Pakistan has 90 Nuclear Warheads (2009) according to UK media

[indian_warrior]

Where this increasing gap in conventional weapons give India an edge, the same aspect increases the possibility of using Nuclear Weapons from our side. When you know your opponent has a gun and he is weak at muscles, he is more likely to use his gun instead of fighting bare handed if you indulge in a fight with him. This aspect keeps India away from indulging into a conventional war which on paper would be won by India. I think India only stopped from crossing the border (although it made up its mind at least 3 times in the past decade) considering the fact that Pakistan will have to use its Nuclear Weapons sooner on India than India would have to use them on us. When Pakistan would know we are not able to hold war for another day, we would rather turn the lights off for India before it goes off for ourself.

All the chest thumping in Pakistan will stop with One phone call from big daddy USA.

 

[karan.1970]

I agree with rest of your post...However Karan i do not think that there would be anything left to fire by the attacker(whoever chose to have the first go)...

If i have to nuke Pakistan i will ensure that i use all of my weapons in one go as i very well know that they will retaliate with full force...I will not wait for them to attack my military installations(the way i did) and then go after their cities(who knows i will not get that chance)...I will just use all my weapons in one go and then pray that i manage to knock off their capabilty to strike back....

Funny that my 2000th post is about a nuclear holocaust, but here goes...

India has a no 1st use policy which means that in all probability if there is a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan, it will be initiated by Pakistan. Unless Pakistan conventionally beats India down and is about to capture Delhi rofl

Now despite a lot of Pakistani members on this board (most of which are living away from Pakistan) believing that one day, Kayani will get upset with Manmohan Singh and lauch a nuke attack on India, this situation will only arise if India has actually captured large parts of Pakistani territory and is about to over run key strategic locations like Islamabad, Karachi or Palkistan's strategic assests like Nuke storage locations or Nuke reactors (extremely low probability)..

Now from a Paksitani mindset, the intent still would not be to commit suicide. At this time, the plan would be to escalate the war so as to enforce a cease fire thru international pressure. Now Pakistan would know that if they take out Delhi or Mumbai, then no matter what the international pressure, India will turn Pakistan's cities into radioactive dust.

However the resolve of India may not be so rigid if the attack was on say the Western command HQ or similar targets and will have a higher probability of showing restraint in retaliation assuming its assured of strong enough punishment (like Denuking) for Pakistan for being the nuclear aggressor

Now if there are miscalculations and Pakistan decides to go after Indian cities from the word go, then you have your worst case scenario.. Or if India does not take the 1st attack (despite being on a military taget) lying down and razes some similar structure/location in Pakistan and the escalation takes place, then again its back to worst case scenario.. But my take is that the 1st option of 1st strike by Pakistan followed by International intervention and denuking of Pakistan will be the most likely result of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.

 

[deckingraj]

In terms of Area, Russia is the largest country of the world and therefore, has low nuclear storage density as compared to United States. (by nuclear storage density, I mean number of weapons stored in one 1 kilometer) If 100 bombs are dropped on Russia, analytically, those 100 bombs will neutralize less stored atomic bombs in comparison to the number that will be destroyed in America as the same result. Russia has lot more chance to have more of its nuclear weapons intact as compared to United States. Therefore perspective of survivability is in the favor of Russia and not USA. But Russia still has more nuclear weapons and this aspect suggests there must be some other reason of building such large number of weapons.

Not entirely true...Russia former USSR had to take on NATO so their higher number is somewhat explainable....Obviously i will not take on just USA but the whole of Nato and vice-versa...In fact if i go by you logic than it should be US who should have more weapons becuase there nuclear doctorine assures MAD scenario and in this case not only Russia has more weapons but due to her vastness have more probablity to survive...nuclear stockpile of US was enough to take care of Might USSR and USSR to take care of NATO countries....I am sure you agree conventional edge won't do anything against nukes....In other words if India have any such feeling that it can loose a nuke war with Pakistan she will immediately increase her nuclear arsenal no matter we have conventional edge or not....

I think you missed a feeling that some of our members here in PDF have been conveying when they see India is piling up more and more weapons and the gap of military power is increasing between India and Pakistan. Some of our members have been suggesting to have more Missiles and more nuclear weapons as a counter measure. Sounds stupid at times but this is one possibility to secure ourself from the possible Indian aggression. If Pakistan has 2times more nuclear weapons than India, India would definitely think multiple times before striking Pakistan because it would know the blow-back will be unbearable for it, plus we know we would need some 50 weapons to destroy Indian cities and we have to make sure at least 50 weapons would stay with Pakistan even if India strikes first. I wouldn't be surprised if Pakistan would make and keep 200 weapons with that aspect in view.

Bolded part is where the flaw is ...more nuclear weapons and more missiles will come in handy only if we cross your nuclear threashold.....You are not going to use nukes in limited war(of the nature of Kargil)...so even with 200 nukes your headache of keeping a minimum conventional parity will not go....Secondly Pakistan is not blessed with Strategic depth...So keep 100 or 200 weapons unless and until you don't have realiable TRIAD that fear of loosing all will always be there....In other words if i know that by taking all of you cities i can deny you your retaliation tell me any reason why i would not do that??? A nuke will take away 2-3 or 100 bombs planted in a city, it won't stop at one.if you know what i mean...

