What's new

If India does a Surgical strike in Pakistan, how would/should Pakistan respond??

Status
Not open for further replies.
We have a first nuclear arms use policy and the surgical strike means a full blown nuclear attack on india.They should know how many bhartis will die in mumbai,delhi,calcutta etc before doing a surgical strike.

But than there shall not be the pakistna in any form.
 
Too much of Orgasm after 4 humiliating defeat and loss of half country after shameless surrender of 70000 soldiers to 5000 indian forces.

Hi,

You can't live on your past performances---. This time we don't have 180 million people stabbing our military in the back---plus we don't have any shortage of weapons either.
 
Hi,

You can't live on your past performances---. This time we don't have 180 million people stabbing our military in the back---plus we don't have any shortage of weapons either.

And India is same since 1971. That is what you want to say?
 
And India is same since 1971. That is what you want to say?

Hi,

Use your brains---would you please---. India had full access to its supply line in east Pakistan at that time as compared to our foorces. Do you want me to explain further or are you intelligent enough to catch on.
 
Just remember one thing----we did Kargil when we were at our weakest----we are at peak strength at this time according to the needs of our military.

This time---we are not looking for a nuclear war with india---we will stay conventional----you have no clue about the capabilities----. Just because the military has put lid on information---does not mean that they don't have certain items for conventional war---.

The only weak link is Nawaz Sharif-----.

So I beg to differ. You are not at your peak strength.......second, you couldn't stay conventional for more than two weeks.....and third, NS isn't a weakest link. He just knows where REAL victory can come from and long term. It's economically driven and once Pakistan runs the course for the next 5 years, no India or Afghanistan or anyone else would get into a conflict. The game would be over.

But if there is a serious conflict lasting more than 2 weeks.....you can be rest assured that there would be escalation from the Pakistani side. The result for both India and Pakistan wouldn't be pretty. They would both go to the stone age. Hopes of ever seeing a Pakistan that's going to be an economic power and European - Dubai like...will never come out true.

So while both sides have hawk like people, you need people like NS to resolve things peacefully and keep marching towards the ultimate destination. That is Pakistan as an economic power house that can build or buy 5th gen planes at will and will never be touched by a foe again. To me, this is much better than a war right now which would weaken everything.
 
Surgical strikes won't do any good as the training camps can be moved easily. Name and shame is our best tool to isolate Pakistan, catching these yahoos alive would serve us better. Even if it requires use of chemical weapons. Not sure what are the constraints/policies that stop us from doing so already.
 
So I beg to differ. You are not at your peak strength.......second, you couldn't stay conventional for more than two weeks.....and third, NS isn't a weakest link. He just knows where REAL victory can come from and long term. It's economically driven and once Pakistan runs the course for the next 5 years, no India or Afghanistan or anyone else would get into a conflict. The game would be over.

So while both sides have hawk like people, you need people like NS to resolve things peacefully and keep marching towards the ultimate destination. That is Pakistan as an economic power house that can build or buy 5th gen planes at will and will never be touched by a foe again. To me, this is much better than a war right now which would weaken everything.

Hi,

Sir----Nawaz Sharif is a gutless coward-----. Unless you are born in the Sharif family---I think I know them a little better from my resources than you ever will.
 
Hi,

Sorry---I am not good at guessing right now.

No problem bhai jaan.

modern military's weakest link is the airforce.

you will cry to hear how badly we were beaten in the air in 1971. So bad that we had to run and hide our fighter bombers to friendly countries.

No matter how bad India is, but they beat us in Kargil through air.

Gen. Mush didn't account for precision bombing by IAF.

India has superior AWACS capability and they can definitely dance around our limited number of F-16s and JF's.

So no, we were weak in Kargil and we still are when it comes to conventional war.

Peace
 
This is the kind of loose talk that will get us in trouble with international agencies.

What do you think Modi is looking for?

Not a real war.

This is part of psyops by RAW to keep on pinching on the jingoists on Pakistani side until they jump.

We'll not be defeated militarily. We were and we can only be defeated psychologically.

And you my friend just showed the weaker side by talking about "retaliation".
I understand you completely, but let me remind you that as a nation we will not sit around and watch IAF jets fly over over our air space. As for my "weaker" side, I don't have a weak view as you have a very liberal and pacifist view. Your view only happens in fiction, do you think we are bloody idiots to watch IAF jets bomb our land and we do nothing that my friend is talking the weak side.
 
Surgical strikes won't do any good as the training camps can be moved easily. Name and shame is our best tool to isolate Pakistan, catching these yahoos alive would serve us better. Even if it requires use of chemical weapons. Not sure what are the constraints/policies that stop us from doing so already.

I feel same. Assassinating one or two terrorists won't change anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom