Slashdot Mirror
India's ICBM Will Carry Multiple Nuclear Warheads
An anonymous reader writes "India is equipping its longest range nuclear-capable missile, the Agni-V, with Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicles (MIRVs), The Diplomat reports. A MIRVed Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) carries multiple nuclear warheads on a single missile, which it dispenses towards numerous or a single target after the final stage of the ICBM boosts off. MIRVed missiles destabilized the Cold War nuclear balance and are likely to do so again: 'Because they give nations greater confidence in being able to destroy an adversary's hardened missile silo sites in a first strike by launching multiple, lower yield warheads at the sites.'"
80% of the Indians don't have a toilet to shit in, but the government is more worried about expensive war toys with no purpose at all.
Way to go, India. There's nothing like getting your priorities straight.
Doesn't India have other priorities? http://www.wateraid.org/uk/where-we-work/page/india
You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
So its ok if Indians are ruled by a Chinese-Pak-American invader force as long as they have a toilet to shit in?
The foremost priority of any government is to protect the nations borders, otherwise whats the point of nationalism anyway?
There won't ever be a nuclear war with Pakistan. The real focus is China. And slowly but surely India is beginning to equalize the equation though it's still pretty far from doing so; at the moment it's advantage China. So these developments have to be read in context of China, not Pakistan.
India is keeping its ennemies close. The nukes are foremost to keep Pakistan and China under control. Why the heck are they devellooping ICBM capability? Thy really just need to be able to lob them far enough over the border...
10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then
India should be working on improved stick technology so they can win WWIV.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
Undeniably so, but isn't it too late for that already, looking at this animated timeline of nuclear tests between 1945 and 1998. One wonders how the planet is still alive.
You are really saying that the world community must band together in order to take all of America's nuclear weapons? After all, America is the ONLY country in all of history to have ever used a nuclear device against another, not once, but twice.
You can make all the distinctions you wish about right or wrong, but one cannot argue it is untrue.
Yeah, so maybe the subject is flame bait, but self righteous ass clowns like you really grind my gears.
You have the balls to talk about India spending money on weapons when the 21% of US children live in poverty?
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/
When there an estimated 500k homeless people living in US cities?
America spends 4.5% on GDP on the military, NOT including the illegal wars being waged.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
You sir, are a jackass.
Or maybe that's because India is the largest democracy in the world and has been mostly at peace since its independence in 1947 (minus border conflicts with China and Pakistan and some peacekeeping operations abroad). It's last conflict was in 1999 against Pakistan and the total death toll after 3 months of operations was less than 5000 victims. It's not a bad track record for such a large and populated country given the size of the societal issues it's dealing with.
The iranian democracy on the other side is today nothing more than an empty shell and while its population is highly educated, young and probably wouldn't mind a change in government, its government and associates have proven time and time again since the 70s to have a rather proactive agressive stance.
Nobody is taking away money allocated to providing clean drinking water to make missiles
As if the money didn't all come from the same bag? The Indian government is taking in money, allocating it to "defense" and building first strike weapons to bomb an imaginary enemy; all while ignoring that a large part of their population is living in poverty. The fact that there are reasonably well educated people here that are OK with this shit speaks volumes.
... whatever
There's plenty on Slashdot, most who live in America. any time there's a discussion of a foreign country, they feel the need to steer it back to America and do so by hating on America. Near as I can tell it is a combination of two things:
1) Trendiness in hating the US. For some reason, they feel that "cool" thing to do (so to speak) is to hate on the US. If anything is bad anywhere, they need to find a way it is worse in the US.
2) Arrogance/self centeredness. They can't deal with a discussion that isn't about them or their experiences, so they have to steer any discussion back to the US so it is. They mentally justify it to themselves as pointing out the US's flaws, but it is really about making the discussion about them and their world.
There's sadly a lot of it on Slashdot, it often gets moderated up, and it can make it difficult to have a real discussion about problems in the rest of the world.
The purpose is to deter the US.
How, pray tell, does an ICBM with a range of 5,500km deter a country that's 12,500km away?
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Obviously, you've never read an anti-abortion bill.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
The US certainly did not give Pakistan nukes. The Chinese did help there.
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
India's nukes is and have always been built to deter Pakistan foremost and China secondmost.
The ICBM cannot even reach the US, by a long shot.
Same reason very few Chinese nuclear weapons can reach the US. All of them can reach Russia just fine.
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
Having played a lot of Scorched Earth and ATanks in my time, I can assure you that MIRV nukes are REALLY bad and can easily end up killing your own tank if launched in haste.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
>Any country that is cowed by Pakistan is nothing to worry about.
That is United States of America.
$hit Cowed. E.g. Pakistanis had Osama as their honoured Guest and US can't even call that bluff.
Well, except for when they found him and killed him without even asking Pakistan if it was ok to conduct a military operation on their soil.
Try that on a real country like Russia or China anyone in Europe... well my guess is they wouldn't be so brazen.
No purpose at all? China attacked India in 1962. There have been border incursions, by Chinese forces, as recently as May of this year. They have fought several wars over disputed borders with Pakistan. Both China and Pakistan are nuclear powers. Before any government can do anything else, such as providing the plumbing mentioned in your post, they have to maintain the territorial integrity of the nation and assure the survival of the state. Frankly of all the recent nations that have gone for nuclear weapons India has the best argument for why they need them.
You may find the following information useful: Chavez is dead. Has been so, as I write this, for several weeks.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace