What's new

Pakistan's Nuclear Submarine Development | News and Discussions

"Today was a good day for Afghanistan. Bagram prison was handed over to the Afghan government... Finally after many years of effort we have reached a deal." "US control of Bagram was a rallying cry for the Taliban and an important issue for much of the Afghan public," said Kate Clark of the Afghanistan Analysts Network.
"This looks like a victory for Karzai as he has got what he wanted. Bagram was a huge stumbling block before they get onto a long list of other issues to sort out -- and time is of the essence."
Karzai plans to visit Qatar shortly to discuss the proposed opening of a Taliban office in the Gulf emirate as a prelude to possible peace talks.
 
. . .
thx. i think that is better for detterance. more silent than diesel.

what sort of extremism will submarines prevent? as a show of military capability?
 
. . . . . .
are you arguing that european countries are not surrounded by water, seas or oceans and that they have no need for navies? planet is mostly water.
displayimage.php
 
Last edited:
.
are you arguing that european countries are not surrounded by water, seas or oceans and that they have no need for navies? planet is mostly water.
displayimage.php

If the Europeans need navies, when they have a defense treaty with the US.....I think Pakistan has even more reasons to have a stronger Navy as it doesn't have any pact with anyone to defend itself (outside of the Strategic relationship it has with the Chinese).
The Russian bear made you guys have Navies which you've not used much outside of "having it". Pakistan faces a huge foe along with its borders with nukes. Unless both India and Pakistan sign NPT and all, they'll both advance their weapons systems sadly. '

In fact, a strong Pakistani conventional military is better for the world. Because a stronger military delays the possibility of pressing the panic button. That delay will be needed by the world to cool everyone down. Panic is bad. Its just as bad as its in Europe when the Bear starts to make noise while looking to its West if you know what I mean.
 
.
If the Europeans need navies, when they have a defense treaty with the US.....I think Pakistan has even more reasons to have a stronger Navy as it doesn't have any pact with anyone to defend itself (outside of the Strategic relationship it has with the Chinese).
The Russian bear made you guys have Navies which you've not used much outside of "having it". Pakistan faces a huge foe along with its borders with nukes. Unless both India and Pakistan sign NPT and all, they'll both advance their weapons systems sadly. '

In fact, a strong Pakistani conventional military is better for the world. Because a stronger military delays the possibility of pressing the panic button. That delay will be needed by the world to cool everyone down. Panic is bad. Its just as bad as its in Europe when the Bear starts to make noise while looking to its West if you know what I mean.

i dont think having just relationship with US is good defense policy. I think every country need navy.

in cold war advancing weapons didnt cause war (so to speak ... small proxy wars) but created a long peace. Pakistan and India share border so balance of power is less evenly distributed. maybe NPT is best apprach to peace.

i know what you mean by bear!
j9hkrjlbpu683690610.jpg
 
.
why do european nations have navies?


Not all of the European countries have sea going Navy. For example Hungary & Serbia have naval flotillas which operate on the Danube. Swiss Navy operates in Lake Geneva, Lake Constance & Lake Maggiore. Austria & Belarus have no navy at all.

In addition to being nearly as deadly as a nuclear submarine; state of the art hunter-killer diesel-electric submarine can stay submerged for about a week and costs only a fraction of the nuclear submarine to build/or buy & to operate.

Pakistan has no ambition to deploy ICBMS on the submarines or to project naval strength thousands of miles away from her shores; Pakistan is also very short on funds. If Pakistan manages to acquire about 6 submarines of the Scorpion or German 212/214 or equivalent class of Chinese submarines; it would be more than sufficient for her security needs.

Therefore, in my humble opinion, all the debate about nuclear submarine is a waste of time. However, instead of putting on their thinking cap, my countrymen prefer to live in dreamland; hence this pointless debate will probably go on ad-infinitum.
 
.
Not all of the European countries have sea going Navy. For example Hungary & Serbia have naval flotillas which operate on the Danube. Swiss Navy operates in Lake Geneva, Lake Constance & Lake Maggiore. Austria & Belarus have no navy at all.

In addition to being nearly as deadly as a nuclear submarine; state of the art hunter-killer diesel-electric submarine can stay submerged for about a week and costs only a fraction of the nuclear submarine to build/or buy & to operate.

Pakistan has no ambition to deploy ICBMS on the submarines or to project naval strength thousands of miles away from her shores; Pakistan is also very short on funds. If Pakistan manages to acquire about 6 submarines of the Scorpion or German 212/214 or equivalent class of Chinese submarines; it would be more than sufficient for her security needs.

Therefore, in my humble opinion, all the debate about nuclear submarine is a waste of time. However, instead of putting on their thinking cap, my countrymen prefer to live in dreamland; hence this pointless debate will probably go on ad-infinitum.

Agreed, plus the newer AIP systems allow submerged times longer than a week..........6 Submarines with AIP and proper weapons along with 3 Agosta90s will give the navy 9 boats....which is sufficient for coastal and beyond coastal/EEZ duties.
 
.
Not all of the European countries have sea going Navy. For example Hungary & Serbia have naval flotillas which operate on the Danube. Swiss Navy operates in Lake Geneva, Lake Constance & Lake Maggiore. Austria & Belarus have no navy at all.

In addition to being nearly as deadly as a nuclear submarine; state of the art hunter-killer diesel-electric submarine can stay submerged for about a week and costs only a fraction of the nuclear submarine to build/or buy & to operate.

Pakistan has no ambition to deploy ICBMS on the submarines or to project naval strength thousands of miles away from her shores; Pakistan is also very short on funds. If Pakistan manages to acquire about 6 submarines of the Scorpion or German 212/214 or equivalent class of Chinese submarines; it would be more than sufficient for her security needs.

Therefore, in my humble opinion, all the debate about nuclear submarine is a waste of time. However, instead of putting on their thinking cap, my countrymen prefer to live in dreamland; hence this pointless debate will probably go on ad-infinitum.
Correct and agreed but having a 2nd or 3rd strike capability be it in the form of SLBM (ICBM would be too much of-course) or SLCM is not a bad idea at all and Navy should plan for acquiring those systems whenever it becomes feasible.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom