India does not retaliate against Pak due to nukes: US expert

[Fuego]

Yeah we are so damn scared of pak nukes that every Indian has made him/her bunker and we are already in it, watching and understanding pakistan through PDF!!

 

[rockstarIN]

This idea of nukes-for-all debunked several times. Right after the nuke experiment, there were Kargil war.

We could have escalated the war with opening other front in case we were not able to get back our land.

Having nukes are one thing that you can't cross some red lines.

 

[senkakudefender]

BMD kya tera baap ki shaadi me band baaja hai?

"The Indian Ballistic Missile Defence Programme is an initiative to develop and deploy a multi-layered ballistic missile defense system to protect India from ballistic missile attacks.
Introduced in light of the ballistic missile threat from Pakistan, it is a double-tiered system consisting of two interceptor missiles, namely the Prithvi Air Defence (PAD) missile for high altitude interception, and the Advanced Air Defence (AAD) Missile for lower altitude interception. The two-tiered shield should be able to intercept any incoming missile launched 5,000 kilometers away.
PAD was tested in November 2006, followed by AAD in December 2007. With the test of the PAD missile, India became the fourth country to have successfully developed an Anti-ballistic missile system, after United States, Russia and Israel. On March 6, 2009, India again successfully tested its missile defense shield, during which an incoming "enemy" missile was intercepted at an altitude of 75 km."

 

[GURU DUTT]

Bakre ki amma kab tak khair manayegi

 

[janon]

You won't completely destroy Pakistan as it is not a very heavily urbanised country but you can bet that India will cease to exist as the central government would not be able to hold the country together with the loss of it's largest urban centres, airbases, naval bases etc.

And what about the loss of pakistan's urban centers, airbases, naval bases, ports etc? Is it easier for India to destroy all of pak's ports, or for pak to destroy all of India's ports? We have large ports in Vishakhapatnam and other places on our east, far away from pakistan. All of pakistan's ports lie a few hundreds Kms from India. Same for naval bases. And airports. And anything else.

When evaluating what is easier for who, try to do so on the basis of facts, not on the basis of which side you want to support. People often assume that it would be very difficult for India to strike pakistan's targets, but for pak, it's as simple as pressing a button, and all of India's infrastructure will vanish. By the way how many ports and naval bases does pak have that India needs to take out, and how many does India have? How many airports and airbases does pak have, and how many does India? How many large urban centers does pak have, and how many does India. At what distances do all these lie, from the other country?

After karachi harbour and the upcoming gwadar is destroyed, what are pakistan's options of shipping? If India loses Mumbai and Karwar, there is still Vizag (a major base), and several other big and small bases throughout its coastline.

Can pakistan survice the loss of Karachi and Lahore? Most of pakistan's productive population is concentrated in punjab and sindh. On the other hand, India has several urban centers, and then the rural population (which, if I'm not mistaken, still accounts for more than half its population).

If it is difficult for India to hit all the vital points of pakistan's strategic assets, it is ten times more difficult for pakistan, for many reasons. One, India has ten times as many of those assets. Two, India is a very large country, and most of its landmass is far away from pak. Three, whatever missiles or nukes pakistan can build, India can build those too, in greater numbers, because its economy is ten times bigger, and growing. Four, the size of our armed forces ensures that we can destroy more of their missiles and aircrafts (the delivery mechanisms) than they can destroy ours.

Besides, it's not like India will disintegrate as soon as the govt in delhi is gone. We are not like neighboring countries, or Arab countries held together by one dictator or strong center of power. There is a democractic tradition in India, and our political representation starts from the grassroots. The country is not held together by the army or the GoI. All the state level govts, and district level govts are representing people's will. Political parties and the system of politics permeates throughout society, at all levels. So even if New delhi is wiped out in a mushroom cloud, our representative political machinations will continue. And we will sweep the nuclear dust, and rebuild another central govt among ourselves. Another Indian govt will rise from the ashes, with intellectuals and politicians from every state contributing to a new capital and a new city. India and its civil institutions are more enduring than a government or a capital city. India is not held together by New delhi or the army headquarters, but by its states and its people. Unlike neighboring countries.

