Low-Budget Indian Satellite Launch
Geekonomical writes "On Thursday afternoon, for a mere 15 million U.S. dollars, India launched a meteorological satellite into geo-synchronous transfer orbit some 36,000 kilometres above the equator using a modified version of its highly successful space workhorse, the polar satellite launch vehicle (PSLV). The article also claims that China spends 12 times as much as this for a launch!"
If they're truly doing that for a twelfth (what a horrid word) of the cost that China spends, the what the hell is China doing wrong?! Or does China send up a system 12 times better?
..hell, at that price, I'll launch 3! :)
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
A common argument in populist economics is that jobs go to the third world because of lower labor costs. Others counter this argument that it is unskilled labor, and that high-end technologically advanced labor stays within 'advanced' economies (US, Europe, Japan).
So-- is this a case that disproves the counterargument-- that even 'skilled' labor industries can skip to the third world, or is it an indictment against the regulatory pressures/infrastructure costs of trying to launch something under a US/EU umbrella?
There is clearly a glut of satellite launching capacity, yet prices have remained high because?
davejenkins.com |
If the US had been more proactive about limiting space research by unstable and undeveloped nations, then we wouldn't have to worry about this.
Are you suggesting that the US has the right or responsibility of regulating space research? What goes on in another country shouldn't be up to the US, unless it directly affects them.
The US could just have easily have placed nuclear weapons in space as India could have, as it is only speculation that India has done.
And, although India is less developed than, for example, the US, why should they be forced to stay that way?
India has not signed any treaties including the big one; the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Other countries that have not signed the NPT are Pakistan and Israel.
Israel is rumoured to have nuclear missiles capable of hitting anywhere on the planet and they have made themselves a lot more enemies than India.
Fuck the US. Space does not belong to them. The Russians were there first, dammit!
"Information wants to be paid"
I have to wonder if this story doesn't have a more sinister side to it. Recall that India shocked the global community recently when satellite data indicated that they had developed nuclear weapons, despite treaties against such activities. If they can put a weather satellite up this cheaply, then they can probably get nuclear missiles up there for not much more.
What country, other than Pakistan, would India target with nuclear weapons? Attacking Pakistan from India would not require techniques such as FRactional Orbit Bombardment.
If the US had been more proactive about limiting space research by unstable and undeveloped nations,
The attempts by the US, and other Western nations, to manipulate third world countries provide plenty of motivation for most of the world to consider the USA a danger to their national security.
As for danger to rest of the world India is far less of an issue than Israel.
Are you suggesting that the US has the right or responsibility of regulating space research? What goes on in another country shouldn't be up to the US, unless it directly affects them.
The US government certainly does not accept this principle. As has frequently been the top story in TV news programmes for the last few months and weeks.
The US could just have easily have placed nuclear weapons in space as India could have, as it is only speculation that India has done.
The US could have done so a lot more easily, simply by virtue of having put far more stuff up there.
Or maybe they already have. If the US had been more proactive about limiting space research by unstable and undeveloped nations, then we wouldn't have to worry about this.
Have you ever wondered why it is that the US wants to regulate (Islamic dictator and harbourer of terrorists) Saddam Hussein, but hasn't tried to do the same to (Islamic dictator and harbourer of terrorists) Musharraf? It's because Musharraf already has nuclear weapons, and Saddam doesn't.
The point is: there is a limit to how proactive even the US can be in today's world. I don't think that India would permit itself to be regulated - they have always been fiercely independant people (one of the reasons the British Empire, proportionally stronger in the world back then than the US is now, couldn't hold on to them).
just like there is no motivation for France, Germany, Japan, UK, Brazil or a few others with nukes to attack the West).
At which point did these fine European nations drop out of "The West". Before the USA we were "The West".
Typical American assh*le syndrome. Where's a moderator when you need one?
The only countries that demonstrably have nuke capabilities (weapon and delivery system) are: US, Russia, UK, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel. Check out the Federation of American Scientists for further info on matters concerning the weapons of mass destruction.
They already have.
Maybe the US should spend some amount of efforts in being good world citizens and stop meddling about just to get cheap oil? The US have also been very efficient in alienating countries on account of other partner countries they like to protect.
If there are threats against the US its not only because muslims and other non wealthy countries are evil by nature. Something has brought them to this conclusion and its not just the koran or lack of money that is to blame here.
The US is working hard to have a reason to fight Iraq when most other countries dont want war in that region.
Whos the warmonger now?
