A Race Pakistan Cannot Possibly Win

[Didact]

Sure. It's a nuclear bluff because they don't plan on using tac nukes on us.

Hellfire has already posted before.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/a-race-pakistan-cannot-possibly-win.587769/page-3#post-10957155



So Pivot Corps move in within 2-3 days after declaration of war and Strike Corps within 5?

The last I heard was the SC moving in within a week.

Too slow by half? If the IBGs begin churning into Pak within 6-8 hours of orders, as they must to have greatest chance of punching through the first defense line, they will require the reinforcement, resupply and relief within 24 hours of moving onto the offensive. Not to mention supporting operations must begin to ease the pressure on the offensive path and flanks. Or given skillful play by PA and a courgaeous commande, we could have our spearheads cut off with extreme rapidity.

 

[randomradio]

I see. I haven't heard of it being made for conventional strike though.

That's really what they have made it for.

Realistically, a missile of this type could take as much as 2-3 min to reach a target. Within this time the tank column, even if moving at just 30Kmph would have already moved more than 1Km away from the potential blast zone.

A T-90 can move at 45Kmph on rough terrain. When such missiles are detected to be headed towards an armoured column, you can expect them to have tactical countermeasures prepared.

Too slow by half? If the IBGs begin churning into Pak within 6-8 hours of orders, as they must to have greatest chance of punching through the first defense line, they will require the reinforcement, resupply and relief within 24 hours of moving onto the offensive. Not to mention supporting operations must begin to ease the pressure on the offensive path and flanks. Or given skillful play by PA and a courgaeous commande, we could have our spearheads cut off with extreme rapidity.

As of today there are no IBGs and there is no "Cold Start". Even if they existed, I doubt 8 hours is possible.

EDIT: @CriticalThought
Infuriated by my truth bombs, Oscar's thread banned me, so peace. You can live with your delusions. You are not qualified to have a discussion with.

 

[hussain0216]

The idea is to use them to defeat an attacking force, which will be in Pak's territory.

Why is this the idea?

And not destroy an enmass of indian forces on the indian side at the same time preparing a full nuclear assault in case indians wish to escalate after use of Nasr

 

[SQ8]

I’m really keen to see the actual affects of nuclear weapons on both military and population targets as downplayed by the usual Indian loghorrea types here; considering all effects have been documented by actual tests in Nevada and the Atoll and paint a much more sobering picture than “All izz well” 2 bit trolls here.

Nuclear war.. Inshallah!

 

[CriticalThought]

I’m really keen to see the actual affects of nuclear weapons on both military and population targets as downplayed by the usual Indian loghorrea types here; considering all effects have been documented by actual tests in Nevada and the Atoll and paint a much more sobering picture than “All izz well” 2 bit trolls here.

Nuclear war.. Inshallah!

LOLZ!!!! Give yourself a positive rating for this one Oscar And the punchline: the Indians will NEVER attack in reality because they are actually scared to death. All they can do is come to PDF and take undue advantage of our hospitality to virtually realize their dreams of penetrating Pakistani forward defences under a nuclear umbrella

What the contention of the (un)learned member of concentration of armour fails to account for, is the frontage of a typical infantry unit in example Rajasthan-Sindh sector. Where as a platoon of infantry typically will occupy a frontage of about 150 to 200 meters, with a classic 2 up 1 down platoon dispersion formation as an example, a company will occupy a frontage of almost 500 to 600 odd meters with a depth of somewhat similar approximation. The more pertinent part is, deployments will be at section/squad level or platoon level or maybe various combinations, as dunes will be occupied for the reason of being higher ground.

You have just invented a new method of discourse: start at the end. So I will help you with starting at the beginning. A CSD style armored thrust will see armor and mechanized infantry leading the initial assault backed by CAS. Let us assume for argument's sake that Nasr survives the CAS sorties, because otherwise end of discussion. Now, you need to make your position clear. What will be the dispersion in an advancing Indian IBG? Answer this, and we can proceed.

Of course, with the expectation of a preceding artillery barrage with close support right till advance elements reach the range for own weapons to engage, dispersion of even the defending forces is but a given. To add to it, the allocation of Light Anti Tank Weapons (at best able to disable a tank by blowing off a track) remains a norm, but the Heavy ATGMs, are few and dispersed for ATGM crew survivability. For precisely that reason, a tank in say 50 meter inter-se gap, is a laugh, as the probability of both being 'killed' increases. ATGM mobility is still an issue, it is not very easy to maneuver on feet and vehicle borne are way too easy to spot (especially in the area we are talking of if the vehicle does not get stuck in sand first )

You are stuck with a conventional war mentality. I hope this is how Indian planners actually think because incompetence will definitely help us. Answer my question above, and we will see what really happens.

As for what Hellfire's been trying to tell you, army formations are so well dispersed that you will need as many nukes as there are tanks in order to defeat a tank formation, considering the nuke is accurate enough to blow up near a tank. If the nuke's blast zone is even 100m too far, the tank will survive, whereas the tank is likely in motion and practically impossible to target in any case. That's why tactical nukes are an impractical solution. This is one of the reasons why Pakistan has not deployed tactical nukes anyway. Plus the fact that all you will be doing is putting your own population at risk by using nukes inside Pak territory, while also coming under direct threat of a strategic response immediately due to the deployment of SSBNs by India. Pakistani propaganda on tactical nukes is meant for idiots.

What @hellfire is doing is denying reality. And as for accuracy etc, you columns will not have just one tank, they will have many tanks. A miss by 100 m will be a hit within 10 m of some other tank. A series of nukes in the midst of your advancing columns will put them in disarray.

As I said you are not trying to dispute the 7:10 rule, but the concept of the rule of thumb itself, which is plainly stupid.

Rule of thumb is what you glean from practical experience. For example, it's easy enough to tell if one has fever or not by feeling the body temperature. If it's hotter than usual, that's your rule of thumb which suggests the subject has fever. To get an exact reading, you obviously need a thermometer. Now, your argument is, "No, I won't believe I have fever even if I'm burning up unless I get a thermometer to confirm it". That's how retarded your argument is.

The fact is radioactive materials decay. And the 7:10 rule says a blast zone with small nukes quickly dissipates in a few days.

Take the following with an open mind: you devise your own interpretation of the opponent's words, construct a world in your mind, and live in it. So let me bring you back to reality.

I am not arguing about the concept of the rule of thumb, I am arguing the applicability. There are certain preconditions that need to be satisfied when a given rule of thumb is applied. In the case of the 7:10 rule, the very site you quoted originally tells us this:

1. The 7:10 rule is to be applied when direct measurements are not possible.
2. It should be applied only in times of extreme necessity. Such as a temporary excursion out of a shelter.
3. It depicts the scenario only after a single explosion.

Are these preconditions satisfied for advancing Indian columns in the aftermath of a nuclear strike? No!!!!

As for using more nukes, sure you can use more nukes, but it doesn't change the 7:10 rule. All you do is reset the the start time again if you hit the same target. So you hit a target again after 24 hours, then instead of a 2-day wait, now it's a 3-day wait. Most effects are gone within 2 weeks anyway.

500R/hr - 50 - 5 - 0.5
Hour 1 - 7 hours later - 49 hours later - 343 hours later (2 weeks)

At 0.5R/hr, people can go back to business as usual. The army can move in on the 3rd day and clean up the place and hasten the decay process also. Wearing chemsuits, you can move in even sooner in fact. Weather can also help disperse fallout, whereas rain can also wash away fallout.

Even assuming a very large nuke is used that disperses 2000R/hr at hour 1, it will take 2 days to reach 20R/hr, followed by 2 weeks to achieve 2R/hr. Otoh, Pakistani nukes are all small nukes.

There is a lot of stuff to read about the effects of nukes even from a layman's PoV, so I'd suggest doing your own research. Here's one:
https://newatlas.com/survive-nuclear-bomb-shelter/31057/

You are inventing new science here. The 7:10 rule is silent about multiple explosions. Someone will need to actually perform the experiment to determine the applicability in the event of multiple strikes. The above represents pseudo-science based on misunderstanding and misrepresentation.

But there is an even more damning aspect to this. The 7:10 rule explicitly caters of air explosions. It does not account for ground contamination, water contamination, or even nuclear rain. You are incorrectly applying it, which means you are abusing science itself. If this is indeed the thought process of Indian planners, then they are absolute clowns!!!

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

LOLZ!!!! Give yourself a positive rating for this one Oscar And the punchline: the Indians will NEVER attack in reality because they are actually scared to death. All they can do is come to PDF and take undue advantage of our hospitality to virtually realize their dreams of penetrating Pakistani forward defences under a nuclear umbrella



You have just invented a new method of discourse: start at the end. So I will help you with starting at the beginning. A CSD style armored thrust will see armor and mechanized infantry leading the initial assault backed by CAS. Let us assume for argument's sake that Nasr survives the CAS sorties, because otherwise end of discussion. Now, you need to make your position clear. What will be the dispersion in an advancing Indian IBG? Answer this, and we can proceed.



You are stuck with a conventional war mentality. I hope this is how Indian planners actually think because incompetence will definitely help us. Answer my question above, and we will see what really happens.



What @hellfire is doing is denying reality. And as for accuracy etc, you columns will not have just one tank, they will have many tanks. A miss by 100 m will be a hit within 10 m of some other tank. A series of nukes in the midst of your advancing columns will put them in disarray.



Take the following with an open mind: you devise your own interpretation of the opponent's words, construct a world in your mind, and live in it. So let me bring you back to reality.

I am not arguing about the concept of the rule of thumb, I am arguing the applicability. There are certain preconditions that need to be satisfied when a given rule of thumb is applied. In the case of the 7:10 rule, the very site you quoted originally tells us this:

1. The 7:10 rule is to be applied when direct measurements are not possible.
2. It should be applied only in times of extreme necessity. Such as a temporary excursion out of a shelter.
3. It depicts the scenario only after a single explosion.

Are these preconditions satisfied for advancing Indian columns in the aftermath of a nuclear strike? No!!!!



You are inventing new science here. The 7:10 rule is silent about multiple explosions. Someone will need to actually perform the experiment to determine the applicability in the event of multiple strikes. The above represents pseudo-science based on misunderstanding and misrepresentation.

But there is an even more damning aspect to this. The 7:10 rule explicitly caters of air explosions. It does not account for ground contamination, water contamination, or even nuclear rain. You are incorrectly applying it, which means you are abusing science itself. If this is indeed the thought process of Indian planners, then they are absolute clowns!!!

Few "naïve" thoughts:

• The possibility of the direct Indo-Pak confrontation in any domain is negligible
• India is fighting via proxies with diminishing returns
• The more the economic/financial freedom for Pak along with fool proofing the domestic fronts the higher the probability of Pak's returning the "overdue" favors
• India has tons of fault lines too, and they know it well; hence, they're trying to brow beat Pak with various plans
• When Pak's onslaught along the fault lines starts in the real domain they may have to settle for "let it be small but let it be mine". 1947 is an example. Fifty tycoon families (Parsi/Jain/Marwari etc.) control 70% of her wealth and are the ultimate arbitrators
• Even with the deployment of 700K troops and that many informers in the IOK, containing a miniscule number of rudimentarily armed freedom fighters is getting on the their nerves

 

[Hephaestus]

Naive ?

You know what ... The Owner of this forum can very easily block the Indian IP ranges and the Indians will simply vanish.

Thats it. Its That Simple. But they wont do that would they ? Its all about Adsense Money.
Thats why he even created an Indian version ( Yes.. an Indian Forum owned by the owner of defence.pk ) lol

Add to it, that dozens of false accounts are created/promoted to spit venom ( in effect "hypocritically" trying to attract a response ) but speaking otherwise.

My friend, You get what you ask for. Simple.

I'm seriously contemplating a move out of here. This has just become a forum for madarssa educated trolls. Hindu this. Hindu that. Indians should just avoid this crap. There is hardly any discussion or knowledge sharing that's worth it.

 

[Super Falcon]

Arihant might be good but pak also increasing hunter killer subs to take on arihant and we have plans for our own nuke subs dont worry PN us growing day by day INSHALLAH

 

[CriticalThought]

I'm seriously contemplating a move out of here. This has just become a forum for madarssa educated trolls. Hindu this. Hindu that. Indians should just avoid this crap. There is hardly any discussion or knowledge sharing that's worth it.

Translation: The fragile bubble of Indian false bravado bursts on PDF so Indians find it more opportune to waste time else where.

I tell you it's a win-win. You won't be missed. Good riddance and I am proud to play my little part in ousting you. But just for the record, it's not "Hindu this, Hindu that" as you put it, rather it's "Indian this, Indian that". Of course Hindutva ideology seeks to convert every Indian into Hindu, but that's your problem not ours.

 

[Hellfire]

Could be that tactical nukes are not worth the hype, but they cannot be dismissed.

Nobody is dismissing it. Be the moniker you have and think about what is being said.

My 'original' post was to exhibit the fallacy of the persistent belief here of NASR being a super weapon to stop Armoured Divisions.

Somehow, it has become a major trend in PDF to bring everything to the level of NASR and use of Nuclear Weapons at a Tactical level. This has led to a serious embedding of the view that the advent of TNWs on subcontinental field, is an assurance of security. Whereas, it merely brings down the threshold. I shall elaborate on it a bit more subsequently.

The datum was posted to exhibit the requirement of number of weapons to effectively neutralize an armoured division in a theoretical manner without getting in to specifics. One merely needs to correlate the numbers required as calculated, to the industrial capacity of the nation to reprocess and enrich and also the availability of nuclear material in first place. The latter is severely limited. So, the number of nuclear devices that a nation can make quickly is limited. Of course, I do give the members the right to self delude and assume that it is available on demand and wish.

There were two very 'interesting' points made by the Pakistani CriticalThought member as under -

a. The Pakistan army has more resources than you see in the annual budget of the State of Pakistan. Where do you think we got 100+ Thunders from? Our defence is seen as being of a strategic nature by China.

b. Typical Indian delusions regarding an enemy that has been amassing nuclear material for over a decade.

When a member makes such statements, one can understand just how seriously they are to be taken.

You can appreciate the laughs I get when member asserts Pakistan Army has greater budget than whole of Pakistan. No wonder they are forever on verge of default. And they have been amassing since over a decade. Wonder what India has been doing since 1964?

If tactical nukes meant nothing, than our army chiefs would not say that we will fight under a nuclear umbrella. There would also not be statements like 'we will call their nuclear bluff'.

What, in your opinion, is a Nuclear Umbrella? And what do you take away from the bold, what do you understand of the statement?

Now calling their nuclear bluff could mean two things - one that it is useless or that Pak won't go nuclear so easily. I find the latter more feasible. Maybe @hellfire can comment on this.

That is your assumption.

I have been at odds with members of my fraternity for sometime over whether Pakistan is rationally irrational (hence their threat of nuclear weapons every other day and across the media) or whether they are genuinely irrational. The majority (and my view) is of view of former, that they are deliberately being irrational. And their achievement of drawing funds from US in garb of support to WoT over the past decade and a half, while strengthening their Nuclear Command and Control from same funds meant for same purpose (by playing on fears of Jihadis gaining control) exhibits the skillful and effective employment of this tactic to achieve their aims.

What I know of Pakistani Armed Forces, does not correlate with irrationality. Having said that, the TNWs are improbable, meant for domestic consumption and hardly to be taken seriously militarily. But they are very effective diplomatic tools, as nations around the world genuinely take them crazy enough to do something as stupid as use them.

Had they been willing to use the TNWs, you would have seen an unprecedented spike in violence in Kashmir. What does that tell you? Present level of violence is hardly a fraction of the peaks of 90s.

I see. I haven't heard of it being made for conventional strike though.