So all this fanboyism of "pak will destroy India with nukes", or that it will be mutual destruction, is just wishful thinking. Both sides will lose a lot, but only one side will cease to exist. And that side will not be India, "the ancient, the eternal and the ever new".

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

And what about the loss of pakistan's urban centers, airbases, naval bases, ports etc? Is it easier for India to destroy all of pak's ports, or for pak to destroy all of India's ports? We have large ports in Vishakhapatnam and other places on our east, far away from pakistan. All of pakistan's ports lie a few hundreds Kms from India. Same for naval bases. And airports. And anything else.

When evaluating what is easier for who, try to do so on the basis of facts, not on the basis of which side you want to support. People often assume that it would be very difficult for India to strike pakistan's targets, but for pak, it's as simple as pressing a button, and all of India's infrastructure will vanish. By the way how many ports and naval bases does pak have that India needs to take out, and how many does India have? How many airports and airbases does pak have, and how many does India? How many large urban centers does pak have, and how many does India. At what distances do all these lie, from the other country?

After karachi harbour and the upcoming gwadar is destroyed, what are pakistan's options of shipping? If India loses Mumbai and Karwar, there is still Vizag (a major base), and several other big and small bases throughout its coastline.

Can pakistan survice the loss of Karachi and Lahore? Most of pakistan's productive population is concentrated in punjab and sindh. On the other hand, India has several urban centers, and then the rural population (which, if I'm not mistaken, still accounts for more than half its population).

If it is difficult for India to hit all the vital points of pakistan's strategic assets, it is ten times more difficult for pakistan, for many reasons. One, India has ten times as many of those assets. Two, India is a very large country, and most of its landmass is far away from pak. Three, whatever missiles or nukes pakistan can build, India can build those too, in greater numbers, because its economy is ten times bigger, and growing. Four, the size of our armed forces ensures that we can destroy more of their missiles and aircrafts (the delivery mechanisms) than they can destroy ours.

Besides, it's not like India will disintegrate as soon as the govt in delhi is gone. We are not like neighboring countries, or Arab countries held together by one dictator or strong center of power. There is a democractic tradition in India, and our political representation starts from the grassroots. The country is not held together by the army or the GoI. All the state level govts, and district level govts are representing people's will. Political parties and the system of politics permeates throughout society, at all levels. So even if New delhi is wiped out in a mushroom cloud, our representative political machinations will continue. And we will sweep the nuclear dust, and rebuild another central govt among ourselves. Another Indian govt will rise from the ashes, with intellectuals and politicians from every state contributing to a new capital and a new city. India and its civil institutions are more enduring than a government or a capital city. India is not held together by New delhi or the army headquarters, but by its states and its people. Unlike neighboring countries.

So all this fanboyism of "pak will destroy India with nukes", or that it will be mutual destruction, is just wishful thinking. Both sides will lose a lot, but only one side will cease to exist. And that side will not be India, "the ancient, the eternal and the ever new".

To destroy PAkistan, we just need to destroy the major cities of Punjab and Sindh. Lahore, Karachi, Islamabad,Rawalpindi and may be a couple of others.

The rest of the provinces will declare independence anyway. Hence, we don't need more than 10 nukes for Pakistan to cease to exist.

 

[UKBengali]

@janon Calm down mate

India cannot take 100 Pakistani nukes and survive.

You will lose much more than Delhi.

Think of your twelve largest cities for starters. Major airbases, ports, naval bases could all be destroyed. Army may already be severely weakened having fought the Pakistanis.

My point was that both countries would be committing suicide to even think of engaging in a nuclear war so that option is not on the table.

To destroy PAkistan, we just need to destroy the major cities of Punjab and Sindh. Lahore, Karachi, Islamabad,Rawalpindi and may be a couple of others.

