India Test Fires Long-Range, Nuke-Capable Missile 336
An anonymous reader writes "India has successfully test fired a long-range, nuke-capable missile. Named after Hindu God of fire 'Agni', the ICBM is capable of hitting targets in China, East Africa and parts of Europe. With a successful launch of the missile, India joins an elite group of nations with long-range weapons. 'The BBC's Andrew North in Delhi says Indian officials deny it, but everyone believes the missile is mainly aimed at deterring China. A spokesman for China's Foreign Ministry, Liu Weimin, said his country was not threatened by the test. ... It was only launched once officials were sure they had the best weather conditions — so this was as much a demonstration as a real test, to show India's rivals that it has this kind of capability.'"
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:5, Insightful)
North Korea has been run by a familial succession of dictators who have been, at best, more than a little deranged. India is the closest thing that region has to a western democracy.
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:5, Insightful)
Not competitors? (Score:4, Insightful)
From TFA, a spokesman for China's Foreign Ministry, Liu Weimin, said "China and India are large developing nations. We are not competitors but partners."
I say bullshit.
Re:India invents the "V2"? (Score:0, Insightful)
And why is the United States of America condemning this missile launch as it does every time North Korea even announces such plans?
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:4, Insightful)
Lets talk about the US here : 1) Dictatorial style governance - check
I understand that UR mad, bro etc. But seriously, how long do you think Obama will remain in office? I'm going to go way out on a limb and predict that he will leave office either in January of 2013 or 2017. If the former, it will be because democratic voters chose somebody else. If the latter, it will be because of written law superseding leaders' preference to stay in office, so that (once again) democratic voters can choose somebody else.
But I admit that's a crazy expectation of mine. So tell me, what do you think will happen?
Seriously: I get that the US government commits constitutional abuses from time to time. But that is a long way from dictatorship.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Serious Differences There (Score:5, Insightful)
Pakistan is close to being a failed state.
India, on the other hand, is the world's largest democracy.
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that he can blithely compare the US to North Korea like that without any repercussions is a demonstration in itself that the US enjoys significantly greater personal freedom than NK does, but I'm sure that didn't occur to him.
If only things were that simple. (Score:5, Insightful)
India is a country surrounded by Pakistan, China, and nearby N. Korea, and other countries who are horribly oppressive, violent and aggressive regimes. They are also currently harboring the Tibetan government in exile; which royally pisses China off.
Time will tell if this was a good idea but from a strategic point of view, I have to agree with their decision.
And don't forget - public protests can be the polar opposite of what's said behind closed doors. Especially, when you need to keep amicable relations with all sides.
Re:India invents the "V2"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:5, Insightful)
I am not sure I get your argument here. Sounds a lot like "I bullied that guy in high school because all my friends were doing that, too".
The argument is that the US is unlikely to unilaterally invade/nuke another country without warning. It has no active border disputes, no external threats to its existence, no significant internal insurgency, has changed leaders in a relatively orderly fashion regularly for over a century, has a military firmly under civilian control, and tends to seek approval of at least its western allies before military action. Of course, it's also the only nation on the planet to have used nukes in anger, so I would understand your skepticism, but don't pretend there's no difference between the US and North Korea in terms of the likelihood nukes would get used.
Re:How Long? (Score:5, Insightful)
And for similar reasons, nobody is any more worked up about this than if France tested a new missile, and maybe even a little less concerned than if the US developed a new ICBM.
Context is important (Score:5, Insightful)
North Korea had just signed a agreement not to test weapons – which specifically included not testing long range missiles for “scientific purposes” in exchange for food aid. The ink was not even dry when they 1. launched the missiles and 2. said there would be dire repercussions if the U.S. did not deliver on the food aid.
The rationality and stability of the North Korea regime is very different then that of India.
Re:India invents the "V2"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because India isn't still technically in a state of war with the US (the Korean War never had a peace treaty, only an armistice, so it is still technically in a state of war), they haven't threatened to destroy the US, they aren't lead by a psychotic megalomaniac who might actually use nuclear weapons, and the missile can only reach to somewhere in China, which India is far more likely to ever go to war with than with the US. In other words, because the US has no real reason to care if India gets a long range missile.
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole "used nukes in anger" remark is nonsense.
We were in the middle of a war. We had been leveling cities for strategic purposes for a long while before we decided to do it with a single device.
People that like to fixate on the nukes tend to ignore all of the other cities that got bombed and all of the other people that got killed. They also tend to trivialize the Japanese.
I often wonder if there isn't a bit of racism mixed in there, trivializing the Japanese.
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think that anyone outside NK knows Dear Successor well enough to understand his state of mind. He's probably not batshit insane, and I don't think his father was either. However, he is a guy who probably enjoys the trappings of power, and also realizes that he has to keep the military and powerbrokers under him on his side. Although he may want a better future for his country, he may realize that it could be very, very difficult to realize that future with himself in power... or even alive at the end of the process.
His best option is a sort of China-like situation where he ditches the Juche crap and starts trying to act like a dictatorial South Korea. Let's not forget, South Korea was not always a model democracy itself. NK can probably succeed by conferring with Bejing on how they can open their markets in certain ways, make nice with the West, while at the same time, not changing the political system very much at all.
free tibet (Score:1, Insightful)
I watch China tv on free satellite once in a while, CCTV4 English, and find it amusing when they refer to the 'Liberation of Tibet' - Liberation? From What? The iron fisted oppressive dictatorial rule of the Dalai Lama ???