HTTP/1.1 400
You may be surprised to know that in 2000 years of indian civilisation, India has never ever attacked another nation.
As for nuclear weapon development look at this way, supposed USA didnt have nuclear weapons but canada and mexico did and were hostile to US, how would you feel, scared.. right. So when you have two nulcear armed dictatorships sitting at your borders you cannot expect otherwise.It is real funny a developed nation has a moral right to have nuclear weapons but an underdeveloped dosent.
As far as space reasearch is concerened satellite launches came much after nuclear weapons. India achieved nuclear capability in 1971. Satellite lauches are for an economic reason. Already france and other european and african contries are looking at ISRO as a launchpad for their satellite and this will bring in much needed cash.My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
India is a more sophisticated and advanced society than large parts of North America, with one of the most educated populations in the world. To call it third world is insulting, to refer to it as unstable and undeveloped is offensive.
"Third world" orginally ment not alligned with either the "first world", NATO or the "second world", USSR and Warsaw Pact. IIRC the term originally came from India as a way of indicating their non alignment. Only later did it come to mean "poor".
Have you ever wondered why it is that the US wants to regulate (Islamic dictator and harbourer of terrorists) Saddam Hussein,
Thing is that Saddam Hussein is more of a secular socialist than a radical Moslem.
but hasn't tried to do the same to (Islamic dictator and harbourer of terrorists) Musharraf? It's because Musharraf already has nuclear weapons, and Saddam doesn't.
More likely the real reason is that Hussein will no longer allow himself to be pushed around the US. The whole "terrorism" thing is a smokescreen. The US is quite happy to let all sorts of terrorists operate in the US, the British government is quite happy to let all sorts of terrorists operate in the UK. Both governments also give some of their tax payers money to supporting terrorists. So it would hardly be suprising if Iraq was prepared to harbourer any terrorists not considering attacking Iraq.
So, whoever with one billion dollar to spend could launch 66 indian weather satellites ! Very neat, I like that =)
ol' Indian rope trick .
Very Cost effective.
I am sick and tired of this debate. Everytime there is a news item about Inidia, we go into this debate of first world, second worlk and third world. Tell me something guys, is this really important?? I mean the fact is that India launched a satellite, why not just concentrate on that??
I will tell you the truth about Infratstructure in Indian universities. Its pathetic. But this is also a fact that when U have 1 billion ppl and so few unis, the competition to get into a decent university is intense. Infact for admission into IIT( India Institute of Technology) about 300,000 ppl appear in the test and only the top 1000 or so make it. So to get admission into a decnt university in India, you have to be in top 0.33% of the population. Now atleast some of such guys( those who are not lured away bu US companies) join organisations like ISRO. They are already intelligent enough and soon they get grip of whats going on. Thats the story of India.
But always remember, behind every thousand who made it, there are 299,000 who din't.
What's under yellowstone?
and...
Count the errors in parent by a known troll.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
That's strange, I would have figured they'd have spent their local currency on the project, not American Dollars.
If you don't get it, just let it go, and move on
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Looks like Bush isn't an "US diplomacy" kind of guy, at least he's not at all working on the "eliminating motivation" part.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
Just FYI: SpaceImaging is the world's biggest supplier of hi-res satellite imagery. It would surprise many on this forum to know that 4 of the 7 satellites SpaceImaging uses are Indian (the IRS series of satellites are Indian satellites).
India has a decent history (20+ years) of building and launching satellites. They have been helped along the way by the Russians to some extent, because the US refuses to sell them some of the advanced propulsion technology (like Cryo engines), which then they have to develop on their own.
All in all, more competition is good, I say.
Are you suggesting that the US has the right or responsibility of regulating space research? What goes on in another country shouldn't be up to the US, unless it directly affects them.
And, although India is less developed than, for example, the US, why should they be forced to stay that way?
Personally, I don't think the US needs to bully India over this. But with respect to your thoughts, the US could say that they are threatened by another nation being capable of delivering nuclear weapons to our doorstep. I don't think the US has any intention of worrying about this now.
That said, if India becomes more advanced than the US, then the US is going to have a lot to say about that. That's just the nature of the beast. Americans have an elitist complex when it comes to other nations (yes, I'm an American and yup, I've got the complex, too). Most all Americans believes that the US is the greatest nation in the world and those same individuals are willing to prove it over and over again. If India starts to compete with the US, we will be directly affected and the US won't be happy. The US will likely force India to remain comfortably beneath; or another cold war will begin.