The rest of the provinces will declare independence anyway. Hence, we don't need more than 10 nukes for Pakistan to cease to exist.

You would need 4-6 of your kT nukes to destroy each large Pakistani city.

 

[Markus]

I disagree with this.

There is absolutely no need for India to attack Pakistan.

India just needs to carry out covert operations against Pakistan via special forces.

If Pakistan decides to escalate, then India will then get a right to bring in the infantry.

 

[ExtraOdinary]

@janon Calm down mate

India cannot take 100 Pakistani nukes and survive.

You will lose much more than Delhi.

Think of your twelve largest cities for starters. Major airbases, ports, naval bases could all be destroyed. Army may already be severely weakened having fought the Pakistanis.

My point was that both countries would be committing suicide to even think of engaging in a nuclear war so that option is not on the table.



You would need 4-6 of your kT nukes to destroy each large Pakistani city.

What makes you think all the 100 nukes will be used in war . I agree it will be mutual suicide but the chance of India surviving>Pakistan just because of the difference in size of the landmass.

 

[cloud]

For all.....

What happens after nuclear war starts, nukes will be the story for a day or 2.. India and Pakistan both loose some cities. Then what?? Conventional force(whole Indian military force) will still be there and dominating anything...

but after the nukes....We bomb any given area at will for decades.. Any type of big construction will be bombed as soon as it finishes....No river, dams, bridge, electricity, cellphone... India stops all the river water supply to Pakistan , whole pakistan turns into desert in 1 decade..Population already reduced to just a few millions after 2 decades.. Still they will be fighting for jihad... Jindabad lad of pure...

 

[r3alist]

india may well be worried that in the face of conventional superiority pakistan's only choice is to lower the nuclear threshold so as to scare india....not a strategy i am that comfortable with i have to say...

 

[Pulsar]

I disagree with this.

There is absolutely no need for India to attack Pakistan.

India just needs to carry out covert operations against Pakistan via special forces.

If Pakistan decides to escalate, then India will then get a right to bring in the infantry.

More potent a threat than a nuclear war is the water war. Stop all water going into Pakistan and its curtains. Nothing grows in deserts you know!

But that of course, is inhuman. But then, so is a nuclear war!

 

[r3alist]

For all.....

What happens after nuclear war starts, nukes will be the story for a day or 2.. India and Pakistan both loose some cities. Then what?? Conventional force(whole Indian military force) will still be there and dominating anything...

but after the nukes....We bomb any given area at will for decades.. Any type of big construction will be bombed as soon as it finishes....No river, dams, bridge, electricity, cellphone... India stops all the river water supply to Pakistan , whole pakistan turns into desert in 1 decade..Population already reduced to just a few millions after 2 decades.. Still they will be fighting for jihad... Jindabad lad of pure...

nuclear fall out will probably leave both countries crippled, iran and bangladesh will feel pain too.

 

[Markus]

More potent a threat than a nuclear war is the water war. Stop all water going into Pakistan and its curtains. Nothing grows in deserts you know!

But that of course, is inhuman. But then, so is a nuclear war!

Water diversion in such a way that water flow into pakistan decreases drastically can have international implications!

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

@janon Calm down mate

India cannot take 100 Pakistani nukes and survive.

You will lose much more than Delhi.

Think of your twelve largest cities for starters. Major airbases, ports, naval bases could all be destroyed. Army may already be severely weakened having fought the Pakistanis.

My point was that both countries would be committing suicide to even think of engaging in a nuclear war so that option is not on the table.



You would need 4-6 of your kT nukes to destroy each large Pakistani city.

India is too big for Pakistan to be able to destroy. Pakistan will not be able to destroy the areas to the South of India to the extreme east and north-East.Even the island of Lakshwadeep and Andaman & nicobar will survive.

By then India will make sure that Punjab and Sindh have been smoked which will be easy considering their size and proximity to the Indian border.

Point being, Pakistan will cease to exist and India will cease to exist as we know it today.