Agni-V, India's first ICBM test-fired successfully

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Agni-V-Indias-first-ICBM-test-fired-successfully/articleshow/12726732.cms

by Garbage • 14 years ago

49 36 14 years ago

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

rollypolly• 14 years ago

Does having more ICBM-capable countries make the world safer?

asto4• 14 years ago

Having an ICBM makes India safer. ( Considering the fact that China is a militarily aggressive neighbour and we previously didn't have the capability to strike them )

caf4• 14 years ago

The reported range of even the MRBM-class Agni II can reach most of China from eastern India. The Agni III and Agni IV IRBMs were easily sufficient for holding China at risk.

radicaldreamer• 14 years ago

Potentially, if you think that countries are rational actors and the mutually assured destruction doctrine.

I think this makes the chance of an Indian/Chinese non-localized war much less likely.

caf4• 14 years ago

The prospect of a major Indian/Chinese land war was already quite remote. A rather large, high mountain range separates the two, and neither has the the ability to fight an extended war at the end of supply lines running over that mountain range.

hashfold2• 14 years ago

hopefully for playing a defensive role...look whom it is surrounded by....any country with similar situation would do it. just my thought.

mooneater• 14 years ago

I wonder if this might be a good counterbalance to Pakistan, resulting in higher chance for "peace" in that region. (Though I really hate nukes.)

asto4• 14 years ago

We've had the capability to nuke Pakistan into oblivion for a long time now! This development does not affect them at all. Also, the AGNI V is just a missile - the warhead need not be nuclear.

47• 14 years ago

Missiles/Nukes are like Software Patents. Most reasonable people will agree that they are bad but will still continue on filling patents for counter suing and deterrence.

runningdogx• 14 years ago

Government doesn't create the principles of nuclear physics that allow fission and fusion to occur.

We can't get rid of the nuclear threat as long as the knowledge of nuclear physics exists and someone somewhere wants to conquer the world (or merely a continent in some cases).

Software patents are a legal construct. Get rid of that, and writing up software patents accomplishes nothing.

mc32• 14 years ago

I don't think so. It adds another variable into the mix. So now each actor has to keep track of one more actor.

Kind of like in the movies where people aim guns at each other. If two people are aiming at each other there's a stalemate. With three it's sill a stalemate, if you have guns in both hands. When you have four aiming at each other it becomes more chaotic and less predictable, I think, specially if one of the four, or five etc. is more disliked than the rest. It's a different scenario and the analogy isn't perfect, but it may illustrate how I see the danger increasing.

fusiongyro2• 14 years ago

It's tempting to say no, but unfortunately for our sanity, it looks like mutually-assured destruction and the concept of the nuclear deterrent actually work. As evidence I cite the fact that both the USA and Russia exist today and neither got nuked by the other, despite some scares.

As long as Pakistan and India continue their pissing contest they're probably both going to need nukes just to keep things cordial.

rskn3• 14 years ago

Yes. A deterrent is a means to peace.

anujmehta• 14 years ago

bravo!!

hashfold2• 14 years ago

this makes Asia a safer place to live by neutralizing the forces. India follows 'no first use' policy.

so India is helping make a safer place.

suyash• 14 years ago

How does this makes to #1 news on HN?

jbarham• 14 years ago

It's 10 pm in SV and 10:30 am in India...

monsterix• 14 years ago

Congratulations to the techies and engineers who worked on this project, however no donuts for those who sponsored it. Here is why:

1. The objective to make a destructive missile is probably not a priority for a country with a billion bare-footed men. Apart from ego-massage you get nothing out of it.

2. The missile doesn't add any value to safety of the country, because - believe it or not - wars are always suicidal. It doesn't matter who is more powerful. Damage is equal on both the sides. Death is equally sad on both the sides of war. Loss is only public, while media and stupid politicians make meat out of it.

3. The most important reason why this missile is a complete waste of tax payers money is that India should focus on widespread poverty, education and corruption at this hour. Not some retard idea to be able to attack the world.

Otherwise, engineers like many out there working under stupid management, you've done a great job!

rskn3• 14 years ago

India doesn't have a billion barefooted men.

War isn't suicidal. Damage is NOT equal on both sides. There have been engagements where one of the two sides have had no casualties yet met the objectives of the conflict.

A missile helps india focus on just that - poverty. Instead of spending its resources on fighting wars that WILL come to be at the absence of nukes and ICBMs. Indo-Pak war of 1965 was based on the misguided pakistani notion that the Indian army was severely crippled following the war with china. This prevents incidents like that.

pm90• 14 years ago

exactly. It is extremely unlikely that there will be a full scale war between India and China; perhaps only border skirmishes. A ballistic missile deterrence can only help to "balance" the stakes and make the region more stable. I also wonder whether the OP and others who post suggestions for getting rid of poverty really mean? These are rocket-scientists, not social scientists. The resources allocated for poverty reduction programs is already quite staggering....pouring more money cannot solve the problem; it is a social and economic change that will occur eventually. Meanwhile, one can secure the territorial integrity of India and build expertise in missile systems, among other things...which surely can't be a bad thing, especially since it looks like there is gonna be a space race sooner than anybody thought about.

startupsdesigns• 14 years ago

Last I checked India was over 1 billion in population with sky rocketing political corruption stats. How does these missiles benefits majority who go without a proper meal everyday.

hooeezit2• 14 years ago

Pride. To tackle the political corruption issue will require a massive movement and a big consensus. If you visit India, you will realize that nothing gets done through consensus. Only individual actors achieve large successes. India still lives in a kingdom mindset where people draw pride from the acts of their superiors and are thankful for such acts. If you try to do something radically different, you will get a lot of resistance from everyone around you because "that doesn't work here". But if you do succeed, everyone around will claim to be part of it and will talk of you proudly.

So, in that environment, building an ICBM (which is btw a very hard engineering challenge and took India 30 years) is an achievable goal for an individual actor (the defence organization DRDO) and because it was an Indian success, brings pride to a nation of 1.2 billion. Getting rid of corruption will make our lives significantly better (there are many other much more modest goals that will have a similar effect), but it won't bring close to as much pride. In a country where you'd die before driving a Tata Nano if you had any semblance of money (Tata Nano is seen as a cheap car - something not to be proud of) and an iPhone is a must have, such sources of pride as an ICBM count for a lot.

Yes, we are flawed, but as we say, "what to do, we are like this only"

ippisl• 14 years ago

One of the main strengths of india is it's ability to create very low cost products of reasonable quality in many fields.it's probably the greatest thing modern india can offer the world.

For example the tata nano has created the whole mini car segment, that has significantly reduced the cost of low end cars around the world. now many people globally can afford to buy new car. Such effect is much harder to achieve than building an ICBM(which is a pretty old technology).

And indians don't take pride in it(if not at a level of buying it, but at least as a national innovation) ? that's a shame.

hef19898• 14 years ago

They could still battle their maoist rebels in the woods (if they are still there, last time i checked they were).

Agni-V, India's first ICBM test-fired successfully

Related Stories