Anyways, you're right that the US shouldn't worry about what other countries do, unless it directly affects us. The problem is that everything directly affects us. Well, at least so we always seem to think. That's just the way it goes. I can't say I'm always proud of that.
Long, cute, or funny Sigs are just another form of over compensation, used by geeks, nerdz, etc.
Everyone loves to bang on the ISS problems but seem to forget that a number of major technology and/or cash commitments that were supposed to be provided by other coutries were never delivered. This means that the US had to cover other coutries expenses.
In other cases where technology was actually provided, extra US funds had to be paid to verify it because of minor communication issues. In fact, to date, I think Canada is one of the few coutries that actually completed what they committed to doing.
I'm simply bringing this up because ISS is probably not the best example to site when to comes to US funds and space research.
India has been in satellite business since long, and currently the man who was behind all this, who has been the scientific advisor to the indian government, who has been awarded the highest civilian honour of the country, is its President. Dr A P J Abdul Kalam, President of India, has always talked about self reliance in the field of space and defence. This is one more step towards it.
You guys working in big companies must have seen vision statements for a big company, which drives the whole company, but have you heard that India too has a Vision, and working towards it ?
visit www.abdulkalam.com for details.
Also, "Wings of Fire" the autobiography of the president, is worth a read.
Extremely well said. This may very well be the entire explanation.
Come on, give it up, that's
When you are the strongest and most powerful nation on the planet, you can dictate any policy you want.
Like a dictator would? Gee, how nice.
I don't know how near sighted you are, but having a potential nuke in space is a threat to my freedom; even if it's not pointed at the US.
Hmmm. The US has the potential to destroy every man, woman and child on the planet many times over. Does that mean that every man, woman and child has the right to use any means necessary to deny the US the use of these weapons and thus ensure their personal safety?
It's about time we start our Space Defense Initiative. I forget who, but some dolt in govt stated that we shouldn't bother with a Space Defense system now cause we won't need it for another 20 years. Like in 20 years we can just say "Launch the space defense system!"
There are these things called "international treaties". One of these international treaties (one of the ones that the US hasn't unilaterally reneged on - yet) outlaws the use of space-based weapons.
Personally, I'm sick and tired of these little puke nations telling us what we can and can not do.
Personally, it's clear to me that a lot of the "little puke nations" are sick of the US telling them what to do, whilst simultaneously playing by its own set of rules when it wants to.
Russia can't invade former Soviet states to take out terrorists and India can't do the same in Kashmir but the US can waltz into Iraq as and when it pleases? Nice double standards you've got there, bud.
In the history of our planet, how many super powers were there that didn't seek to expand their empire.
Where are they now? Empires are made to fall.
They should be thankful we're content with what we already have.
Right on, bro! We've got the biggest guns and all those other shitty nations, even the ones that we call friends, should be quaking in their boots. If we want something then we'll take it, simple as that. Why shouldn't we? We're the biggest and the best. Fucking, yeah!
Yeah, right. I hope you don't mind when the large family down the road comes into your house and strips you of everything that you've got. Why shouldn't they? There's more of them then there are of you, there more powerful, etc. Enjoy your TV, etc while you can and be thankful that they're content with what they already have - for now. Because, when they kick down the door, you're going to be shit out of luck, pal.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
It's interesting that the new president of India was also the father of its space and missile programs - the PSLV is a descendant of the original Satellite Launch Vehicle, SLV-3, which was also the basis for a short-range SSM, Prithvi ("Earth"). Under Dr. Abdul Kalam's tutelage, the DRDO embarked on an ambitious program to develop a suite of missiles, many of which have either been inducted or are being tested. It's quite possible that his popularity as head of the Indian Space Research Organization, and later as DRDO chief, led to his choice as president.
this is either blind prejudice or blind ignorance. But just in case someone doesn't know the facts, I'll bite: ...)
again, this is from the same source [cia.gov]
size of India : 2,973,190 sq km Area - comparative: slightly more than one-third the size of the US # of citizens : 1,029,991,145 (July 2001 est.) these data (unlike your prepostrous claim) are not blown out of my ass, but can be found here [cia.gov]
size of Israel : 20,330 sq km Area - comparative: slightly smaller than New Jersey # of israelly citizens : 5,938,093 (yes, that's six millions, not billions
The size of a country has little to do with how many enemies they have. The only country India is in conflict with is Pakistan, which is also a nuclear power. So MAD applies.
Israel is currently in conflict with Lebanon and Syria, who have no nuclear deterance. Also Israel has effectivly been in a state of civil war for over half a century.
Only one of these countries makes a habit of invading it's neighbours, ignoring UN resolutions and even tried to sink a US navy ship.
Everybody seems to be missing the larger point here. This capability is the stepping stone to being able to put up spy satellites. In a few years India will be able to keep tabs on Pakistans cross border infiltration and nuclear installations, and hopefully, in the case of fundamentalists taking over( which I dont think will happen, Pakistan being to a large extent a fairly sensible country), be able to make a pre-emptive strike.
If you want to learn more about the origins of this programme read Abdul Kalam's Wings of Fire. Its a very inspiring book. That Kalam is now President of India(which is a titular position without much power, unlike the Prime Minister), is
itself a testament to where self-reliance and competition in science and technology can take one.
Hopefully the programme can now be commercially self sufficient, and the pace of space exploration and missile defence research becomes faster. As you have probably realized in the last year, South Asia ia a tough neighborhood: a dictatorship to the west and east(Pak and Burma), the worlds largest communist state to the North, and ofcourse, central asia and the unstable 'stan's near by..
Lastly, such development can only serve as a long term counterpoise to scary go-it-alonists and US supremacists like some members of this administration...
The Inscrutable Gargoyle
> Well maybe he isn't but I am. When you are the
> strongest and most powerful nation on the
> planet, you can dictate any policy you want.
"dictate"... so America should be the worlds "Dictator" for our benefit... I like it. Very liberal of you. Thank you for looking after us and listening to our own countries beliefs and ideals (I live in the UK).
> Personally, I'm sick and tired of these little
> puke nations telling us what we can and can not
> do.
What an idiot.... the US spends all it's time talking about a global economy & politics and it's "responsibility on the world stage" but makes the assumption that the global economy & politics will be made up of western (read US) ideals and that the US is the only one to have a say.
Then when the realisation that through sheer weight of population numbers, land mass & available resources other nations outside of the US are capable of the same achievements (sometimes a lot more effeciently) they get all insular and over-protective (ref: Agricultural, Steel & manufacturing subsidies) to f&ck up those developing nations.
Who says a global community will reflect only US ideals? It's foolish and ultimately dangerous to think like that. Be a bit more open minded about congratulating other countries on their achievements.
> In the history of our planet, how many super
> powers were there that didn't seek to expand
> their empire. They should be thankful we're
> content with what we already have.
What you already have is a highly unbalanced, global, political make up where one nations population is using up far more resources than it has at it's disposal and one nations beliefs over represented to the rest of the world. This is at the cost of the rest of the world and every move the US makes is designed to protect that situation.
You may be content with what you already have but the rest of the world isn't, cos you're f&cking us over to keep it.
For comparison, how much do US launches cost?
What about the European Arienne rocket?
${YEAR+1} is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop!
Maybe the US should spend some amount of efforts in being good world citizens and stop meddling about just to get cheap oil?
Even though the US has plenty of its own oil.
The US have also been very efficient in alienating countries on account of other partner countries they like to protect.
Usually what the US is interested in protecting are the interests of US corporations operating abroad. From this POV the "best" government is something along the lines of a dictator friendly to the corporate interests in question.
If there are threats against the US its not only because muslims and other non wealthy countries are evil by nature. Something has brought them to this conclusion and its not just the koran or lack of money that is to blame here.
Lack of money is more likely to be an effect of US intereference. Maximising the profits of US corporates dosn't do much to help the economies of the countries they operate in.
The US is working hard to have a reason to fight Iraq when most other countries dont want war in that region.
The US wants a war for reasons more to do with domestic US politics. Virtually none of the rest of the planet is interested in a war with Iraq. Apart from the US only the UK and Israeli governments appear to think there is cause.
finders, keepers! ...come and take it!
-l
Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
Your comment could apply to so many countries, remind us which one you are posting from? ;-)
> Israel is rumoured to have nuclear missiles capable of hitting anywhere on the planet and they have made themselves a lot more enemies than India.
And at the same time, Israel gets sold many missle defense technologies from the US, which they consequently sell to other countries (India being one of them).
Yeah, jeez. Indians=Pakistani until just 50 years ago. The British should have never partitioned India (they did, over Gandhi and other's objections.)
Of course India is 3rd world. In fact, it was India who coined the term during the non-aligned movement.
And, currently, Montana's per capita income is roughly ten times higher than India's. Also, it's literacy rate is about 30-40% (depending on the census year) higher.
