NUCLEAR WEAPON DOCTRINE OF INDIA

Nuclear Indian New Defense Doctrine- Kalki Gaur
http://indiatalking.com/blog/kalkigaur/
http://my.opera.com/kalkigaur/blog/ Author: Kalki Gaur: American Nuclear Weapon Doctrine © 2006 Copyrights
Nuclear Indian New Defense Doctrine
QUERY: How India should develop a nuclear doctrine to deter the threat of nuclear attacks from Pakistan and Iran as fundamentalist Jihadi Muslims are not rational human beings to be deterred by Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) Nuclear doctrine? How Israel should develop a nuclear doctrine to deter Iranian or Islamic nuclear attacks as MAD doctrine fails to deter the Jihadis and Martyrdom seeking Islamic terrorist leadership of the Middle East? How to deter oil-rich Saudi Al Qaeda fundamentalists from using dirty radioactive nuclear bomb to contaminate the civilized metropolitan cities by terrorist dirty nuke attacks?
SOLUTION: (DNA Nuclear Doctrine): The Nuclear Doctrine of Depopulation of Nuclear Aggressor, warns the Islamic nations that any attack on any civilized nation (“Y”) by Islamic nuclear power (“X”) would result in the mass execution of the entire male population of that nuclear aggressor (“X”) and all women, lands and assets of the Islamic nuclear aggressor (“X”) shall become the property of the nuclear victim (“Y”)

(i) Draft Nuclear Doctrine
INDIA DECLARED DRAFT NUCLEAR DOCTRINE: India on August 17, 1999 made public the draft nuclear doctrine spelling the minimum nuclear deterrent, command and control system and the broad thrust on nuclear forces. National Security Advisory Board (NSAB) headed by convenor, Dr. K. Santhanam outlined broad principles for the development, deployment and employment of India’s nuclear forces. The announcement reinforces the view that under a BJP-led government, India has established its credentials as a strong nuclear power. The collection of general principals on national security that have over the last year been enunciated by the PM in Parliament, now have been transmuted into a weapon.

OPERATIONAL SECRET COMPONENT OF DOCTRINE: The draft paper will be reformulated into an operational, secret component and a public component. The operational secret component will contain details like the size of the nuclear arsenal; there the nukes will be deployed as well as the nature of the response. The public component will be an elaboration of the elements already contained in this draft. It seeks to give a complete scenario of its nuclear doctrine. India is slowly and steadily moving toward a responsible position in the nuclear field. The document charts the A to Z process of it. India’s nuclear weapons program is not country specific. It is a question of deterrence in a nuclearised environment around India.

UNCOMPROMISING NUCLEAR DOCTRINE: India has published an uncompromising draft nuclear weapons doctrine. Indian draft of its nuclear weapons doctrine makes clear that India will brook no bullying or interference from the five acknowledged nuclear powers.
Autonomy of decision-making in the developmental process and in strategic matters is an inalienable democratic right of the Indian people. India will strenuously guard this right in a world where nuclear weapons for a select few are sought to be legitimized for an indefinite future. India’s nuclear deterrent was aimed at convincing any potential aggressor that any nuclear attack on India and its forces shall result in punitive retaliation with nuclear weapons. India should remain in a position to retaliate if nuclear weapons are used against us.

MINIMUM NUCLEAR DETERRENT: India’s minimum nuclear deterrent will be based on survivable triad of land, air and sea-based systems. The credible minimum nuclear deterrence will be based on aircraft, ships and mobile land based missiles. It is with a sense of responsibility, transparency and restraint that India approaches the nuclear doctrine. The suggestion that the Indian deterrent should be based on a triad of aircraft, mobile land-based missiles and sea based assets is meant to ensure survivability. The deterrent should cater against surprise attacks and rapid punitive response.
The nuclear weapons shall be designed and deployed to ensure survival against a first strike and to endure repetitive attrition attempts with adequate retaliatory capabilities.

