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".