Let me put another point for you.

The smallest device we have, is for a 155 mm Caliber Artillery Gun.

Suppose we declare a First Use policy as they have. What will you, as a commander, assume when India fires the first artillery gun?

If you look at the statements emanating from Pakistan, from MIRVs to Cruise Missiles to NASR, everything is nuclear this or that. By doing so, they are already negating their own defences because while Indian policy calls for No First Strike, the mere fact that there is a line in India's Nuclear Doctrine which states that 'the use or threat of use of Nuclear, Biological, Chemical & Radiological Weapons' is enough to indicate the possibility of India mistaking a conventional rocket/missile attack as a nuclear attack. Such a move clearly shows the reckless behaviour of the opposite side.

India has clearly delineated it's weapon's systems for these very reasons. eg BrahMos has been kept exclusively for conventional strikes.



Further, there are plenty of Arm Chair Generals on this thread, and posting to every idiotic claim/assertion is a painful task.

Refer to Effects of Nuclear Weapons by Samuel Glasstone & Philip J Dolan. It remains a good work on the Nuclear Weapons and understanding the whole concept.

Also, militarily, as a commander, I would like to use my nuclear weapon in a counterforce strike, to achieve a 'breakthrough'. There is always a height where the radioactive fallout is minimal. The data for nominal bomb (called as a 20 Kt bomb because of use in Japan and data for the same is available) is available. Please be advised to go through that.

With an air burst at the ideal height, the primary casualties will be from shock and thermal effects of a nuclear weapons. With a negligible fallout (fallout is made up of debris and dust sucked up in near surface/surface blast which settles back on ground and gives rise to NIGA in long run in soil in near vicinity where the sand/debris is redeposited on land), as a Commander, I shall be able to take my troops in their MOPP and exploit the breach.

Just some pointers. Do the research.

Regards

And there is member who is busy calling all trolls and claiming results of tests. Let the member cite references of Genetic Defects/Incidence rate of Malignanies in Japanese survivors of Nuclear Strike. That too, is a very interesting study, the longest current study going on.

 

[Hephaestus]

Of course Hindutva ideology seeks to convert every Indian into Hindu, but that's your problem not ours.

Hindutva ideology eh! Coming from a land of bigots which was solely created for a particular religion that's rich.

Good riddance and I am proud to play my little part in ousting you.

Congrats!

 

[Hellfire]

So Pivot Corps move in within 2-3 days after declaration of war and Strike Corps within 5?

The last I heard was the SC moving in within a week.

 

[Hephaestus]

Had they been willing to use the TNWs, you would have seen an unprecedented spike in violence in Kashmir. What does that tell you? Present level of violence is hardly a fraction of the peaks of 90s.

Wonderfully put.

 

[GHALIB]

Hindutva ideology eh! Coming from a land of bigots which was solely created for a particular religion that's rich.

Congrats!

Well said.

 

[Hellfire]

You are stuck with a conventional war mentality. I hope this is how Indian planners actually think because incompetence will definitely help us. Answer my question above, and we will see what really happens.

Sigh.

And I thought we were talking of conventional war in a nuclear backdrop. Head back to your very first quoting me addressing a point to an Indian member. Go through all your posts. Understand the intent.


If it is non-conventional chill then .... you are in Australia

Recall the reference to accumulating material for over a decade? What do you think India has been doing since 1950s and especially after 1964?

Simple query: If NASR was a big deal in Indian calculations as you claim, why have you not used the situation to settle Kashmir equation yet?

Oh btw, I saw you shied away from commenting on the thread where I tagged you on photographs of Pakistani victories? What happened'?

Wonderfully put.

My Dear Sir.

I never comment on topics I have never dealt in/handled my self/been formally trained in.

The Pakistanis on PDF, even those who are trying here to drive in a point of the horrors of Nuclear War, forget that their championing Nasr as a solution is reinforcing the misconception, thereby increasing the likelihood of the stupidity gaining traction in national psyche. My post was to undermine this fallacy, thereby reinforcing the fact that it is not an option.

regards