Pakistan conducts successful test launches of 4 x Nasr missiles 05 Nov, 2013

[The Deterrent]

i wrote fallout/yeild ===== fallout per yield

That difference is ratios does not really matter, does it? I know that the radiation produced by a TNW will be much higher relatively, but still it won't harm friendly forces ~10 kilometers away instantly. 

Oh you are telling as if they will really hear me and take my advice!
These missiles which they made in 90 are still being tested again and again because they can't simply just make anything bigger and technologically advanced to which Pakistanis can feel proud and by which their country could be recognized internationally advanced.
india tests icbm, Pakistanis they have nothing to do except test a nasr missile and waste some money and time, they launched satellite to mars, hey launch nasr to counter them. Pakistani logic.

I really don't know what to say. Its like comparing apples with horsecrap.

 

[rockstarIN]

I can't believe Indians are so stupid. An indian armour brigade obliterated by Nasr in Pakistani cholistan desert and they think Indian would Nuke whole Pakistan for this. At least, your War planners are much much more smarter and saner than you are and that's why they won't nuke Pakistan.

Who told you we will chose some desert for the thrust?

What if our forces near Lahore?

The same situation came in 2008 where your birds tailing Indian jets, but did not shot down, reason behind is the massive retaliation. Same is the case with nuke too.

 

[The Deterrent]

But you reduced your enemy's threshold as well!

Before it was like Pakistan hits India with a high yield nuke, we hit back with a high yield nuke.

With Nasr in the scene, Pakistan hits India with a low yield nuke, India still hits back with a high yield nuke! Its not like India will be like oh so cute Pakistan hit us with a low yield nuke, lets reply with a small yield nuke as well.

Capability wise, Nasr brings nothing new to the table.

Now there, keep on increasing the nuke replies...what do you get? MAD, right? So, in order to avoid that, we need to avoid initiating the conflict, yes?
Well, there you are. Any sort of full-scale Indo-Pak military conflict deterred.

And Nasr is not about demonstrating a new capability...rather it is a new strategy (in the IndoPak region).

 

[Secur]

I rather see your small nuke attack on Indian CBGs looks good in paper. Nuke is a nuke, will the generals order a nuke strike on Indian Forces fearing that a massive response on their civilian centers including where their family resides?

Not really , the concept of " tactical nuclear weapons " has been present for long before . What is new is going for a " Mutually Assured Destruction " and risking the lives of 1.2 billion Indians for a couple of armored brigade/corps/CBG's , it simple isn't practical to say the least , the doctrine looks good on paper . But when it comes to implementation , the decision makers sure will take this thing into account . The person who fears so much about his family wouldn't even be the one making decision in the first place , talk about a fallacy , you are talking about war and death is inherent to it .

 

[erwineugene]

The yield of a TNW is more than that of a strategic nuclear weapon? How?

It is not necessary that Pakistan will use Nasr as soon as any Indian armored formation crosses into Pakistan. Say it is a Lahore which is the primary target, then the dense city will be advantageous for us instead, as guerilla warfare can be waged there. Point being, no need of using Nasr when conventional forces are enough for the situation.

In case they fail, or are not enough to tackle the assaulting enemy to a large extent, then Nasr comes into play.

Now for those claiming that India will go for an all-out strike: Indian military simply cannot guarantee the complete destruction of all of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal in a single blow. That means that MAD would still happen, which deters India from invasion in the first place.

That difference is ratios does not really matter, does it? I know that the radiation produced by a TNW will be much higher relatively, but still it won't harm friendly forces ~10 kilometers away instantly.

so u r saying that pak has an option of using TNW and it is not the only option for pak against cold start??
is'nt it a benfit for indian excersicing coldstart where pak cannot use the tnw (like population centers close to borders)
and restraining all else where.

 

[Secur]

Who told you we will chose some desert for the thrust?

What if our forces near Lahore?

The same situation came in 2008 where your birds tailing Indian jets, but did not shot down, reason behind is the massive retaliation. Same is the case with nuke too.

Because the other areas are ill suited for heavy mechanized offensives and the terrain favors defense , if you understand the whole thing , that is why the desert and the desert alone is a perfect place for such offensive , because the Pakistanis can take care of any such adventure in other areas just fine . I would say that you have mobilized your forces three times until now and yet chosen not to cross the borders to test Islamabad's resolve , even in Kargil , where all the fighting took place in Indian controlled areas , The IA wasn't to cross International Border and even the Line of Control . Ever thought why ? Shooting down an Indian aircraft which we got a lock on , wasn't going to start a war , now was it ?

 

[rockstarIN]

Not really , the concept of " tactical nuclear weapons " has been present for long before . What is new is going for a " Mutually Assured Destruction " and risking the lives of 1.2 billion Indians for a couple of armored brigade/corps/CBG's , it simple isn't practical to say the least , the doctrine looks good on paper . But when it comes to implementation , the decision makers sure will take this thing into account . The person who fears so much about his family wouldn't even be the one making decision in the first place , talk about a fallacy , you are talking about war and death is inherent to it .

