are laid forth), unless such analysis opts for the maximum upper bound a geographical and demographic entity (for instance the subcontinent) has to offer in terms of damage (read: total annihilation).

Your argument and perhaps the frame-of-mind when coming up with it, tries to super-impose ``comprehensive annihilation`` on military warfare of ``absolute`` damage which simply potrays obliviousness to the wholesome truth. There is no ``score-settling`` in such exchange nor is there a yankee version of tit-for-tat.
All this gives to is to is the most practiced rationale of all time: the ``detterent``. The same detterent which allows a nation like Pakistan to adhere to a first-strike-policy..and simply ingnore those who try to ``gauge-out`` the ``extent`` of a first strike or the resulting retaliatory strikes.

This article merely echoes the racist propaganda that somehow brown men (and women) cannot control their tempers and are more likely to attack with nuclear weapons as opposed to the whites who alone can be trusted with such destructive weapons.

Re: # 11

``How hard is it to take this for granted that, a nation over-awed by its enemy in conventional weaponry and military might would have no second thoughts in engaging itself in a FIRST-STRIKE nuclear war when its territorial existence is threatened. ``

It is really foolhardy, if the nation realises the extent of retaliation. Unless it completely destroys the enemy country with the first strike.

Also, if the nation is really ``over-awed`` by its enemys conventional weaponry then it is wiser not to pull stunts like Kargil and provide ``moral support`` for jihadis.


``Condescending and consistent belittling of its opponents within its masses has led India into being the only geographical entity in the world surrounded...``

what rubbish.


``Vir Sanghvi a Hindu nationalistic hawk seconds ``

FYI, Vir Sanghvi is not a hindu nationalist hawk.

Re:#1 & #2
>>Pakistan has threatened to use its weapons in every crisis since then<<
How hard is it to take this for granted that, a nation over-awed by its enemy in conventional weaponry and military might would have no second thoughts in engaging itself in a FIRST-STRIKE nuclear war when its territorial existence is threatened. It is utterly ridiculous being ``politically-correct`` in this debate or pertain to a facade of no-first-strike when the very purpose of having nuclear arms is to not allow self-marginalization in the face of war.

It really is hard to further articulate this irrefutable view-point of the Pakistani nation (not the military or the political patriarchs, but the common street man). What John F. Burns wrote in the NY Times on 29th of May 1998.
(http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pakans.htm ) a day after Pakistan detonated its nuclear weapons, puts into perspective the status quo i.e. the obtuse nature of Indian emotional discharge at Pakistan`s first-strike policy.

Responding to (tvard) #9:
>>This insecurity comes from one simple fact, viz. Pakistanis can`t figure out the meaning of their existence.>.

Condescending and consistent belittling of its opponents within its masses has led India into being the only geographical entity in the world surrounded by two semi -hostile nuclear-armed nations with whom it exercises fragile ties on all fronts less perhaps the economic ( that too amidst aplenty mistrust and suspicion) . An aspirant of a permanent UN seat and the next Asian economic stronghold, she ought to look within its caste ridden and religiously fervent society which wastes no time turning masses into murdering mobs once every decade, before it questions the meaning in existence of other nations.

And what has just been said is not an opinionated bias. Vir Sanghvi a Hindu nationalistic hawk seconds it with little remorse.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1457178,0008.htm
The Delhi riots of 1984, Bombay riots in 1993 and Gujarat in 2002 merely suggests an ongoing periodic trend of inexplicable human atrocities against its minorities. India a country of many dimensions has recently added a new minority within its ranks ``the secularists``. The well fed, well bred, and well entertained middle, upper-middle and elitist class is only good for sloganeered protests and its efforts to put a human face to the rampant corruption and gross violation of human rights within rural India. That India-of-the-slumps where it will see a nuclear attack only be fitting to put the Shudars , the Muslims, the Sikhs and the Christians out of their misery. …``meaning of existence ..ha! ``

Oh God! It is so easy to talk about Nukes and dangers of nuclear war. One can sit comfortably in the living room with a glass of cognac after a delicious dinner with wine and talk in abstract. These physicists like to be seen and rub shoulder with other physicists and get photographed.

Has any one talks about the dangers being caused by over population, destruction of environment, pollution, diseases, crime, terrorism? We are right in the midst of it !

Now talk about coffe table idealism- destruction of civilization!! How far removed from reality!

One thing is certain. This membersship adds a notch in one`s resume!

The Pakistani nuclear program has been neutered by the Americans. The Pakistani establishment cannot smell a uranium atom without the Americans knowing about it. Musharaff has gone from a nuclear tiger to a pussycat in a matter of a few years.

Let`s cut out all this ``no first use``, ``strategic`` BS and scholarly discussion. Pakistan has become a pariah in the eyes of the world and the threat of nukes by it`s leaders will be seen as a threat to the rest of the world, not just India. All this bravado is Pakistan`s vain attempt at re-hyphenating itself with India.

This insecurity comes from one simple fact, viz. Pakistanis can`t figure out the meaning of their existence. Figure that out and that`ll give you more security than all your nukes which are effectively under the control of the Americans anyway.

I am pleased to find the physicists taking the lead and initiative in stating clearly that both India and Pakistan should have strong peace initiatives.

The memory of Oppenheimer and Pauling have to be fresh in the minds of those who know about such things.

While, the physicists developed the powerful weapons, against the barbarities of the Nazis in Germany and Fascists in Japan - of course, they have delightedly also have been in the forefront of germinating sanity - which is important a precarious balance of power which has allowed the development of the fragile off-shoots into a viable plants. No doubt, there are still blights that can wither it and push humanity to the precipice.

Returning to India and Pakistan situation, I believe the needs and the requirements therefor are obvious.

India and Pakistan have to move on and accept the partition of a once colonially united India. Is a free united India still a desirable goal? Yes. But one has to appropriately put emphasis on ``free`` and ``united.`` Both the Hindus and Muslims have to openly acknowledge a willing acceptance of the other. A united nation emerges not out of coercion but by recognizing the legitimate grievances of the other party. This leads to what should be the requirements and what should be done to satisfy the need.

The leadership in India needs to unambiguously declare its disassociation from the revivalists like Hindu Maha Sabha and even the RSS. The leadership in Pakistan has to to do the same by clearly denouncing the Mullah brigade that leads the Pakistani Wahaabis and formally enunciating the recognition of other faiths, specifically, Hinduism. THE EXCLUSIVITY IN ISLAM HAS TO GO.

Now they - the leaderships - can not perform this miracle overnight. Indian leaders have to win the elections and, therefore, they can only take tentative steps riding the majoritarian wave and the Pakistani leaders have internally explosive situations where enemies - personal or otherwise - are waiting to assasinate any leader that appproaches rapprochement.

THEREFORE, IT IS UP TO US, THE PEOPLE, TO GENERATE THE ATMOSPHERE OF CBMs AND CORDIALITY THAT CAN OOZE UP TO OUR LEADERSHIP. CONSEQUENTLY, LET US DECLARE CLEARLY THAT WE NEED TO WORK ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF MINIMUM COMMON PROGRAM OF INDIAN AND PAKISTANI POPULATIONS.

As a practical initial step, I propose that people like Nazar Hayat Khan, Ballukhan and their corresponding among Hindus develop a forum whereby the elements of the envisaged cooperation can be formulated.

Why worry about Pakistan?
Read the preamble to the IND.Worry about India`s pre emptive reataliation first use jargon and decipher it.
Cheerios

Re: # 5


`` Their present protege USA still ...``

Protege or not, each country has its own policies depending on its strengths and weaknessess. Have you realised that your biggest supporter, China has no first use policy, so why don`t you have the same?

``So what do these Indians mean when they bellitle Pakistan`s first use but still ambigious stance. ``

what do you mean?

Do you mean india is ambiguous about using nukes?


``Spewing venom against Pakistan is a policy objective of India and these peace activist better go and rest in their lounges. ``

Yeah, and Pakistan is dudh ke dhule ....

Unfortuntely, pacifist ideas fo not work in the realist paradigm. So whatever these peace doves say, the arms race will continue in South Asia.

India has now shifted from a declared policy of non alignment to alignment in nuclear activities. Their present protege USA still has a nuclear policy based on first use. So what do these Indians mean when they bellitle Pakistan`s first use but still ambigious stance.

Spewing venom against Pakistan is a policy objective of India and these peace activist better go and rest in their lounges.

Cheerios

#1 & #2

to be fair...Pak generals will nuke Balochistan if becomes necessary to stay in power.

so unki baat ka gussa mat karo:-)

First, nobody in the U.S. means to belittle the suffering of the individual Japanese victims of the A-bomb. Absolutely none!

Now, that having been said, all bombs (yes, even the nukes) are passive devices – bad only in the wrong hands. For example, we would have been living in a very different (and a very lousy) world had the Soviets gotten the nukes before the U.S. The same can be said to some extent in the South Asian subcontinent – there is no telling where a Pakistani head start of 20 years (instead of India having had that head start) would have taken things!

Any peace constituency, to have any true and long-lasting degree of success, must focus its efforts on educating the populations so that such populations take charge of their own destinies and not let someone else drive the bus for them – be it an army, a despot, a religious group, a family, a whatever. This is the only way to ensure that the wishes of the populations – survival being the first wish – get the respect that they deserve. Generally speaking, civilian leaders are less likely to rattle their nuclear sabers, than the Generals.

Simple scare tactics, like the ones preached in this article are essentially futile – they only preach to the choir – and rarely others.

I earlier penned some additional thoughts on this issue, especially regarding the U.S. role, on a parallel board.

Re: # 1
You say,``.Shouldn`t it be, Pakistan has threatened to use its weapons in every crisis since then...``
Right! Pak Generals have stated over and over again that they would use Nukes against its arch enemey India before breakfast if necessary to protect Pakistan. No body seem to reallize that others might retaliate too. What would then be the fate of Pakistan? Who will then be left to protect Pakistan? Could it be Allah?

Nukes are no use against non-Nuke states if one has some conscience and it is insane to use against those who have Nukes. After all ANYstate which has the ability to design them has also the capability to hide enough of them, distribute them across their land mass and fire them in the retalitory strike. So such is the madness. Only Pak Generals can think of using Nukes before breakfast. It certainly gives them illusion of Rambo-like power.

``They have threatened to use their weapons in every crisis since then. ``

Shouldn`t it be, Pakistan has threatened to use its weapons in every crisis since then.