Trump may mount pressure to limit Pak nuclear programme

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Well? How much?

At least 500 advanced nuclear missiles with high yields. At least 200 of which need to be H-bombs. That would give us the ability to wipe india of the face of the Earth. That is the basic requirement.

 

[Solomon2]

Nothing to talk about.

Why not?

How come Israelis aren't taking about Israel's?

Officially Israel doesn't have nukes and unlike Pakistan the Israeli budget is controlled by elected civilians in its parliament, so at least the peoples' opinions are represented and questions of guns vs. butter can be debated.

How come Russians aren't talking about Russia's?

Despite Russia being a secrecy-obsessed autocracy, Russians still talk more about their nuclear weapons and strategies than Pakistanis do.

 

[WaLeEdK2]

Why not?

Officially Israel doesn't have nukes and unlike Pakistan the Israeli budget is controlled by elected civilians in its parliament, so at least the peoples' opinions are represented and questions of guns vs. butter can be debated.
Despite Russia being a secrecy-obsessed autocracy, Russians still talk more about their nuclear weapons and strategies than Pakistanis do.

I think it is far evident on this forum how much Pakistani talks about its nuclear strategy. You've never been to Pakistan. Protection of our Arsenal is the number one concern on the subject. Then it is how and when to us them. The final decision will go through the army chief as it should be.

 

[Solomon2]

At least 500 advanced nuclear missiles with high yields. At least 200 of which need to be H-bombs. That would give us the ability to wipe india of the face of the Earth. That is the basic requirement.

Are you sure 498 bombs wouldn't suffice instead?
And what Pakistani official has ever claimed that this is Pakistan's nuclear weapons policy?
When has it ever been subjected to public debate?
Why, if Mao only needed six nukes to deter India, does Pakistan need five hundred if Pakistan's only purpose is deterrence?
Why aren't Pakistanis asking these questions of their leaders rather than foreigners like me?

I think it is far evident on this forum how much Pakistani talks about its nuclear strategy. You've never been to Pakistan. Protection of our Arsenal is the number one concern...

Not talking about protecting the nuclear fist. Talking about how big the nuclear fist should be - and why Pakistanis aren't aggressively involved in the issue, rather than leave it to others. Do you believe the Zardaris and Musharrafs and Zias are some sort of superior beings who never make errors, can never be wrong, and possess infallible judgment?

 

[Storm Force]

If the americans were going to attack and invade Pakistan, they would have done it by now. Not happening. That only happens to ultra weak nations like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria. Even in Iraq, as super weak as Iraq is, they still managed to kill AT LEAST nearly 5000 american troops. And that's the "officail" figure the neocons admit to. The REAL figure could be many times higher.


By the way, the americans ain't and can't do anything to Pakistan. Trump is all mouth and hot air. If not please come and try. The non-whites in America however may have their life made more difficult though by his election.

USA can bring 99% of the worlds nations to their knees by economic sanctions and political isolation and that certainly includes Pakistan.

China is not the world by ...............YOU better AND stronger having Trump and USA on your side.

You bravado is false

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Are you sure 498 bombs wouldn't suffice instead?
And what Pakistani official has ever claimed that this is Pakistan's nuclear weapons policy?
When has it ever been subjected to public debate?
Why, if Mao only needed six nukes to deter India, does Pakistan need five hundred if Pakistan's only purpose is deterrence?
Why aren't Pakistanis asking these questions of their leaders rather than foreigners like me?

USA can bring 99% of the worlds nations to their knees by economic sanctions and political isolation and that certainly includes Pakistan.

China is not the world by ...............YOU better AND stronger having Trump and USA on your side.

You bravado is false

We've had sanctions of all sorts by the americans since 1990. And we're still here. Thriving and doing good better now than we have ever done. Begging the americans to like us and getting into their good books makes no difference whatsoever. When you are super weak and the they want to destroy you, they will no matter what. Saddam Hussein and the Iraqis are a perfect example of this.

 

[Basel]

Do you believe China will fight a war with US and risk their own devastation just because it has invested few billion dollars in Pakistan? China doesn't even support Pakistan openly on Kashmir and you want them to fight US for you

Do you remember what China did for Korea in 50s when they were infant as a country?

USA can bring 99% of the worlds nations to their knees by economic sanctions and political isolation and that certainly includes Pakistan.

China is not the world by ...............YOU better AND stronger having Trump and USA on your side.

You bravado is false

What most don't understand is that now Pakistani economy is not as much US depended as it was in 90s.

 

[YeBeWarned]

Well? How much?

100 Warheads are more than enough to keep Indians at bay. Pakistan needs to work on its conventional Capabilities along with modernizing its Air Force, Navy and Warhead Delivery Systems .

Do you remember what China did for Korea in 50s when they were infant as a country?