MAD situation will be a dilemma for Pak generals who first order a nuke strike provided we already stated our stance in public.

 

[Secur]

MAD situation will be a dilemma for Pak generals who first order a nuke strike provided we already stated our stance in public.

What would it be for India - a blessing somehow ? Even crossing the borders * which Indian Govt and Army have hesitated three times in the past * will , because the thresholds of the country of Pakistan aren't defined and thus not known clearly - a dilemma in itself .

 

[The Deterrent]

so u r saying that pak has an option of using TNW and it is not the only option for pak against cold start??
is'nt it a benfit for indian excersicing coldstart where pak cannot use the tnw (like population centers close to borders)
and restraining all else where.

Of course not! Pakistan still has a heck of a huge Army and is very well capable of countering the Indian Armored threat to a great extent. But Nasr plugs-in the loophole of the "what if the conventional forces/response is not enough?"

Thats what I clarified above, that if the Cold Start assault takes place against a city, the city's congested constructions would provide enough cover for the anti-armour troops to counter the assault.

 

[rockstarIN]

Because the other areas are ill suited for heavy mechanized offensives , if you understand the whole thing , that is why the desert and the desert alone is a perfect place for such offensive . You know the terrain of Northern Punjab and Gilgit Baltistan ? I would say that you have mobilized your forces three times until now and yet chosen not to cross the borders , even in Kargil , The IA wasn't to cross International Border and even the Line of Control . Ever guessed why ?

1.Why can't the plains of Punjab is an option?
2. Even if it is desert, will Pak risk a nuke exchange for few desert areas which has no much strategic value unlike a city like Lahore or something? It make sense that Pakistan threatens to India in the event of breaking the country into two pieces. It cant stop the war, it is last resort not to disintegrate and India does not wish to disintegrate Pakistan by military force.
3. Kargil decision not to cross LOC is just not only coz of nuke scenario, there were other major reasons like problems in growth rate etc and in that case a mere thrust does not make any value except to convery the message that we will again go all out war like in 1965.

 

[Secur]

@AhaseebA Reply on other thread , mate . I need an article on Pakistani missiles done immediately .

 

[erwineugene]

Now there, keep on increasing the nuke replies...what do you get? MAD, right? So, in order to avoid that, we need to avoid initiating the conflict, yes?
Well, there you are. Any sort of full-scale Indo-Pak military conflict deterred.

And Nasr is not about demonstrating a new capability...rather it is a new strategy (in the IndoPak region).

The thing is war dont follow a logic .........no one calculates (at-least at the tactical level ) TNW s are not taken seriously on par with strategic weps so the mad theory dont apply to them ..atleast in the subcontinent where we can think of military casualties. i mean to say india will not hold back for the fear of tnw but if attacked by n weps(tnw or anything) then logically it has to retaliate with strategic weps

 

[rockstarIN]

What would it be for India - a blessing somehow ? Even crossing the borders * which Indian Govt and Army have hesitated three times in the past * will , because the thresholds of the country of Pakistan aren't defined and thus not known clearly - a dilemma in itself .

Wrong, it is already defined as not to break the country or falling of big cities like Lahore. It is clear.

Nobody will take serious when you threat even for LOC fire.

 

[Secur]

1.Why can't the plains of Punjab is an option?
2. Even if it is desert, will Pak risk a nuke exchange for few desert areas which has no much strategic value unlike a city like Lahore or something? It make sense that Pakistan threatens to India in the event of breaking the country into two pieces. It cant stop the war, it is last resort not to disintegrate and India does not wish to disintegrate Pakistan by military force.
3. Kargil decision not to cross LOC is just not only coz of nuke scenario, there were other major reasons like problems in growth rate etc and in that case a mere thrust does not make any value except to convery the message that we will again go all out war like in 1965.

What do you know about the conventional firepower of Pakistan Army , I am just curious ? Because there in the North , taking the advantage of terrain and the massive conventional power , the army can take care of any such adventure . Learn something about the capabilities of Pakistan army - the most powerful of all three branches of military before bragging about the Elephant's invincibility . The problem arises in the desert where the forces may face the problems and thus the TNW is brought in the picture to take care of " what if the conventional forces aren't enough or are overwhelmed ? " , nobody will order a nuclear strike as soon as the first Indian soldier crosses the border . Trust me , Islamabad will not play by your rules and that is the deal here , which is why you cant decide the thresholds for it . Kargil's decision not to cross any borders and fight inside Indian controlled areas and before it the Operation Brasstacks and after it , the Operation Parakram all failed because of the nuclear deterrence , the threat of a nuclear war was a significant cause , deterring your country from invading in the first place .

 

[The Deterrent]

@AhaseebA Reply on other thread , mate . I need an article on Pakistani missiles done immediately .

Which thread?