It's not about spying or ICBM's or anything, the key factor here is, believe it or not, agriculture. I know other patriotic Indians have problems accepting this, but India is still largely an agriculture-based economy, with the population especially concentrated in rural areas. With the exploding population creating pressure on food resources, the Indian Council of Agricultural Research actively involves itself in creating better yielding food varieties .
Students of Indian history would have heard about the green revolution that created self-sustainence in food; a crucial post-independence achievement considering food scarcity situations such as the 1943 Bengal Famine (the one on which Amartya Sen did economic research and won the 1998 Nobel Prize for Economics).
Now with satellite technology, ICAR can identify which land areas are suitable for which crops and therefore goad farmers into growing those varieties (remember that India is a sub-continent; you have all sorts of terrain, from deserts to plains to plateaus to, of course, mountains.
So accurately knowing which crop goes best where is critical information for the hungry masses (over-cliched, but it's true). Methinks that this will be the biggest use, followed closely by telecommunications and satellite television AND then by urban planning (Mumbai will have 24.7 million people by 2005).
PS:- Note that I'm not saying that satellite technology wont be used for other purposes; I definitely want India to use cutting-edge technology against a couple of motherfuckers, but talking only about that would be misleading.
More than mere navel gazing.
At my University, there are plenty of older students from India and Pakistan who are trying to get a 'Western' education. I've sat in classes of engineers who can't get work cause their foreign education is considered worthless.
So they end up coming here, just to find out that their education is worthless, and they find out they have to go BACK to University again here. I feel really bad for these people.
So when people complain saying that immigrants are stealing their jobs in the tech industry, many times it's just not true. (or not as pervasive as some make it seem to be) The only immigrants that maybe stealing tech jobs are rich immigrants.
At which point did these fine European nations drop out of "The West".
:)/2
Sometime in the 60's, give or take a decade, as best I can figure.
"You may be surprised to know that in 2000 years of indian civilisation, India has never ever attacked another nation."
Which is not to say India has never ever engaged in war. I guess attacking another nation during war is ok. Another thing that makes war completely ok is to not recognize the entity that you are fighting as a nation. I like the rest of your comment. Unfortunately I believe all nations are guilty of engaging in violence at sometime in their history, and not always for moral reasons. Saying that a nation never started a fight is at worst lying, and at best a glib attempt to justify violence.
Although India does not seem to be interested in building a world empire, things would be better if they could just leave Pakistan and Kashmir alone. I have heard too much rhetoric justifying violence in those regions.
Sputnik doesn't compare because it was communist grandstanding that created a communist agency within the West, NASA, that succeeded in suppressing progress in space for decades. This challenge from the Dravidian-Aryans hybrids of India is bound to light a fire under the moribund pioneering culture of the West -- particularly the nations of Canada, Australia and New Zealand and hopefully the US (assuming if the US can hold together in the face of such challenges to its pioneering heritage -- which I doubt and hope it cannot for the sake of the remnant of its pioneering subpopulations).
Seastead this.
Third world is a term from early in the Cold War. Those who coined the term saw all developed Western nations lined up against a monolithic communist bloc. In those days there was hardly any trade between Capitalist countries and Communist countries. It was like they were on two separate planets. The third world referred to technologically underdeveloped, non-aligned nations.
Nowadays third world may have lost its idealogical roots. But it still bugs me when people invent their own meanings for 2nd world, 4th world, etc.
The 2nd world would be former communist bloc nations. Don't use it for other meanings, OK?
I like MickLinux's characterization of IMF loan repayments as "tribute". In the most (formerly?) corrupt nations the west made huge loans to these countries. On paper the loans were made to aid development, but corrupt cronies the west installed, like Mobuto Sese Seko of Zaire, diverted those funds offshore to their Swiss bank accounts.
Yes, the "middle east" was more advanced than Europe for a long time. I am not sure that corruption is the explanation of Europe's rise over the "middle east". By today's standard things were pretty corrupt in Britain even 200 hundred years ago. Somewhere I have a copy of Marvin Kitman's very funny "The making of the President, 1789" and "George Washington's expense account". By today's standards Washington's corruption make the Gates, Ballmer, and the CEOs of worldcom, ENRON etc look like choir-boys.
We may think of India as a very poor country. But I had an Indian buddy, 20 years ago in University, who used to remind me that India was the 10th most industrialized nation on Earth. Kind of like that saying that inside every large person there is a skinny person screaming to get out. So the billion or so people in India includes more college grads than many smaller nations.
