mukeshkumar007
Active member
How wise the policy of “no first use of nuclear weapon” is? I’m really not sure whether such policy really exists but I have often read the statements of political leaders that India is a responsible nuclear power and it is committed not to use its nuclear power first on any of the country. India will use its nuclear power only for its self defense.
I didn’t understand the logic behind it but I’m convinced that whenever there will be a war we will definitely be on backfoot if we are attacked with nuclear weapons. For instance suppose we engage in war with Pakistan and in accordance with our policy of no first use of nuclear weapons we are fighting only a conventional war, suddenly Pakistan attacked India with its nuclear arsenal. In result our major cities get destroyed, millions of people died in seconds, infrastructure and economy come on halt. The worst part of it is that logistic supports to defense forces which are already fighting on front, get destroyed which in turn halted the ammunition and food supply to the forces.
One can easily imagine how worst the situation would be for India in this case? We might reply back with our full nuclear might but we are already hundreds year back.
So I don’t understand what is the use of such policy? May be I’m not able to perceive it properly. Moreover I’m also doubtful on the quickness of our response, since the decision of using the nuclear power fully rest with political leaders and we have already experienced the reluctance of our political leaders in taking bold decisions?
It would be interesting to read your point of view on this topic.
I didn’t understand the logic behind it but I’m convinced that whenever there will be a war we will definitely be on backfoot if we are attacked with nuclear weapons. For instance suppose we engage in war with Pakistan and in accordance with our policy of no first use of nuclear weapons we are fighting only a conventional war, suddenly Pakistan attacked India with its nuclear arsenal. In result our major cities get destroyed, millions of people died in seconds, infrastructure and economy come on halt. The worst part of it is that logistic supports to defense forces which are already fighting on front, get destroyed which in turn halted the ammunition and food supply to the forces.
One can easily imagine how worst the situation would be for India in this case? We might reply back with our full nuclear might but we are already hundreds year back.
So I don’t understand what is the use of such policy? May be I’m not able to perceive it properly. Moreover I’m also doubtful on the quickness of our response, since the decision of using the nuclear power fully rest with political leaders and we have already experienced the reluctance of our political leaders in taking bold decisions?
It would be interesting to read your point of view on this topic.