To the second bolded part 100 nukes are good enough to stop any imaginary Indian aggression...If one bomb of your was good enough to stop India from siding with Israel to attack your nucleat installation(same members sharing this story as well) than what do you think 100 can do??? Please note that we had our first blast in 1974...At that surely Pakistan was no where close to detonate a bomb....We did not runover Pakistan and we will not...However i understand the concern but buddy those days are over when nations used to runover other nations....and if the adversary is nuclear(even with 10 bombs) that equation will never come...

 

[Windjammer]

All the chest thumping in Pakistan will stop with One phone call from big daddy USA.

That may just prove your down fall, ever heard of the term,
Crying Wolf once too often.

 

[deckingraj]

Funny that my 2000th post is about a nuclear holocaust, but here goes....

However the resolve of India may not be so rigid if the attack was on say the Western command HQ or similar targets and will have a higher probability of showing restraint in retaliation assuming its assured of strong enough punishment (like Denuking) for Pakistan for being the nuclear aggressor

Now if there are miscalculations and Pakistan decides to go after Indian cities from the word go, then you have your worst case scenario.. Or if India does not take the 1st attack (despite being on a military taget) lying down and razes some similar structure/location in Pakistan and the escalation takes place, then again its back to worst case scenario.. But my take is that the 1st option of 1st strike by Pakistan followed by International intervention and denuking of Pakistan will be the most likely result of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.

Dangerous assumptions is all i can say....Here we talk about even a conventional BMD can be mistaken and thus start a nuclear war and you are saying that Pakistan nuke attack on India will go unpunished and we would have time to engage International Community to denuke Paksitan????

Buddy we will not wait for Pakistan nukes to cause devastation here before we launch ours....How would you know that they are going to attack only our Military installations??? How would they know that if they attack only our military installations then we will not retaliate and go for Diplomacy??? If there is a dire need for them to use nukes then there best bet would be to nuke every corner of india and hope our second strike ability if destroyed....Do i make sense???

 

[deckingraj]

^^^^^^^^^^

Oops i just realized i have become a senior member though unfortunately discussing nuke war...

 

[graphican]

Not entirely true...Russia former USSR had to take on NATO so their higher number is somewhat explainable....Obviously i will not take on just USA but the whole of Nato and vice-versa...In fact if i go by you logic than it should be US who should have more weapons becuase there nuclear doctorine assures MAD scenario and in this case not only Russia has more weapons but due to her vastness have more probablity to survive...nuclear stockpile of US was enough to take care of Might USSR and USSR to take care of NATO countries....I am sure you agree conventional edge won't do anything against nukes....In other words if India have any such feeling that it can loose a nuke war with Pakistan she will immediately increase her nuclear arsenal no matter we have conventional edge or not....

This is what I have been trying to tell you that its Pakistan's sense of insecurity and fear of loosing a conventional war that we have more nukes. It is the fear, the sense of insecurity that has made us build more nuclear weapons than India and the similar conventional gap exists between Russia and USA and which is Russia's reason of having more nuclear weans. Regarding conventional weapon scenario, let me address in the second part.

Bolded part is where the flaw is ...more nuclear weapons and more missiles will come in handy only if we cross your nuclear threashold.....You are not going to use nukes in limited war(of the nature of Kargil)...so even with 200 nukes your headache of keeping a minimum conventional parity will not go....Secondly Pakistan is not blessed with Strategic depth...So keep 100 or 200 weapons unless and until you don't have realiable TRIAD that fear of loosing all will always be there....In other words if i know that by taking all of you cities i can deny you your retaliation tell me any reason why i would not do that??? A nuke will take away 2-3 or 100 bombs planted in a city, it won't stop at one.if you know what i mean...

To the second bolded part 100 nukes are good enough to stop any imaginary Indian aggression...If one bomb of your was good enough to stop India from siding with Israel to attack your nucleat installation(same members sharing this story as well) than what do you think 100 can do??? Please note that we had our first blast in 1974...At that surely Pakistan was no where close to detonate a bomb....We did not runover Pakistan and we will not...However i understand the concern but buddy those days are over when nations used to runover other nations....and if the adversary is nuclear(even with 10 bombs) that equation will never come...

Pakistan is not at parity with India on conventional defense capability. Do we agree? Having less chances to win a conventional war, we are least likely to wage a war upon India. Regarding Kargil, do you realize how close both the countries were from utilizing their nuclear weapons upon each other? Why have you presumed that in the next conventional war, both the countries will settle the matters like they did in Kargil or any country will let the other country win the war and would not use Nukes because that is being fought with conventional ammunition? There is no lairing in wars and no mile-stone which when crossed, the war will become Nuclear. Any future battle between India and Pakistan will nevertheless end up at Nuclear Conflict and India knows that pretty well and this was understanding on part of India that it refrained crossing the intentional border in 2001 and again on 26/11, even when it knows it has a conventional superiority over Pakistan.

I do not think Pakistan needs to match every Indian move or develop counter conventional potential for every potential India develops. BUT we need every mean that will make sure our Nukes get delivered and the Nuclear attack from our side is completed without any interception in the way.

 

[graphican]

Funny that my 2000th post is about a nuclear holocaust, but here goes...

India has a no 1st use policy which means that in all probability if there is a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan, it will be initiated by Pakistan. Unless Pakistan conventionally beats India down and is about to capture Delhi rofl

Now despite a lot of Pakistani members on this board (most of which are living away from Pakistan) believing that one day, Kayani will get upset with Manmohan Singh and lauch a nuke attack on India, this situation will only arise if India has actually captured large parts of Pakistani territory and is about to over run key strategic locations like Islamabad, Karachi or Palkistan's strategic assests like Nuke storage locations or Nuke reactors (extremely low probability)..

Now from a Paksitani mindset, the intent still would not be to commit suicide. At this time, the plan would be to escalate the war so as to enforce a cease fire thru international pressure. Now Pakistan would know that if they take out Delhi or Mumbai, then no matter what the international pressure, India will turn Pakistan's cities into radioactive dust.

However the resolve of India may not be so rigid if the attack was on say the Western command HQ or similar targets and will have a higher probability of showing restraint in retaliation assuming its assured of strong enough punishment (like Denuking) for Pakistan for being the nuclear aggressor

Now if there are miscalculations and Pakistan decides to go after Indian cities from the word go, then you have your worst case scenario.. Or if India does not take the 1st attack (despite being on a military taget) lying down and razes some similar structure/location in Pakistan and the escalation takes place, then again its back to worst case scenario.. But my take is that the 1st option of 1st strike by Pakistan followed by International intervention and denuking of Pakistan will be the most likely result of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.

Your post is on the same "Das Qadam-Paksitan Khatam" philosophy and also on the basis of cold-start. BUT you are not thinking through the mind of Pakistan here. Did you try to read what did Musharaf said? This is what Paksitan and the people resonsible for controlling the war think. Try to understand and read what we plan and what is our reaction instead of expecting how we should react. It is laughable that you think of striking and winning a war over Pakistan and then you expect Pakistan will not retaliate thinking people would die. And regarding International Pressures, War only start when diplomacy fails and when diplomacy has already failed, how would it stop something? If Cold-Start was that easy, we must have seen something happening between Russia/America or China/India at least.

 

[indian_warrior]

That may just prove your down fall, ever heard of the term,
Crying Wolf once too often.

USA does not have to come to Pakistan for their work done. They just make phone call. Even you have 90 or 900 warheads does not matter.

 

[graphican]

USA does not have to come to Pakistan for their work done. They just make phone call. Even you have 90 or 900 warheads does not matter.

Warning Warning Warning - warrior is obsessed with cold-start.

Indian_warrior, you are going to earn few million deaths on both the sides of the border because of this fool-proof ideology.

 

[Windjammer]

Warning Warning Warning - warrior is obsessed with cold-start.

Not surprised, he's based in Siachen.

 

[graphican]

Not surprised, he's based in Siachen.

But if he is feeling cold, he should be trying to get cozy but not waporized and sucked up to the nuclear cloud. doing so might kill the cold-part but he might not be able to see comfort of wrath either

 

[indian_warrior]

But if he is feeling cold, he should be trying to get cozy but not waporized and sucked up to the nuclear cloud. doing so might kill the cold-part but he might not be able to see comfort of wrath either

I am happy that Indian cold keeping pakistan head hot, restless and scary always.

 

[graphican]

I am happy that Indian cold keeping pakistan head hot, restless and scary always.

Aww sardar jee ea tay tusi ghusa ka kar gaye ho na

I would welcome your thoughts about the topic. Regaridng hala gula and noke-jhonke, there are other sections of PDF where I can taunt you and you can taunt me. Here, lets stay on the topic and try to discuss with topic in mind.

But on the side note, a brain that is not restless or is resting is the "dead brain" because brain is the only part of human body that doesn't rest. If you think you made my mind "restless", i would thank you for making the good effort and keeping me on the pulse of life. I have 100 taunts to revers back but again, its not the forum for that.

 

[indian_warrior]

Aww sardar jee ea tay tusi ghusa ka kar gaye ho na

I would welcome your thoughts about the topic. Regaridng hala gula and noke-jhonke, there are other sections of PDF where I can taunt you and you can taunt me. Here, lets stay on the topic and try to discuss with topic in mind.

But on the side note, a brain that is not restless or is resting is the "dead brain" because brain is the only part of human body that doesn't rest. If you think you made my mind "restless", i would thank you for making the good effort and keeping me on the pulse of life. I have 100 taunts to revers back but again, its not the forum for that.

Sure. Lets get back to the topic.
Nuclear war won't happen. It is like suicide mission. Pakistan can use one time only. After it uses it won't be there. Pakistan knows about it.

If it is not the case why pakistan is buying F-16, ships and other military equipments.