Re:Can't feed nor provide clean water for populati (Score:5, Insightful)
I have read this bullshit before. India had a GDP of 1.73 trillion dollars last year, of this it spend 36 billion on R&D including this one. So you are saying its wrong to spend less than 2 cents of every dollar you make on protecting yourself. Not only that, this tech also is related to satellite launch market, which is quite lucrative. India also launches and makes money on that.
So don't buy your LED TV, smartphone, Laptop until you pay off your mortgage, that is wrong priorities by your logic. Furthermore, dare you get a gun or a security system in your house until your mortgage and debt are paid off.
What rubbish!
Re:We broke the NPT with India (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, the NPT itself is a carte blanche to US, USSR, UK, France, and China. The NPT gives carte blanche to all nuclear powers prior to 1969 and India tested in 1974 and many /signed/ the NPT in 1992, like China and France. That said, like any legal document the NPT has loopholes, or at least ambiguous wording, and just like the wealthiest lawyer wins, the wealthiest country wins. The U.S. decided to re-interpret the NPT from "not collaborating with nations outside the NPT on nuclear matters" with "not collaborating with nations outside the NPT on /military/ nuclear matters" and gave a green-light for selling nuclear fuel and technology to the civilian sector in India (which consequently frees up India's domestic nuclear resources for military use if they can import nuclear fuel and tech for civilian use). And once the U.S. gave that interpretation, Russia, France, and soon Canada and Australia will also adopt that interpretation and begin exporting nuclear fuel and tech to India for civilian use. Australia and Canada are big since together they have 80% of the world's uranium deposits.
In the end, it's all big chess game. What was the point of the NPT? Choices like "world peace" and such are nice for elementary school kids, but the reality is that the NPT like everything else is done to win, and in this case to maintain status quo for the major powers so they remain major powers. Then why be flexible and allow India? Because rigid structures are more prone to break than flexible structures. India became the 3rd largest economy ahead of Japan this year on purchasing power and by 2050 both the economies of China and India will independently surpass the U.S., and combined surpass the U.S plus Europe. Moreover, the U.S. doesn't see any long-term conflict with India, and in fact sees India as an ally which has a democracy, a liberal society, and a focus on business and economy rather than military. While India has nuclear and missile programs, its military budget is tiny, at only 2.7% of GDP, compared with 2.6% for England, 3.9% for Russia, 4.7% for the U.S. and 10.4% for Saudi Arabia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures [wikipedia.org] and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Military_expenditure_by_GDP_2008.png [wikipedia.org]
All that said, it makes sense to slowly induct India into the status quo than risk a change in the global order. Every exclusive club has to occasionally induct new members to keep from turning irrelevant. That said, while a country club may accept a rich black man with the changing of the times, it's not a free-for-all where it accepts a homeless man. So the nuclear status quo will
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:5, Insightful)
This is so pathetic. Do you honestly think US leaders are the first EVAR to make stirring speeches and rouse the population to "defend" their nation for a "just" cause? Do you think the Iraqi insurgents or the Taliban in Afghanistan somehow started those wars in order to loot and conquer their own nations?
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:5, Insightful)
The Japanese leadership wasn't prepared to surrender even after Hiroshima, and was still hesitant to do so after Nagasaki, and it was the direct intervention of the Emperor that finally forced the Japanese government's hand.
Bullshit stories about Japan seeking a peaceful resolution in the weeks leading up to the attacks are pretty easily falsified by the behavior of the Japanese government at the time, which even after spectacular attacks on two of its cities still needed the Emperor to basically force the issue for them to raise the white flag.
Re:Serious Differences There (Score:2, Insightful)
Has India actually ever been the aggressor in wars w/ Pakistan? Nope, except for arguably in 1971 when they interceded on one side's behalf in the Pakistani civil war that resultated in millions of refugees crossing the border in the former East Pakistan.
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:3, Insightful)
But is the corruption level high? not really, especially compared to many other states in the world
Depends on what you call corruption. The illicit bribery is among the lowest in the world. Legal bribery is among the highest.
I know you're just trying to score points by showing that the US is evil and more dangerous than states like North Korea or Iran, but even a basic knowledge of the issues shows your assertion is not all that well supported by the facts.
When was the last time North Korea invaded anyone on false pretenses? How much leverage does North Korea have to force other countries to pass laws contray to the interests of their peoples? Can North Korea force the EU to send them all their air traffic data in violation of numerous privacy mandates, for instance? Can North Korea extend a war on drug users or a war on copyright infringers across the globe?
If the North Korean regime was replaced by a sane one, it would be very good news for South Korea and welcome news to the rest of the world. If the US regime was replaced with a sane one, it would be cause for celebration in all corners of the world.
Re:Wait, hang on (Score:5, Insightful)
I also remember learning that the fire bombing of Tokyo killed 3x as many people in one night as the Hiroshima nuke and wondering why we focus so much on the horror of that single event. At 12, I concluded that it was because most Americans are blind apologists who don't have the mental fortitude to go beyond lumping together a couple of stand out historical events to formulate their world view.
Re:India invents the "V2"? (Score:4, Insightful)
Iran is no threat? The country where they all come together and shout "Death to America" every single day?
Indeed. Look at the huge death toll all this shouting has caused all across the United States. The shouting must be stopped!!!1!