India's Cold Start Is Too Hot

[GUNS-N- ROSES]

Yes and thats the failure of CSD.

read post 133. u r tactical nuclear missile is useless.

 

[JonAsad]

watsoever be yield, use of tactical nuclear weapon by one country is like a giving a free ticket to othr country to bomb u hell back to stone ages. The retaliating country can always say they dint use Nukes first and were forced to use nukes only to save themselves as they feared more nuclear attacks all over country.

so tactical nuclear nukes in present scenario is strict no no.

When cold start is implemented- then we will have the free ticket to use NASR on the large enemy formations to send them back to Narg-and the retaliating country can always say that it was attacked first and it has every right to defend itself with what ever means necessary-

Surely you can use nukes too- but hey isn't NASR doing what having nukes did?- taken away your advantage- creating Nuclear deterrence?- Now the chances of any Cold Hot Start or No start are very slim-
and if its Narg is what you ask for- you may proceed with that flawed Cold start--

 

[JonAsad]

read post 133. u r tactical nuclear missile is useless.

Lol- read post 137- your Cold Start has gone Cold-

 

[Manas]

Very true.. however I feel bewildered at your confidence in your own .."healthy" survival.

Let me tell you a secret and you may find it interesting .

Some right wing hindu organization actually secretly desire a nuclear war with Pakistan.
Being the smaller one its going to the hardest hit and certainly wont survive.

So these hindu organization think ,it'll pave way for the Akhand vahrat , that means Pakistani land becomes India, minus most Pakistanis gone with the nuclear wind.

 

[SEAL]

read post 133. u r tactical nuclear missile is useless.

You have no idea what is CSD.
CSD=limited war without Nukes
As you said in 133 use of tactical Nuke can escalate full scale Nuke war what it means? CSD can't achieve its objectives it is failed.

 

[Areesh]

When cold start is implemented- then we will have the free ticket to use NASR on the large enemy formations to send them back to Narg-and the retaliating country can always say that it was attacked first and it has every right to defend itself with what ever means necessary-

Surely you can use nukes too- but hey isn't NASR doing what having nukes did?- taken away your advantage- creating Nuclear deterrence?- Now the chances of any Cold Hot Start or No start are very slim-
and if its Narg is what you ask for- you may proceed with that flawed Cold start--

Exactly.. Well said Glorious Resolve.

 

[foxbat]

When cold start is implemented- then we will have the free ticket to use NASR on the large enemy formations to send them back to Narg-and the retaliating country can always say that it was attacked first and it has every right to defend itself with what ever means necessary-

Surely you can use nukes too- but hey isn't NASR doing what having nukes did?- taken away your advantage- creating Nuclear deterrence?- Now the chances of any Cold Hot Start or No start are very slim-
and if its Narg is what you ask for- you may proceed with that flawed Cold start--

Is this the 1st Nuclear capable short range missile Pakistan has?? If not then why dont the same argument apply to that missile??

 

[JonAsad]

Let me tell you a secret and you may find it interesting .

Some right wing hindu organization actually secretly desire a nuclear war with Pakistan.
Being the smaller one its going to the hardest hit and certainly wont survive.

So these hindu organization think ,it'll pave way for the Akhand vahrat , that means Pakistani land becomes India, minus most Pakistanis gone with the nuclear wind.

Bring the right wing hindu in power- i want to see the look on their faces after the nuclear confrontation

 

[blackops]

NASR is nothing my friends read this you will get an idea it would be suicidal to use nukes

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strategic-geopolitical-issues/105560-stupidity-goes-nuclear-i.html

 

[JonAsad]

Is this the 1st Nuclear capable short range missile Pakistan has?? If not then why dont the same argument apply to that missile??

