Why do some Pakistanis think they need ICBM?

[Kamikaze Pilot]

New threads on PDF very soon...

Why do some Indian join Pakistani forums?
Why do some Indians troll on PDF??
Why do some Indians dont eat Beef??
Why do some Indians dont want ICBM with Pakistan?

somebozo's ancestor:

 

[LeGenD]

no they won't. They would be mad to do such a thing pakistan is not iraq or afghanistan nato refused to join the american in 2003 in iraq and all of the nato members including the U.S are friendly towards pakistan.
Why pakistan need ICBMs simple to have a stand off capability against any potential threat and it is the next logical state of development. ICBMs are much harder to intercept since they travel at much higher speeds than intermediate ballistic missiles of the short range ones. I also think pakistan eventually wants ballistic missile submarine. So the submarine could fire their missile out of the reach of indian navy's detection

I agree that US is not interested in attacking Pakistan. Such a move will bring more instability in the region.

However, never underestimate your enemy. Iraq was one of the strongest countries in early 1990s. However, Saddam Hussein wasn't pragmatic and his country paid a hefty price because of it.

ICBM is an expensive venture; we need to grow economically first.

 

[somebozo]

somebozo's ancestor:

Here is the correct one! As my grandfather family migrate into India to settle in Bangalore to be precise...

 

[LeGenD]

Infact, USA lost war against Vietnam despite killing in millions, it lost terribly. Even without ICBMs Pakistan can do extreme damage to if there is a war especially nukes....You might have heard djinn ki jaan totay (parrot) main hai. GSLV is infact an ICBM and Pakistan needs satellite launching capability peaceful purposes. No nation can object on the development of a satellite launch vehicle sir!!!

US lost in Vietnam due to combination of several factors:

1. Geography of Vietnam is not suitable for mechanized thrusts into enemy positions within the mainland. This restricts a state's ability to project overwhelming firepower from the ground in several parts of Vietnam. On top of this, American commanders were terribly restricted in making decisions on their own.

2. American people were not enthusiastic about Vietnam War. When a state's population is against something, it cannot achieve wonders in the battlefield with even the greatest army in the world.

3. Stuff like smart bombs, cruise missiles, computerized systems, stealth aircraft, heavily armored (and advanced) ground vehicles and network-centric coordination among the units, did not exist back then. Therefore, operations weren't highly effective.

4. Vietcong, by itself, stood no chance against American forces in the battlefield. The battle of La Drang made this abundantly clear to them. Therefore, Vietcong changed its strategy to utilizing Vietnamese terrain to its advantage to draw American troops into areas where they could be ambushed.

5. USSR and China got involved and funded Vietcong operations. They provided sophisticated weapons to Vietcong forces to enable them to shoot down American aircraft and helicopters and challenge them better on land.

6. Racial tensions in the US had a trickle down effect on cohesion and discipline of American forces stationed in Vietnam.

Situation is absolutely different now. American War Machine is incredibly resourceful (with greater autonomy) and American public is no longer split on racial grounds. And Pakistan's geography is not like that of Vietnam.

 

[GuardianRED]

Here is the correct one! As my grandfather family migrate into India to settle in Bangalore to be precise...

Sorry your Grandfather family is related to "Charlton heston" ?

 

[denel]

Why do some Pakistanis think they need ICBM?

Do they really have any enemy in any other continent?

When was this idea first stated in public domain? Just who suggested this unnecessary thing?

Man, this is really silly. People in both countries dont have access to clean drinking water and ICBMs man, where are the priorities.
First priority should be population control, clean environment, education and health.
this concept of beating each other up will not get anywhere.

 

[I S I]

Man, this is really silly. People in both countries dont have access to clean drinking water and ICBMs man, where are the priorities.
First priority should be population control, clean environment, education and health.
this concept of beating each other up will not get anywhere.

well, Atom Bomb can control population.

 

[Viper 94]

I agree that US is not interested in attacking Pakistan. Such a move will bring more instability in the region.

However, never underestimate your enemy. Iraq was one of the strongest countries in early 1990s. However, Saddam Hussein wasn't pragmatic and his country paid a hefty price because of it.

ICBM is an expensive venture; we need to grow economically first.

People keep comparing iraq and pakistan, when they couldn't be more different. Pakistan is massive in terms of population and size compared to iraq and invading pakistan will create more instability in the region is putting it very lightly. It would be catastrophic for the entire world.

 

[LeGenD]

People keep comparing iraq and pakistan, when they couldn't be more different. Pakistan is massive in terms of population and size compared to iraq and invading pakistan will create more instability in the region is putting it very lightly. It would be catastrophic for the entire world.

You are correct to an extent.

Look at Syria. A major war in this nation have resulted in a massive humanitarian crises and ISIS benefited tremendously from such instability.

Imagine the magnitude of humanitarian crises that can be result of a major war in Pakistan. Much of the accomplishments in War on Terror will be down the drain, at least in the surroundings.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Well if an enemy has a nuclear sub parks in a continent far away , and it is a thread , that is why

 

[denel]

well, Atom Bomb can control population.

and be depopulated for next hundred year. very short sighted. then again ii am reminded by iqbal's shikwa - education is common but not worthy; he is right, this country is condemned.

 

[That Guy]

Pakistan doesn't need ICBMs, nor is Pakistan thinking about it. While Pakistani military leaders have talked about it in the past, there has been a conclusion that Pakistan does not require them, unless India is able to operate military bases outside of Pakistan's current missile ranges.

Pakistan's strategy is very reactionary, and as long as India doesn't give Pakistan a reason to, Pakistan will not actively develop ICBMs.

 

[risingsinga]

Pakistan doesn't need ICBMs, nor is Pakistan thinking about it. While Pakistani military leaders have talked about it in the past, there has been a conclusion that Pakistan does not require them, unless India is able to operate military bases outside of Pakistan's current missile ranges.

Pakistan's strategy is very reactionary, and as long as India doesn't give Pakistan a reason to, Pakistan will not actively develop ICBMs.

I wish a nukes free planet. A simple mistake can cause devastation for the entire planet and the life on it.

 

[That Guy]

I wish a nukes free planet. A simple mistake can cause devastation for the entire planet and the life on it.

Everyone does, but earth isn't paradise, and humans are stubborn forgetful creatures.

As long as nukes continue to act as deterrents to wars, nuclear states will continue to develop new delivery systems for them.

 

[friendly_troll96]