[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: WE WILL NEVER FORGET!!



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Sticking to the topic, low yield nuclear weapons are not nuclear weapons in
the traditional sense and may our armed forces be prepared with the best
weaponry to protect India, our interests, our heritage, and our people so that
no one else would dare say that we don't have a choice like those in Hiroshima
and Nagasaki!!

Indians will NEVER forget the day (May 11th, 1998) when we had to stand
against the hegemonic powers to explain to them that we will not turn our
backs on our national security and that we will will bear any burden to
protect our liberty!

Sincerely,
Vamsi M.

Rahul Mittal wrote:

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mr. Vamsi,
>
> The people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had no choice but to accept it. =
> There
> was only one country in the world that had nuclear weapons. Those =
> weapons
> were essentially used in the pre-nuclear era. Ever since other countries
>
> developed their own nuclear weapons, there has never been
> a nuclear attack. Hence my point is extremely valid that nuclear weapons
>
> serve primarily as a deterrent in the modern world, rather than an =
> offensive
> force. It is ridiculous and naive to think they are weapons of offense.
> =
> The
> aim of the Indian nuclear policy needs to be towards building nuclear
> weapons to serve as deterrents.
>
> Additionally, the nuclear weapons were launched on a Japanese Empire,
> not on modern Japan. There is a vast difference between the two. The
> nuclear weapons did in fact destroy that empire because it no longer
> exists. Nuclear weapons launched on any country destroy that country.
> In the modern era, a nuclear weapon launched on a country could cause
> the other country to retaliate in kind. This results in the destruction
> =
> of
> both countries, and very likely a large portion of the surrounding =
> areas.
> So let me repeat, nuclear weapons need to serve as a deterrent. Not
> as an offensive tool.
>
> Additionally, you said in a previous post, "I would be quiet ashamed to
> =
> say
> this to the brave armed forces of India that somehow the rest of the
> world matters more to the people of India than the
> land that they are willing to protect with their lives!!"
>
> So what you are saying is that by deploying nuclear weapons for
> offensive purposes, the people of India will not be affected? Your
> entire interpretation of my statements is quite invalid. The
> correct interpretation of what I said is that nuclear weapons will
> not affect just some neighboring or remote region outside India.
> More importantly, any nuclear response from such a region to
> counter an offensive manouvre will be quite devastating to Indians.
> The most direct way to provoke another country into using
> nuclear weapons is by using nuclear weapons on them first.
> I would quite like to hear what you will tell the "brave armed
> forces of India" at that stage. Perhaps something like "Sorry,
> I made a mistake and now all your families are dead. Since
> we have no population left to protect, there is no need for the
> armed forces any more."
>
> So, contrary to your rash statement to the "brave armed forces
> of India", I would propose that you instead explain to them
> that nuclear weapons launched by India can likely mean nuclear
> weapons launched by other regions on India. Which would
> mean the destruction of India alongwith the destruction of the
> other country. If you think the "brave armed forces of India"
> should be some sort of "Jihad armed forces", then by all means
> launch nuclear weapons. Because at that point neither your own
> life nor the life of others matters to you any more. But in my
> view, the best and purest purpose for nuclear weapons is to
> serve as deterrents.
>
> So what do I believe Indian military research should be focused
> towards instead of developing purely attack-oriented nuclear
> weapons?
>
> 1. More safety when dealing with nuclear materials. I shudder
> to think of a Chernobyl happening in India (doesn't have to be
> a power plant... could just be a nuclear silo that, hmm, sorta
> rusted in the rain or got cracked in an earthquake). Given
> the current situation in India, I would not be surprised if some
> event like that did happen.
>
> 2. Think of more ways to make other nations think twice about
> attacking India with nuclear weapons. One good way is to keep
> a limited arsenal ourselves (again with the aim of the arsenal
> serving as a deterrent). Another way is to perhaps apply
> ingenious Indian brainpower to maybe not repeat the American
> mistakes and instead build a missile defense shield that
> actually works! Good solid diplomacy also has the ability to
> do wonders. Perhaps India should take a more proactive
> stance in international diplomacy, rather than complain that
> some other country is sponsoring terrorism in India and
> therefore India will just sit and watch and refuse to attend
> any diplomatic meetings to protect the lives of its own
> citizens. (Pardon my harsh tone here, but I get rather
> excited about matters like these).
>
> 3. If foreign governments do, for whatever insane reason,
> decide to launch nuclear attacks on India, then we need some
> sort of detection system to be able to identify and potentially
> shoot down any such missiles. Considering the cost for
> building a nuclear missile and the cost and danger for building a =
> smaller
> missile that can reliably gun down a nuclear missle, I think
> I would gamble with technology and go for the smaller
> missiles. (I would also keep a small nuclear arsenal, but
> again only for deterrance). The only way any country can
> survive a nuclear attack is by preventing the nuclear
> weapons from detonating on its soil. So that is what the
> aim of Indian military research is best directed towards.
> If we have something reliable, then let any other country
> build 10 or 20 or 5000 nuclear weapons. It will be an
> enormous expense for them. We can just gun down any
> missile entering or approaching India, and laugh away
> any attack.
>
> Finally, you write, "Oh really!  People in Hiroshima
> and Nagasaki disagree with your statements!".
> I'm not sure how many people from Hiroshima and
> Nagasaki you have spoken to, but all three of the people
> I have spoken to, said that their ancestors did in fact
> experience an "end of the world". What they
> experienced was not anger that the Japanese didn't
> have any nuclear weapons during World War II. Instead
> they expressed remorse that it was tragic to think that
> the only way the war could be ended was to use
> the nuclear bomb. They were glad that Japan did
> not have nuclear weapons at the time, because if they
> did, World War II would not have ended. Note that
> even after the bomb at Hiroshima, the Japanese did
> not surrender. It took a second bomb to get them to
> stop. Many more lives would have been lost and both
> the U.S. and Japan would have been the eventual
> losers, if Japan would have had a nuclear arsenal at
> the time and launched them on the U.S.
>
> In the Indian case, who would you propose India
> might need to use nuclear weapons against? Perhaps
> the Bhutanese might become arrogant and feisty 50
> years from now, and to shut them up, you would
> suggest launching a nuclear bomb. After all, no
> Indian military lives would be lost directly, right?
> If India chooses to launch nuclear weapons against
> China or Pakistan, or any other country with nuclear
> weapons, I don't think either country will stand
> victorious. Neither you nor I, nor your ideology
> nor mine, will remain. In effect, your ideology
> would have been the cause of my "murder". In my
> view you would not be a national hero. You would
> be a criminal.
>
> Simply sir, the greatest benefit to all the world
> is if there is peace. For there to be peace in the
> world, you have to believe that something like that
> can at least exist. Then all you need to do is work
> towards it. Alternatively, I get the feeling you don't
> think peace can exist in the world. Hence you feel
> strongly that India needs to develop weapons solely
> for the purpose of mass destruction, whether or
> not anyone else uses those weapons on India.
> Perhaps my views are not grounded in reality the
> way you experience it, but at least I believe that
> some day the world can be a peaceful place, with
> India occupying a very important role in that new
> world order. But I disagree that weapons of mass
> destruction are the means of achieving that new
> world order.
>
> Sincerely,
> Rahul Mittal
>   ----- Original Message -----=20
>   From: sdcvamsi@yahoo.com=20
>   To: debate@indiapolicy.org=20
>   Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 4:31 AM
>   Subject: Re: WE WILL NEVER FORGET!!
>
>   ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>   Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
>
>   ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>   Rahul Mittal wrote:
>
>   > I am sorry sir, but the day any country actually uses nuclear =
> weapons to
>   > achieve military
>   > objectives, I think you and I will have no choice but to be looking
> =
> forward
>   > to the end of the world in a matter of a few days.
>   >
>
>   Oh really!  People in Hiroshima and Nagasaki disagree with your =
> statements!
>   The world has not ended since then and in fact, the country that used
> =
> these
>   weapons and continues to build even more powerful ones became even =
> stronger!!
>
>   Indians will NEVER forget the day when we had to stand against the =
> hegemonic
>   powers to explain to them that we will not turn our backs on our =
> national
>   security and that we will will bear any burden to protect our liberty!
>
>   Sincerely,
>   Vamsi M.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
> Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Sincerely,
Vamsi M.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------