What's new

Wikileaks: India unlikely to deploy Cold Start against Pakistan

. .
why on earth would India want to start a war with Pakistan? if a lot of the Pakistani members on this forum are to be believed, India is already subjecting Pakistan to a covert warfare through its alleged support of Baloch insurgents, TTp etc, and by the looks of it, doing a fairly successful job as well.....

If India is really behind all this, it is achieving its goals without sacrificing the lives of its soldiers.....maybe this is the real "cold start" and the actual doctrine is just a smoke screen.

think about it.....
 
.
Actually Pakistan does not hold an offensive doctrine and its forces are prepared to hold showdown against India in Kashmir. If India expands the war, then it expands it beyond the metrics of our goals. In that case it invites a nuclear attack.

Haha you're actually suggesting we let an invasion happen just to keep our noses up? You can't invoke our egos to save yourself from a nuclear attack, if you go to war with Pakistan.

Actually Pakistan does not hold an offensive doctrine and its forces are prepared to hold showdown against India in Kashmir

You do not have offensive doctrine, but violate Shimla agreement to respect the sanctity of the LOC mutually agreed by both the countries.

You do not have offensive doctrine, but still refuse to endorse the Non-Aggression Pact as suggested by senator Kerry during his pakistan visit.

Actions speak louder than words.

In that case it invites a nuclear attack.

And you will live happily ever after!!! Is this what a fairy tale. Think about the repercussions buddy.

you're actually suggesting we let an invasion happen just to keep our noses up?

You are conceding defeat even before there is any hostilities. Can't your forces thwart the invasion. It is supposed to be a mighty one.. Oh i understand, you invariably mean your forces are not a mighty one without nuclear weapons. I got it now.
 
.
i didnt bother reading you entire post all it said was.. .nuke.nuke.nuke..bla bla..bla ..but im curios on this part.. you seem to know more about Indian nuclear capability than most of our strategists ...answer me one thing ...what you said in bolded part was true...then why in HELL India would opt for NFU policy ...or is it just your assumptions..?? or our strategists are bunch of retard's... im just curious ...:what::what:

Actually I'm pretty sure India's NFU is a lie. India too will not be shy from using nukes when our forces cross into Srinagar one day. So yes, that only makes our first use policy more eager and more urgent. We have to use it before India is given the chance to use it.
 
.
why on earth would India want to start a war with Pakistan? if a lot of the Pakistani members on this forum are to be believed, India is already subjecting Pakistan to a covert warfare through its alleged support of Baloch insurgents, TTp etc, and by the looks of it, doing a fairly successful job as well.....

If India is really behind all this, it is achieving its goals without sacrificing the lives of its soldiers.....maybe this is the real "cold start" and the actual doctrine is just a smoke screen.

think about it.....
It has been theorized. In fact we are confident that India won't start a war. They have a doctrine, we have a doctrine. Simple as that. The use of nukes only comes in if there is a war.

The theory goes that the real battle footing has been achieved for India through Afghanistan. With the wikileaks confirming that at least Afghanistan - at the Presidential level - is in fact behind supporting the MAIN guy - Bugti - against Pakistan then - tying up India to him isn't a far stretch.

So yes, why would India go to war against Pakistan whereas its main objective is to keep Pakistan boiling, not at war, not failed, not successful. Just simmer at the appropriate level so we are too busy to do anything to India.

Terrorism has yielded far better results for India than any war could have.
 
. .
You do not have offensive doctrine, but still refuse to endorse the Non-Aggression Pact as suggested by senator Kerry during his pakistan visit.

Actions speak louder than words.

The wikileaks clearly give the reasons for that refusal. Historically India has been pushing us to sign the NFU pact and we are the ones who have been pushing India to sign a Non-Aggression Pact. However this time around the agreement only stipulated that we would be the ones halting aggression to India through Kashmir and India would be given a free hand to conduct its hostilities through Afghanistan.

The Non-aggression pact is a lot more comprehensive than the NFU and it should be done - India won't agree to it in its entirety.
 
. .
The wikileaks clearly give the reasons for that refusal. Historically India has been pushing us to sign the NFU pact and we are the ones who have been pushing India to sign a Non-Aggression Pact. However this time around the agreement only stipulated that we would be the ones halting aggression to India through Kashmir and India would be given a free hand to conduct its hostilities through Afghanistan.

The Non-aggression pact is a lot more comprehensive than the NFU and it should be done - India won't agree to it in its entirety.

India won't agree to it in its entirety

Your government rejected the Non-Aggression Pact because, it assumed India would reject the pact.

Please sign the CTBT & NPT assuming, India would sign it.;)
 
.
Pakistan will opt to respond with nukes if Indian army makes an incursion into some village across the Punjab border under the guise of attacking a militant camp. Pakistan's stated deterrence is disproportionate attacks.

Enough with the Nuclear bluff!

You seriously doubt your generals' ability to think rationally so much Asim?

Nuclear? lol! Do you even know what that means?

I'm sure that your generals have at least as much sanity left in them to know that the day they nuked India, will be last day of Pakistan.

Don't doubt their intelligence so much, Asim. :no:
 
.
Well part of psy-op called "wiki leaks" to deform opinions with deliberate disinformation. First the denial of cold start then wiki leaks..any one can expect that and move on.
 
.
The word I used was confrontation, not war. India blinked, Pakistan didn't.




Actually time and time again articles are filled with Pakistan's missile preparedness and readiness, I don't say it the world does.

Pakistan is of no match to India,economically and militarily.
I don't say it,the world does.
;)
 
.
Pakistan is of no match to India,economically and militarily.
I don't say it,the world does.
;)

And let me guess, the world consists of Indians. Here you have an American cable stating that they doubt that India can launch an attack against Pakistan, so clearly the world does not believe that its only you. Actions speak louder than words, and clearly all India has done is TALK TALK. You tried to outmanoeuvre us several times deployments but they were checked by counter deployments. Whether you guys like it or not, Pakistan is immune to a military strike from India.
 
Last edited:
.
The audacity with which you guys talk of using nukes is unbelievable.

thats because these guys dont believe their army, air force or navy and that is because they dont value human lives. but in return they expect the enemy to use rubber bullets.

Cold start doctrine if exist cannot be deployed against Pakistan in particular. the reason is the entire border is completely surveyed by SAMs and Cold Start can be done only by Heavy lifters. SAMs and heavy lifter combinations wont work. if India try to neutralise those SAM site in the first wave even then cold start cannot be deployed bcos airforce would scramble its jets and the BVR capable fighters would take down those lifters very easily.

but it may work in the case of China with huge geographical area..
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom