04-14-2006, 08:16 AM
I am too far ahead of time.
China today has a few hundred, but in the future they will have several thousand. The Asian Nuclear buildup won't really kick in until 2030 or so, but I can guarantee you that the Indian Government at that time will be looking at these numbers, but for now it's not required.
<!--QuoteBegin-Arun_S+Apr 11 2006, 02:00 PM-->QUOTE(Arun_S @ Apr 11 2006, 02:00 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Mar 30 2006, 07:02 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mudy @ Mar 30 2006, 07:02 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->build atleast 1000-2000 nuclear weapons. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Does it make sense to have 1000-2000 weapons? From where we will get material to build so many weapon? Do we have Uranium?
Minimum deterrence is good enough for now.
[right][snapback]49236[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Some may recall the adage "Electricity is a good servent and bad master". That is as true for power, money and nuclear fissile material. 1000-2000 weapons is shooting on own foot and IMHO most un-wise in current context.
BTW India has 8000Kg of outside safeguard Pu. After seperation those 8 PHWR reactors will generate 660Kg Weapon Grade Pu/ Year. (This is not even taking PFBR in account). Strategic weapon takes ~3Kg/wpn.
That is all power. The key question however is how best to make use of it. Thus defining objectives is the most important question, albiet not the most charming question that most people are willing to spend quality time on. Dissing IRoP is more enjoyable pastime; but that does not add drop of water where it matters most.
[right][snapback]49737[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
China today has a few hundred, but in the future they will have several thousand. The Asian Nuclear buildup won't really kick in until 2030 or so, but I can guarantee you that the Indian Government at that time will be looking at these numbers, but for now it's not required.
<!--QuoteBegin-Arun_S+Apr 11 2006, 02:00 PM-->QUOTE(Arun_S @ Apr 11 2006, 02:00 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Mar 30 2006, 07:02 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mudy @ Mar 30 2006, 07:02 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->build atleast 1000-2000 nuclear weapons. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Does it make sense to have 1000-2000 weapons? From where we will get material to build so many weapon? Do we have Uranium?
Minimum deterrence is good enough for now.
[right][snapback]49236[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Some may recall the adage "Electricity is a good servent and bad master". That is as true for power, money and nuclear fissile material. 1000-2000 weapons is shooting on own foot and IMHO most un-wise in current context.
BTW India has 8000Kg of outside safeguard Pu. After seperation those 8 PHWR reactors will generate 660Kg Weapon Grade Pu/ Year. (This is not even taking PFBR in account). Strategic weapon takes ~3Kg/wpn.
That is all power. The key question however is how best to make use of it. Thus defining objectives is the most important question, albiet not the most charming question that most people are willing to spend quality time on. Dissing IRoP is more enjoyable pastime; but that does not add drop of water where it matters most.
[right][snapback]49737[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->