The Nukes and other Missiles were to generally stop India from attacking Pakistan in the future-

This NASR is specifically for stopping you from implementing Cold Start-

Now the reason of having NASR as primary to stop Cold Start can be different- May be its cost efficient- Maybe its feasible to fire multiple missiles on large army formation then to fire a single one- The warhead is tactical with less yield than conventional- gives us the advantage to use it on (God Forbade) our soil if need arises-

 

[JonAsad]

NASR is nothing my friends read this you will get an idea it would be suicidal to use nukes

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strategic-geopolitical-issues/105560-stupidity-goes-nuclear-i.html

Knowing how Pakistan will retaliate with NASR- I will say it back to you- it will be suicidal for you to even think of implementing CSD in first place-

 

[Dalai Lama]

When cold start is implemented- then we will have the free ticket to use NASR on the large enemy formations to send them back to Narg-and the retaliating country can always say that it was attacked first and it has every right to defend itself with what ever means necessary-

Surely you can use nukes too- but hey isn't NASR doing what having nukes did?- taken away your advantage- creating Nuclear deterrence?- Now the chances of any Cold Hot Start or No start are very slim-
and if its Narg is what you ask for- you may proceed with that flawed Cold start--

Before Nasr:

- India attacks
- Indian cities get nuked
- India retaliates
- MAD


After Nasr:

- India attacks
- Pakistan nukes Indian troops with Nasr
- Pakistani cities get nuked
- MAD


For me it seems that the Nasr was developed in order to fill the gap, namely speaking: India's conventional advantage and the Cold Start Doctrine. But all it has done is fill a gap which didn't exist in the first place. Your conventional nukes offered much more deterrence against the CSD. The Nasr pretty much allows India to take the risk and assuming the Nasr is used, India then has a perfect excuse to unleash a massive retaliatory nuclear strike.

Either way, when it comes to nukes (no matter which kind) all I can see happening is mutually assured destruction.

 

[GUNS-N- ROSES]

When cold start is implemented- then we will have the free ticket to use NASR on the large enemy formations to send them back to Narg-and the retaliating country can always say that it was attacked first and it has every right to defend itself with what ever means necessary-

Surely you can use nukes too- but hey isn't NASR doing what having nukes did?- taken away your advantage- creating Nuclear deterrence?- Now the chances of any Cold Hot Start or No start are very slim-
and if its Narg is what you ask for- you may proceed with that flawed Cold start--

i would like to burst u r bubble right now.

1. wen u lower u nuclear thresh hold by attacking indian armed forces with tactical nuclear weapon u become the "fall guy" not india. india will be at full liberty to strike at all u r nuclear sites and take out u r nuclear missiles site first simultaneously.

2. Now are u willing to use a tactical nuclear weapon. it is better to threaten a country by saying that they will launch hundreds of missiles simultaneously if it were attacked. so that the enemy country is cautious. now if that is the case wat is the actual utility of u r NASR missile. as i said it is useless as there is nothing called tactical nuclear weapons. if u use it once then be prepared for full scale nuclear war. and if u have to fight nuclear war wats the use of tiny NASR missile wen u have ghauris and shaeens (long range missile).

3. Lastly, if our cold start had gone cold there wouldnt have been so many pakistani members discussing it after all no one discusses "cold" things.

better luck next time at making fun of me.

 

[blackops]

The Nukes and other Missiles were to generally stop India from attacking Pakistan in the future-

This NASR is specifically for stopping you from implementing Cold Start-

Now the reason of having NASR as primary to stop Cold Start can be different- May be its cost efficient- Maybe its feasible to fire multiple missiles on large army formation then to fire a single one- The warhead is tactical with less yield than conventional- gives us the advantage to use it on (God Forbade) our soil if need arises-

but you will have to see indias nuclear policy as well even a low yield nuclear attack will result in massive retaliation from every where (sea land air) that is the reason it will be suicidal to use even a small nuke

 

[foxbat]

The Nukes and other Missiles were to generally stop India from attacking Pakistan in the future-

This NASR is specifically for stopping you from implementing Cold Start-

Now the reason of having NASR as primary to stop Cold Start can be different- May be its cost efficient- Maybe its feasible to fire multiple missiles on large army formation then to fire a single one- The warhead is tactical with less yield than conventional- gives us the advantage to use it on (God Forbade) our soil if need arises-

Some points..

Its just 2 missiles from the same truck.. Isnt it? How different it is from 1 missile each from a truck
A 500 Kg warhead capability does not mean you have to carry a 500 kg nuke warhead. You can have lower yield warheads for any of your missiles
and when you are at a stage of using nuke warheads on you own soil, cost of the missile is the last thing on your mind.

The point I am trying to make is that NASR is not for something which Pakistan did not have earlier. May be its lower cost, but then how many nuclear tipped missiles do you think Pakistan will want to or be able to fire in a real war.. So cost really doesnt have a play here..