How relaible is the target detection in A-band, and is it just a target detection system or it is also a fire-control radar.

Of course its just detection system. It is just as reliable as any other radar. Althought you cant fire rockets with that radar it is still a death end for any pre-F22 stealth plane. With help from this radar you can direct other fighters or optical-guided SAM’s. This is one of reasons why russians havent developed stealth bombers. Untill the later 70x most fighters used WWR rockets/guns to shot down bombers anyway, and during Vietnam era the absence of BVR rockets also didnt hinder MIG-21’s to shot down B-52’s. F-22 is completely another story as its a _relatively_ cheap fighter plane and stealth is used to get adantage in fighterVSfighter engament , to shot down enemy fighters first, to reduce the usefull SAM range, but not to “sneak” throught national radar network. B-2 and F-117 were only a very expencive “technology demonstarators” which wasnt very effective. Like first jet – german ME-262. Where immature technologe, drawbacks and huge cost overweights advanced design principles. The true revolution comes with F-22 – first effective stealth plane.

. The East starts with a disadvantage in numbers and due to reinforcement at a comparable rate maintains that disadvantage during every reinforcement cycle. Considering your average attacking force likes a 3 to 1 advantage in numbers this doesn’t bode well for the WP.
.

1 to 3 – Is a very common mistake done by “armchair generals” knowing nothing about strategy. 1 to 3 is only applicable for breakthrought throu the limited size position against prepared & fortified enemy troops. For example, breaking established front line. Basicaly, once you achieved breakthrought than you dont need numbers advantage. After that point DEFENDERS start to take much heaver losses than attakers. This is why basicaly you should always attack if your troops _strategicaly_ weaker than enemy. If you let stronger enemy choose time & point for attacking, your will lose horrible without even inflicting much loses to enemy. A very good example is WW2 war, or Gulf War. Most of USA loses was during Irak conterattaks, NOT during USA attacks.
Thats why USSR troops, in case of attacking first, would have little problem to conquer West Europe. As european troops was too much spread out, with too few concentration points (aka military bases), and much weaker artlillery and SAM’s. The traditionally strongest european army – Germany – was almost non-existant back then, with too few NATO bases.

More serious joke – the recent AH-64 shotdown in Iraq was made by Strela-2M. At least, so are reports.

Whats the use of a Danush when you have the brahmos. The size of the warhead of the danush is not all that much greater and its sorter in range. Is the Danush liquid or solid fuelled?

BrahMos have most likely restrictions about nuclear use. It was official jointly development and Russia must follow they agreement about nuclear weapon proliferation. So India most likely have agreed NOT to install nuclear warhead on BrahMos.

The US forces don’t need a javelin till something like the Black eagle or the T-95 are available for export… which wont be any time soon.

Thats not very true… As even with current t-80 and t-90 with ERA its very hard to penetrate they armour frontally – espeally, with a HEAT weapon type. TOW-2 and other portable ATGM’s will have problems to penetrate its armour.