I don't know where India ranks now. But I read an editorial when the leaders of the G7 were thinking of letting Russia join them, to make the G8. The editorial writer said that the G7 would really have to be enlarged to be the G18 to include Russia if admission was based solely on GNP.
Concerning the term "middle east" -- this is also a new term. What we now call the "middle east" used to be referred to as the "near east".
Typical American assh*le syndrome. Where's a moderator when you need one
;-) )
;-)
Ack. Just because one guy is an idiot here don't call it typical "american"
I live in the county and I should know. That's not typical.
(Most American's havn't heard of those other countries
P.S. in defense of that guy, read more carefully. Brazil and "a few others" are the ones with nukes to attack the west. Of course, technically Brazil doesn't HAVE nuclear weapons capability. Just the capability to have the capability
So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
Ooo. Yes, and the world quakes under the thumb of that rouge terrorist nation "Israel".
Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
And the Australian Government. But we are basically the 51st state of the US under our current government.
Who you calling a teenager? ;-)
Live web cams
pipsqueak.. sounds like something the US can easily overtake in about 2 minutes. ;-)
Then when the realisation that through sheer weight of population numbers, land mass & available resources other nations outside of the US are capable of the same achievements (sometimes a lot more effeciently) they get all insular and over-protective (ref: Agricultural, Steel & manufacturing subsidies) to f&ck up those developing nations.
That's just a cop out. The US is world power, partly because of it's location, a good ocean away from it's potential enemies [although Canada has been pissing me off lately], it's mostly because of our freedom and pride which make us a great country. If it was just a case of natural resources making a great country, then Russia should have been a world power 10x the US. I think you feel a little disgruntled because the UK is so small and *does* lack natural resources and is probably limited by it's lack of those natural resources. Absolutely no offense to the UK too. I consider your country to be our greatest ally and respect your ideals and culture immensely.
What you already have is a highly unbalanced, global, political make up where one nations population is using up far more resources than it has at it's disposal and one nations beliefs over represented to the rest of the world. This is at the cost of the rest of the world and every move the US makes is designed to protect that situation.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, but someone must have cause you have a score of 3. I think you're telling me that because of America's growth and natural resource consumption, we'll eventually have to seek an expansionist policy, which will lead to US initiated attacks. Personaly, I don't see this happening with the potential advances in science; which hopefully one day will free us from our strangle hold on the need for oil.
Cheers and we'll see you in Iraq.
Live web cams
Them chinky ostriches will say anything to make China looks good.
They will say that China never need anything from abroad, they can invent everything. In fact, that ostrich that you replied to was implying to the world that China's space program is 100% indigenous, without parts nor ideas from abroad.
Go back several decades, near the end of WW II, it was the Germans who invented the jet engine, as well as the rocket (in modern sense), US, USSR and the rest of the world, in one way or another, got hold of the technology and add on to it.
So whichever chink who think that it was the Chinese who invented the modern rocket, please unplug your head from the sand pit.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Now I have to type a bunch of crap down here to make slashdot pass through my editorial comment.
What waste of bits and bytes.
Kintanon
Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
And... India is STILL Third World by the original definition as they are not considered Allies to the US or to Russia/Former Soviet Bloc countries. Making them still a part of the Third World politically. Economically I would consider them on par with the former Second World countries, but not quite up to First world status simply due to having SO MUCH population that it drags down their average.
Kintanon
Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
Threats need three things:
* weapons
* delivery system
* motivation
Most western democracies have the first two, but lack the third.
I would like to add that to use a nuke, you don't have to fire it. You can "use" it by threatening others quite well (worked in the cold war). A threat also implies that you are willing to fire. So I would say that countries who have the first two certainly have the third, in other words the motivation to "use" them, one way or another. And they do quite frequently, the US, China, India, Pakistan, etc. do it all the time (implicitly threatening).
Your statement is also wrong in another aspect: in fact, most "western" countries do not have nukes, even though they may have the technology to build them should they so desire. Most European countries do not have their own nukes, Germany being one particular example that you got wrong. Germany never built their own nukes, though nukes of NATO allies were stationed in Germany during the cold war (though not under direct control of the German military).
So maybe you should catch up on some history reading. I suggest you start with Sun Tsu's "The Art of War", quote: "All warfare is based on deception." So much for perceived threats.
</offtopic>
Idempotent operation: Like MS software, wether you run it once or often, that doesn't make it any better.