2011

121. Statement I : India used the Minimum Credible Deterrent argument to de

Statement I : India used the Minimum Credible Deterrent argument to develop its nuclear weapon system arguing that it had such a threat from China. Pakistan in turn used the same argument against India when it developed its own nuclear weapons.
Statement II : The Minimum Credible Deterrent refers to a notion according to which nuclear weapons become necessary for a country when it has a clear nuclear threat.

[amp_mcq option1=”Both the statements are individually true and statement II is the correct explanation of statement I” option2=”Both the statements are individually true but statement II is not the correct explanation of statement I” option3=”Statement I is true but statement II is false” option4=”Statement I is false but statement II is true” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CAPF – 2011
Download PDFAttempt Online
Both Statement I and Statement II are individually true, and Statement II is the correct explanation of Statement I. Statement I describes the historical application of the Minimum Credible Deterrent argument by India and Pakistan in the context of their nuclear weapons programs. Statement II provides a definition of the Minimum Credible Deterrent, explaining that nuclear weapons become necessary for a country when it faces a clear nuclear threat. This definition precisely explains *why* India and Pakistan would employ such an argument – they perceived nuclear threats (India from China, Pakistan from India) and therefore argued that a nuclear capability was necessary as a deterrent.
Minimum Credible Deterrent is a strategic posture where a state possesses just enough nuclear capability to deter an attack, particularly a nuclear attack, by threatening unacceptable retaliation. It emphasizes the ‘minimum’ requirement to deter, rather than seeking nuclear superiority or parity in numbers.
India officially adopted the policy of ‘Minimum Credible Deterrence’ after its 1998 nuclear tests, alongside a ‘No First Use’ policy. Pakistan has not adopted a ‘No First Use’ policy and its doctrine is often described as ‘Full Spectrum Deterrence’, though it also maintains a nuclear arsenal aimed at deterring India.

122. Statement I : The Earth is shaped more like a tangerine. Statement II

Statement I : The Earth is shaped more like a tangerine.
Statement II : The Earth spins faster at the Poles.

[amp_mcq option1=”Both the statements are individually true and statement II is the correct explanation of statement I” option2=”Both the statements are individually true but statement II is not the correct explanation of statement I” option3=”Statement I is true but statement II is false” option4=”Statement I is false but statement II is true” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CAPF – 2011
Download PDFAttempt Online
Statement I is true, but Statement II is false.
The Earth’s shape is an oblate spheroid, and its rotation speed is greatest at the equator.
Statement I is true; the Earth is not a perfect sphere but is slightly flattened at the poles and bulges at the equator due to centrifugal force from its rotation, a shape often approximated by calling it an oblate spheroid or using the analogy of a tangerine or orange. Statement II is false; the Earth spins at a constant *angular* velocity (completing one rotation in roughly 24 hours), but the *linear* velocity (speed along the surface) is highest at the equator because points on the equator are farthest from the axis of rotation. The linear velocity decreases towards the poles and is essentially zero at the geographical poles which lie on the axis of rotation.

123. Statement I : In forensic investigations, DNA fingerprinting tests are

Statement I : In forensic investigations, DNA fingerprinting tests are carried out.
Statement II : In DNA fingerprinting technique, DNA is isolated and subjected to Northern Blotting.

[amp_mcq option1=”Both the statements are individually true and statement II is the correct explanation of statement I” option2=”Both the statements are individually true but statement II is not the correct explanation of statement I” option3=”Statement I is true but statement II is false” option4=”Statement I is false but statement II is true” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CAPF – 2011
Download PDFAttempt Online
Statement I is true, but Statement II is false.
DNA fingerprinting is a valid forensic technique, but the method of analysis involves DNA-specific techniques, not RNA analysis methods.
Statement I is true; DNA fingerprinting (or profiling) is widely used in forensic investigations for identification purposes, such as matching samples from a crime scene to a suspect. Statement II is false; Northern Blotting is a technique used to detect specific sequences of *RNA*. DNA fingerprinting techniques involve analyzing DNA, using methods such as Southern Blotting (historically) or more commonly PCR amplification of variable regions (like STRs) followed by electrophoresis or sequencing.

124. Statement I : The recent national election results in India are indica

Statement I : The recent national election results in India are indicative of a transition towards a new region based multi-party system.
Statement II : The intensification of competitive politics has changed the party system in India from being a rivalry between national parties into one between alliances and coalition of national and state parties.

[amp_mcq option1=”Both the statements are individually true and statement II is the correct explanation of statement I” option2=”Both the statements are individually true but statement II is not the correct explanation of statement I” option3=”Statement I is true but statement II is false” option4=”Statement I is false but statement II is true” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CAPF – 2011
Download PDFAttempt Online
Both Statement I and Statement II are individually true, and Statement II is the correct explanation of Statement I.
The Indian party system has transitioned from a single-party dominant system to a multi-party system characterized by competitive alliances and coalitions involving both national and regional parties.
Statement I suggests that recent national election results indicate a move towards a “region based multi-party system”. While potentially debatable as the sole characterization, it captures the increased importance of regional parties. Statement II states that intensified competitive politics has changed the system from one primarily between national parties to one between alliances/coalitions of national and state parties. This is an accurate description of the shift in Indian politics, especially since the late 20th century. This shift directly explains why regional (state) parties have become crucial players in national politics and elections, forming necessary components of national coalitions. Therefore, Statement II provides the underlying mechanism for the outcome described in Statement I.

125. Directions : The following five (05) items consist of two statements,

Directions : The following five (05) items consist of two statements, statement I and statement II. You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the answers to these items using the code given below :

Code :
(a) Both the statements are individually true and statement II is the correct explanation of statement I
(b) Both the statements are individually true but statement II is not the correct explanation of statement I
(c) Statement I is true but statement II is false
(d) Statement I is false but statement II is true

1. Statement I : The US Army built the historic Stilwell Road in 1943 running from Ledo in Assam to the China-Burma Road.
Statement II : The objective was to form a link with the Bengal-Assam Railway and carry support for the US and the UK warfare against Japan.

[amp_mcq option1=”Both the statements are individually true and statement II is the correct explanation of statement I” option2=”Both the statements are individually true but statement II is not the correct explanation of statement I” option3=”Statement I is true but statement II is false” option4=”Statement I is false but statement II is true” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CAPF – 2011
Download PDFAttempt Online
Both Statement I and Statement II are individually true, and Statement II is the correct explanation of Statement I.
The Stilwell Road was a strategic military supply route built by the Allies during WWII.
Statement I is true; the Stilwell Road (initially Ledo Road) was indeed built starting in 1943 by US Army engineers with Allied (Chinese and Indian) labor, running from Ledo in Assam, India, through northern Burma to link up with the existing Burma Road into China. Statement II is true; the primary objective was to re-establish a vital supply route to China, which had been cut off by Japanese occupation of Burma, in order to support the US, UK, and Chinese war efforts against Japan. The Bengal-Assam Railway was the logistical backbone for bringing supplies to the Indian railhead at Ledo for transport via the road. Thus, the objective described in Statement II directly explains the building of the road mentioned in Statement I.
Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5