MINIMUM, CREDIBLE, SURVIVABLE DETERRENT: What constitute a minimum nuclear deterrent? Minimum but credible is the watchword of the nuclear doctrine. The draft doctrine reconciles three essential considerations. The size of India’s atomic arsenal has to be kept at a minimum. Simultaneously, an effective capacity to deter a nuclear attack based on a credible nuclear arsenal should be created. Finally, the national atomic stockpile should be made ‘survivable’ at all costs. The document does not quantify the minimum deterrent, saying that will depend on security environment. It is a dynamic concept related to the strategic environment, technological imperatives and the needs of national security. The actual size, components, deployment, and employment of nuclear forces will be decided in the light of these factors. The principles of credibility, effectiveness, and survivability will be central to India’s nuclear deterrent. Credibility requires that the adversary must know that India has the will and the ability to use nuclear weapons.

PUNITIVE RETALIATION: India should have enough nuclear reserve forces to carry out effective retaliation, in case deterrence fails and the country subjected to a nuclear attack. In fact, Indian forces should carry out ‘punitive retaliation’ with nuclear weapons to inflict unacceptable damage on the aggressor, if India ever subjected to a preemptive nuclear strike. In the case of an attack by another Nuclear Weapon State, India reserves the right to shrike back. There should be enough weapons in its arsenal to be able to retaliate to inflict destruction on the aggressor.

NO FIRST STRIKE & RETALIATION ONLY: This is a policy of retaliation only. The draft reiterates that India should not initiate a nuclear strike. India will not resort to the use and the threat of use of nuclear weapons against States, which did not possess nuclear weapons, or not aligned with nuclear weapons States. India will never be the first to use nuclear weapons against any country. But its nuclear arsenal will have the capability of inflicting unacceptable and retaliatory damage on the aggressor.

SUBMARINE BASED SECOND STRIKE CAPABILITY: Besides keeping the nuclear arsenal widely dispersed, the second strike capability is realized through nuclear submarine armed with atomic weapons. The submarines which are extremely difficult to target, are fundamental to the survival of nuclear forces. Key countries, including Britain and France, have not subjected their nuclear submarines to arms reduction agreements.

EFFECTIVE NUCLEAR CHAIN OF COMMAND: An effective nuclear chain of command is the second is the second crucial element to ensure survivability? Prime minister is at the heat of the nuclear command and control establishment. The Prime Minister alone and his designated successor(s) should be authorized to order the release of nuclear weapons. To ensure that an effective and survivable command and control system with flexibility and responsiveness is in place, the doctrine calls for an integrated operational plan, or a series of sequential plans predicated on strategic objectives and targeting policy. Nuclear weapons shall be tightly controlled and released for use at the highest political level. India need not give details of the command and control structure, or the designated civilian successors to the PM who would have control over the nuclear button, for reasons of security.

CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS DETERRENT: The command and control of nuclear and conventional weapons should be kept separate.

EFFECTIVE EMPLOYMENT: For effective employment, it seeks the unity of command and control of nuclear forces including dual capable delivery systems. It calls for the creation of space-based (high resolution satellites) and other assets to provide early warning so that the survivability of the nuclear arsenal and effective command, control, communications, computing, intelligence and information (C4 I2) systems is ensured.

SAFETY & SECURITY AGAINST THEFT: The extraordinary precautions should be taken to ensure that nuclear weapons are guarded against theft, sabotage, damage or unauthorized access. It envisages institution of tamper-proof procedures to prevent inadvertent activation or use of such weapons. India will have to develop an appropriate disaster control system.

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT: India should step up efforts in research and development, while categorically rejecting any restraints on building the country’s research and development capabilities. India will not carry out any nuclear tests. India will remain committed to carrying out Research and development, such as sub-critical tests, for building its minimum and credible deterrent. Such tests are clearly allowed under the CTBT.

GLOBAL TREATY BANNING FIRST USE: All efforts shall be made to persuade other nuclear weapon states to join an international treaty of banning first use. India should work for internationally binding unconditional negative security assurances of non-use against non-nuclear weapon states by the different nuclear weapon states. In the view of very high destructive potential of nuclear weapons, the appropriate nuclear risk reduction and confidence building measures should be taken.

