It doesn't change much on the ground. And there is nothing that can be done now.
Where did I claim it would immediately change anything?
The above should be done to immediately demonstrate our capabilities to still protect our sovereignty in the face of a grave existential threat. A hostile nation has just violated international protocols and law on our doorstep and you would have us twiddle thumbs??
It would be madness to NOT build up our troops and shut the airspace at the very least.
It would also test Modi and declare the gravity of the situation to the world. The minute the airspace is closed, he will be squeezed. A full state of Cold War is very much a reasonable option given our apparently somewhat inferior military situation, the point being we are not completely incapable of anything.
Without a show of force and intent, what's to stop these madmen marching over the LOC?
I'm a huge supporter of IK but he has only 48 hours to do the right thing here.
Nope. USA is not going to WW 3 over Cyprus. So is the USSR. They will squeeze your balls so hard
Of course. Silly us. You're always right I've noticed simply because you declare an outcome that is against Pakistani interests, or if none is available, then you declare the outcome that would annoy as many Pakistanis as possible. This methodology makes you right by default every time, especially in hypothetical scenarios and especially without any evidence.
I keep forgetting to apply your doctrine to all historical, present or future scenarios - it would make my life easier.
Regarding this particular hypothetical scenarios, NATO or at least US would certainly intervene on Turkey's side at that point in time and to thwart communist forces - I mean, they did so regularly, even siding with your biggest Muslim ideological enemies to do so. Didn't US side with Pakistan to stop USSR in Afghanistan just "the other day"?? Why do you insist the cold war doctrine only would ever work for Your specific agenda?