TRIAD OF NUCLEAR DETERRENT: India will depend on strategic bomber command, Agni-II IRBM, and a nuclear submarine for second strike capability. The survivability of the forces enhanced by a combination of multiple redundant systems, mobility, dispersion and deception. Minimum Nuclear deterrent encompasses: (1) sufficient, (2) survivable and (3) operationally prepared nuclear forces, (4) a robust command and control system, (5) effective intelligence and early warning capabilities, (6) comprehensive planning and training for operations in line with the strategy, (7) and the will to employ nuclear forces and weapons.

DOCTRINE OF WESTERN POWERS: The Essential difference between India’s nuclear doctrine and that of the US, France, UK and Russia are that the latter are expressly sworn to a first strike. India and China on the other hand, both abjure first use. Besides the UK no other country’s doctrine has been as transparent in the description of is principles.
8 (ii)
New Defense Doctrine

NUCLEAR INDIA IS SECOND SUPER POWER: Nuclear Weapons are great equalizers. Pakistan’s Atom Bomb would deter any future Indo-Pak wars across the common frontiers. Similarly, Nuclear India would soon get parity with China. Nuclear India would like to be treated with respect as an equal by United States a fellow Super Power. India would soon overtake China on a level playing ground. India and Pakistan should jointly convince the White nuclear Powers that two Brown Nuclear Powers deserve their fair share under the Sun.

BARBARIAN INVASIONS OF CIVILIZATIONS: Afghan Mujahideens represent “Barbarian” threat to “Civilizations” as defined by Professor Arnold Toynbee in the Study of History. Mountainous terrain provides natural defenses, and the entire population has become battle hardened. The political anarchy in Afghanistan allows the barbarian Army to monopolize the lucrative Drug trade in the Golden Crescent, which includes Afghanistan, Pakistan’s NWFP region, and parts of Iran and Central Asian republics. Barbarians will organize ad hoc transnational mercenary armies and undertake overseas military operations to destabilize civilizations. Afghan Mujahideens that attacked Kargil represent the force of Barbarians that is determined to undermine civilization. The civilization should respond by destroying the barbarian threat. Mohammad Gaznavi and Mahmud Ghouri represented the barbarians that crossed the Khyber Pass and attacked Hindu Indian Civilization. India must take the challenge of Afghan barbarians by occupying Afghanistan and by destroying the menace of barbarians in the world. India should deploy troops to fight barbarians in Afghanistan, Central Asia, Algeria, and Egypt.

MORE OVERSEAS WARS FOR NUCLEAR INDIA: Nuclear India could not fight Pakistan and China across the common frontiers without risking a nuclear conflagration. As a Nuclear Weapon Power India would get legitimate worldwide interests and responsibilities. India could militarily compete with China in Burma, Laos, Cambodia, and Angola. India would compete with Pakistan by military intervention in Afghanistan. India would meet the challenge of Islamic Bomb by promoting secessionist movements in Indonesia, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Kurdistan, and Somalia. India would require long-term overseas intervention capability, even when nuclear weapon Program would reduce salary allocations in the Defense Budget.

ROLE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS: The purpose of Indian nuclear weapons is to protect Hindu and Buddhist civilization in the Age of Civilizational Wars. India will not use nuclear weapons against Pakistan as India and Pakistan is integral part of the common civilization. India and China shall be allies in the Clash of Civilizations. Hindu civilization will not use nuclear weapons against Buddhist civilization. India shall not use nuclear weapons in Southern Asia and Central Asia, fearing the contamination of the rivers in the Subcontinent.

NUCLEAR TORPEDOES IN CLASH OF MARITIME AND LAND POWER: Nuclear torpedoes are tactical nuclear weapons and land powers will deploy them to deter the aggression of hostile maritime powers. The land powers can use tactical nuclear weapons, nukes, and nuclear torpedoes can be used to deter naval aircraft carriers in sea wars. The use of tactical nuclear weapons in Sea Wars will not lead to general nuclear war. Hindu land power India and Protestant maritime power United States would be adversaries in the Clash of Civilizations. India’s military doctrine is not to let the Americans build their forces; not to let them put the air-power and sea-power; not to let them take the initiative; not to let them fight a war with low U.S. casualties. After the deployment of sea based deterrent, India will use its nuclear arsenal to become a nuclear Equalizer. The United States becomes an equalizee due to India’s nuclear deterrent, as Indian nuclear weapons equalize the conventional and maritime superiority of the United States forces.

MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX: The Chinese army controls thousands of foreign joint ventures, 15,000 small businesses and 1,000 large industrial enterprises and international conglomerates, generating billions of dollars for which Chinese government could not account. China is earning around $70 billion by drug/heroin shipments worldwide. Chinese Army is earning billions by drug trade for which it has not accounted. Nuclear India should develop a military-industrial complex, so that Indian Defense expenditures would not burden state Exchequer. India should draw upon the experience of Britain’s East India Company, to enable Indian multinational enterprises finance overseas Indian military operations in return for trading monopolies.

GEO-TECHNOLOGY OF WARFARE: The development of Global Position Satellite (GPS) technology enables soldiers and base camp to pinpoint their locations on real time basis. Wireless cellular telephone technology allows instantaneous communications between soldiers and base camp. Development of hand-held SAM-6 missiles can bring down low flying aircraft. These developments have enhanced the role of Infantry in land wars. The American defeat in the Vietnam War and Russian defeat in the Afghanistan War establishes that the Infantry of populous land powers would determine the outcome of third World War in the future. India should reorganize its Armed Forces to reflect the changing role of military technology.

POLITICAL GUERRILLA WARFARE: Nuclear Powers would rely on politically motivated guerrilla armies to realize military goals in long drawn overseas conflicts. The success of Vietcong and Mujahideen in the Vietnam and Afghanistan Wars established the role of politically motivated volunteer forces. India should develop a Political Guerrilla Army, by recruiting commandos of LTTE-Tamil-Tigers type outfits, to militarily intervene on behalf of India, in overseas conflicts in Afghanistan, Burma, Cambodia, Laos, East Timor, Jaya Irian, Sumatra, Georgia, Somalia and Angola. Financing LTTE would be cheaper for India than to send Indian regular troops overseas. India should explore the role of Private Armies on the pattern of East India Company, which secured Indian Empire for British Crown. Perhaps India should mandate that every able-bodied person spends five years for compulsory national service.

INDIA’S ROLE IN THE 3RD WORLD WAR: The burning issue is whether nuclear India and the United States would fight the 3rd World War as allies or as adversaries. India contributed toward Allied Victory in the first & second World Wars more than any nation other than Britain, United States and Russia. India should demand its spoils of War for its wartime contributions. The humiliating defeat of the United States in the Vietnam War and Russian defeat in the Afghanistan War enhances the role of Indian Army in the third World War. We convince India that we would fight the third World War over Siberia and Siberia. China would likely invade Australia around 2005 AD as Australia could provide the solution of Chinas overpopulation. Would United States hand over Australia to China?
http://indiatalking.com/blog/kalkigaur/
Author: Kalki Gaur: American Nuclear Weapon Doctrine © 2006 Copyrights
http://my.opera.com/kalkitv/blog/

Depopulation of Nuclear Aggressor Doctrine (DNA Doctrine) -Kalki Gaur

http://indiatalking.com/blog/kalkigaur/ http://my.space.com/kalkitv/blog
http://my.opera.com/kalkigaur/blog/ Author: Kalki Gaur: American Nuclear Weapon Doctrine © 2006 Copyrights
Depopulation of Nuclear Aggressor Doctrine (DNA Doctrine) -Kalki Gaur
QUERY: How India should develop a nuclear doctrine to deter the threat of nuclear attacks from Pakistan and Iran as fundamentalist Jihadi Muslims are not rational human beings to be deterred by Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) Nuclear doctrine? How Israel should develop a nuclear doctrine to deter Iranian or Islamic nuclear attacks as MAD doctrine fails to deter the Jihadis and Martyrdom seeking Islamic terrorist leadership of the Middle East? How to deter oil-rich Saudi Al Qaeda fundamentalists from using dirty radioactive nuclear bomb to contaminate the civilized metropolitan cities by terrorist dirty nuke attacks?
SOLUTION: (DNA Nuclear Doctrine): The Nuclear Doctrine of Depopulation of Nuclear Aggressor, warns the Islamic nations that any attack on any civilized nation (“Y”) by Islamic nuclear power (“X”) would result in the mass execution of the entire male population of that nuclear aggressor (“X”) and all women, lands and assets of the Islamic nuclear aggressor (“X”) shall become the property of the nuclear victim (“Y”)

(1) EXECUTION OF ENTIRE MALE POPULATION:
DNA Doctrine. Doctrine of Depopulation of Nuclear Aggressor has an acronym DNA Doctrine. This doctrine promotes nuclear peace by postulating that any First Use of Nuclear Weapons would result in the total occupation of the Aggressor Nation and the mandatory execution of its entire male population.
Doctrine of Depopulation of Nuclear aggressor states, if Nuclear attacker “X” undertakes a preemptive nuclear strike on Country “Y” then country “Y” shall have the legal rights under International Law to invade Country “X” and execute the entire male population of nuclear attacker country “X” and take over all the women, lands and assets of the country “X”.
Doctrine of Depopulation of Nuclear Aggressor states as follows. Whenever a Nuclear Weapon Nation launches preemptive nuclear strikes against other Nation B, then the Victim Nation B will militarily retaliate to defeat the Nuclear Aggressor Nation A. The Nuclear Victim Nation B, will then execute the entire adult male population of the Nation A. In doing so the Nation B will not be violating any current Laws of War. The Nuclear Victim Nation B could also take over all the women, lands and assets of that Aggressor Nation A, without violating the Laws of War. If any Nuclear Power (A) attacks Nation (B), whether a nuclear or non-nuclear power, then once the hostilities are over, the world organization and world powers would arrange that the entire male population of the Nuclear Aggressor Nation A would be hanged and executed. The entire lands and resources of the Nuclear Aggressor Nation (A) would become the property of the Nuclear Victim Nation (B). The enforcing World Organizations would recoup their total cost of enforcing the DNA Doctrine, out of the national resources of the Aggressor Nation (A).

(2) PREEMPTIVE NUCLEAR STRIKE IS A WAR CRIME:
The United Nations should pass a treaty declaring that any first use of Nuclear weapons would be a Crime against Humanity and a War Crime. The United Nations should declare that it would supervise the mandatory execution of the entire male population of any Nuclear Aggressor Nation that used nuclear weapons in the preemptive nuclear strike against other Nation.

(3) DNA DOCTRINE VERSUS M.A.D. DOCTRINE:
Doctrine of Depopulation of Nuclear Aggressor, DNA Doctrine is more humane and results in more effective nuclear deterrent, than the Doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction, M.A.D. Doctrine. The M.A.D. doctrine is more destructive as it leads to a nuclear Armageddon. The Victim Nuclear Power would destroy the whole planet in case of preemptive nuclear attack and the resulting Second retaliatory strikes.
Doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction is credible as a nuclear Deterrent and promotes world peace. M.A.D. Doctrine threatens the potential Nuclear Aggressor that the Nuclear Victim of the preemptive nuclear attack would launch the retaliatory strikes against the Aggressor Nation annihilating it. Sufficient nuclear weapons of the Victim Nation would survive the preemptive strikes, enabling the Victim Nuclear Power to launch the retaliatory strike against the Aggressor Nation, annihilating the Aggressor.

(4) FANATICS & TERRORISTS ARE NOT RATIONAL:
Leaders of the fanatic and terrorist Nations are not reasonable and logical. The fanatic Muslim Mojahideen believing in the ideal of Religious War Jihad and could sacrifice their own lives and even their lands, driven by their fury to convert Kefirs. MAD Doctrine will not deter fanatic Terrorist Islamic Nuclear Powers from launching the preemptive nuclear strikes against non-Muslim nations. Thus, the Doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) would fail to provide an effective Deterrent against a fanatic Islamic Nuclear States. Since Islam preaches fanaticism, so even a normal nation like Pakistan under the influence of religious frenzy could become irrational enough to launch preemptive nuclear strikes against Muslim States like Israel and India disregarding the consequences of the Retaliation.

(5) INDIA-ISRAEL DETERRENT FOR PAKISTANI BOMB:
India and Israel should jointly develop a credible Doctrine of Nuclear Deterrent against Islamic Nuclear Weapon Powers. India and Israel should promote the Doctrine of Depopulation of Nuclear Aggressor. We should amend the Laws of War to include the provision of the mass execution of the entire male population of the nuclear aggressors. The problem is how to prevent any future Pakistani and other MAD Muslim leader from making preemptive nuclear strikes. How to stop Pakistan and other Muslim nuclear weapon powers from using nuclear weapons against India and Israel? When the Muslim nuclear nations realize that it could lose its entire male population, if it ever launches a nuclear strike against India, then it would never launch the nuclear weapons.

(6) NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN THE BLACK MARKETS:
Mad Muslim terrorists and fanatic Islamic nations could easily buy nuclear components to assemble a nuclear arsenal. Maniacs are irrational and not deterred by any future threat of Second Strike by the victim. Since any Second Strike retaliation would also destroy a large part of the world, the mad leaders argue that the Victim State would lack the Will for launching the retaliatory second nuclear strikes, as it could destroy the World. Because the M.A.D. Doctrine envisages a gruesome holocaust, so mad Nuclear States could launch an unprovoked nuclear attack. Mad nuclear State could argue that because the retaliatory Second strike results into a holocaust, the Victim of the nuclear attack would refrain from pushing the Nuclear Button. Thus logic of an Armageddon promoted by Mutual Assured Destruction Doctrine would become counter productive and fail to deter a nuclear attack by Pakistan and other Mad fanatic terrorist Nuclear Muslim Regimes.

(7) THE ARMAGEDDON PROMOTES NUCLEAR STRIKE:
A mad leader of the Islamic Nuclear nation would argue that the sensible non-Muslim leaders would not respond with a counter nuclear attack as it would destroy a large part of the world. While Armageddon being the only credible nuclear option, it would fail to deter the mad, fanatic, terrorist nuclear nations. The Doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction would fail to provide nuclear deterrent, against Pakistani nuclear weapons. Doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction would fail to deter Pakistani Islamic Nuclear weapon powers from launching preemptive nuclear strikes.

(8) SEMITES MASSACRED BROWN EGYPTIANS:
Pakistan could drop Atom Bombs on Israel or India, either incited by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, or blinded by Jihad spirit to convert Hindus into Islam. Desert Arabs could use nuclear weapons against agricultural societies, arguing that Arabs would survive the nuclear war in desert oases. Arabs attacked Iran, destroyed Zoroastrian Civilization, and forcibly converted Iranian Zoroastrians into Islam. Semite Arab had been a slave in the ancient Egypt Civilization of Brown Pharaohs. Semite Jews and Arab Muslims attacked Egypt to massacre the entire dominant Brown Race of the ancient Egypt. Fair skinned Semite Arab Muslims occupied Egypt and North Africa. Throughout history, whenever Muslims had military superiority they destroyed non-Muslim societies. Before the Islamic conquest Libya and Algeria was the granary of the Roman Empire. Conquest by the nomadic Arabs destroyed the agricultural economy.

(9) ONLY MALE DEPOPULATION IS THE SOLUTION:
The problem as How to deter any future mad Muslim Nuclear Power from using nuclear weapons against Christians, Jews or Hindus, who could be under the influence of the religious Jihad spirit! As explained above, the Doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction would fail to provide credible nuclear deterrent.

(10) DNA DOCTRINES DETERS FANATICS:
What could be the Solution? Even the most rabid fanatic, terrorist leader of a Muslim nuclear weapon State, would be deterred from using nuclear weapons against any other adversary, if it knew that the retaliation would be according to DNA Doctrine. Muslim Nations should unequivocally understand the following. The result of any Muslim nuclear attack on India, will be the mandatory execution of the entire Muslim male population of that Muslim nation. Besides it will also result in the confiscation of the entire Muslim Women, Lands and Resources by India. Then no Muslim nation would dare undertake a nuclear strike against India.

(11) RETALIATE AGAINST ENTIRE ISLAMIC WORLD:
Only the Depopulation of Nuclear Aggressor Doctrine would deter nuclear attack from a fanatic Islamic terrorist nuclear nation. DNA Doctrine would convince the Islamic World that the result of any Islamic nuclear preemptive attack would be the mandatory execution of entire Islamic male population. Besides all of its Women, Lands and Resources, would become the property of the nuclear Victim Nation.

(12) PROBLEM OF PROXY NUCLEAR INVASION:
What should be the response if any small or Micro Islamic State with small population, decide to commit suicide in the name of Islam, launches the nuclear weapons against a very populous Nation? What should be the response, if the Organization of Islamic States, (OIC) or OPEC finances an Islamic State to develop nuclear weapons and use against other non-Islamic State say Israel, Vatican or Mediterranean Europe? Whether the Victim State or its allies could punish only the front nation, who physically dropped the Bomb or the retaliation could be against all conspiring Islamic allies? Should the retaliations be limited to the Proxy enemy the Front Nation, Mini State whose leadership they have bribed to drop the Atom Bomb, or could it be against the entire coalition? Any Arab state that finances Pakistani Nuclear Weapon Program will be considered a joint-aggressor, in case of Pakistani nuclear attack against India. India could retaliate at nuclear level against that particular Arab State.

(13) RETALIATE AGAINST CO-CONSPIRATORS:
In Common Law if Organized Crime issues a contract to make the hit, the entire crime organization is considered guilty of crime and is punished. Indian Nuclear Doctrine should unequivocally declare that any nuclear attack by any Islamic State would result in massive nuclear retaliation against the entire hostile Islamic Coalition, specially such Islamic Nations as aided, abetted and financed the Aggressor.

(14) PROBLEM OF ATTACK BY A MICRO STATE:
What should be the retaliation in case Islamic nations conspire to sacrifice one Islamic State to wage a nuclear attack on Hinduism and Judaism? What would the retaliation if the Micro State of Palestine (PLO) led by a terrorist, were to drop nuclear bombs on Europe, America, Israel or India, aided and funded by other richer Islamic States? Should the retaliation be limited to PLO? Islamic Nations could select a smaller State having a smaller population, to launch a nuclear attack on a nation of 900 million by proxy. They may argue that even if the nation-state with the population of only five millions, gets destroyed by the retaliatory strikes, it should be considered an acceptable loss, as it helps eliminate an enemy state. What should India’s response be?

(15) REGIONAL RETALIATION:
Indian Nuclear doctrine unequivocally declares that India will not restrict the populous nation’s retaliatory strikes to the smaller Nation that acted as the front in this Proxy War. Indian will retaliate by using neutron bombs, against all members of the enemy coalition attacked.

(16) HINDUISM IS ONE NATION STATE:
No Islamic nation has large populations, while Hinduism and Judaism are one-country Religions. The populous nation justifies the retaliatory nuclear strikes against the entire coalition of hostile nations, whose total population equals to that of the populous nation. Indian Nuclear Doctrine should declare that if Islam were to declare a Religious War on Hindu India, a nation of 950 millions, then Indian retaliation would target the entire Islamic Bloc having combined population of 900 millions. If Islamic World incites Pakistan to launch nuclear strikes against India, then India would make targets retaliatory nuclear strikes against all Islamic States.

(17) RETALIATE AGAINST ENTIRE COALITION:
Indian Nuclear Doctrine will declare that the populous Victim of a preemptive nuclear strike has a legal right of counter-strikes against the entire Coalition of hostile Nations. It can retaliate against all conspiring nations, whose combined populations equal the populous Victim.
Doctrine of Depopulation of Nuclear Aggressor unequivocally declares as follows. In case of any Islamic Nuclear strike by any Islamic Nation, against any non-Islamic Nation, the retaliation would target the entire Islamic World. The right of nuclear retaliation would justify India to use nuclear weapons against the Islamic World.

http://indiatalking.com/blog/kalkigaur/
Author: Kalki Gaur: American Nuclear Weapon Doctrine © 2006 Copyrights
http://my.opera.com/kalkigaur/blog/
http://my.opera.com/kalkitv/blog/