What our Ignorant Indian members don't understand that now US hold less leverage on Pakistan as they have in 90's , they talk how China will risk its Existence to safe Pakistan but the moment US will invade Pakistan, China will jump in and now you have 3 Nuclear States are at war , With China jumping in Russian wont sitting in and India itself will go panic mood cause there will be 1 regional Power and 2 Super Power are at War in their Neighborhood .

 

[Solomon2]

100 Warheads are more than enough to keep Indians at bay. Pakistan needs to work on its conventional Capabilities along with modernizing its Air Force, Navy and Warhead Delivery Systems .

It's estimated Pakistan already has over 100 nuclear warheads and within nine years will have a larger nuclear weapons inventory than China. Furthermore, Pakistan is developing "tactical" nuclear weapons that are small and portable yet apparently are little use in deterrence, since they won't stop an Indian armored thrust more effectively than anti-tank weapons can.

 

[Basel]

100 Warheads are more than enough to keep Indians at bay. Pakistan needs to work on its conventional Capabilities along with modernizing its Air Force, Navy and Warhead Delivery Systems .



What our Ignorant Indian members don't understand that now US hold less leverage on Pakistan as they have in 90's , they talk how China will risk its Existence to safe Pakistan but the moment US will invade Pakistan, China will jump in and now you have 3 Nuclear States are at war , With China jumping in Russian wont sitting in and India itself will go panic mood cause there will be 1 regional Power and 2 Super Power are at War in their Neighborhood .

What many don't understand is that China will not let situation escalate to level where US could directly attack Pakistan, also Pakistanis are not fools they know how to handle situation, at best US could use India with limited war but that to can go out of hands and led to disaster like MAD.

 

[WaLeEdK2]

Are you sure 498 bombs wouldn't suffice instead?
And what Pakistani official has ever claimed that this is Pakistan's nuclear weapons policy?
When has it ever been subjected to public debate?
Why, if Mao only needed six nukes to deter India, does Pakistan need five hundred if Pakistan's only purpose is deterrence?
Why aren't Pakistanis asking these questions of their leaders rather than foreigners like me?

Not talking about protecting the nuclear fist. Talking about how big the nuclear fist should be - and why Pakistanis aren't aggressively involved in the issue, rather than leave it to others. Do you believe the Zardaris and Musharrafs and Zias are some sort of superior beings who never make errors, can never be wrong, and possess infallible judgment?

What the military wants (a sizeable good nuclear Arsenal) is what the far majority of us want. Nothing to discuss or debate. There is no comprise in national security.

 

[YeBeWarned]

It's estimated Pakistan already has over 100 nuclear warheads and within nine years will have a larger nuclear weapons inventory than China. Furthermore, Pakistan is developing "tactical" nuclear weapons that are small and portable yet apparently are little use in deterrence, since they won't stop an Indian armored thrust more effectively than anti-tank weapons can.

Pakistan Strategic matters work in contrast to Indian Strategies .. NASR Tactical Nukes were Direct Answer for Indian Cold Start Doctrine which they initiated after the Mumbai Attacks . I personally think that we don't have to Increase the Numbers of our Nukes , but now its time to put some Focus on Conventional Capabilities , we need a Stronger Air force with around 350-400 BVR capable Fighters , with 6-8 AWAC's and 3 Level SAM Defenses , in Fully Net Centric Environment . For Navy , we Need 10 Frigates , 8-10 SSK's and 2 SSBN's along with 4 DDG's and around 10-12 corvette . with a Separate Naval Arm armed with Flankers and JFT sqs ....

Pakistan right now can not just hold but even Repel Indian Armor at any front , we are Evaluating further new MBT's like Oplet M , and our home grown Project AK-2 will be rolling out soon .. I doubt that Nukes will be used in Indo-Pak war in any near Future Conflict .

What many don't understand is that China will not let situation escalate to level where US could directly attack Pakistan, also Pakistanis are not fools they know how to handle situation, at best US could use India with limited war but that to can go out of hands and led to disaster like MAD.

Exactly, but our Indian members think that whoever start talking ill about Pakistan will instantly Attack Pakistan , as we Refused to release Shakeel Afridi the next thing we see are some Raptor bombing our Air Bases ... US for now does not even have resources to carry or Sustain another war.. let alone attacking a Country with 0.7 Million standing Army with 120 Nukes on stand by .. No one will Attack US by nukes , but as they say " Naam hi Kafi hai " .

 

[Solomon2]

What the military wants (a sizeable good nuclear Arsenal) is what the far majority of us want. Nothing to discuss or debate. There is no comprise in national security.

"The Party and the People are One" - the Communists' approach to cutting off discussion. Yet if minority opinions aren't allowed to be voiced and discussed how do you ever expect to uncover errors and new events that demand change? Will it take disaster after disaster? Catastrophes? Losing a major war? Or is a revolution required?

 

[ashok321]

Do not believe what Trump has said before election:

https://twitter.com/x/status/796800141634117632

 

[Solomon2]

Pakistan Strategic matters work in contrast to Indian Strategies .. NASR Tactical Nukes were Direct Answer for Indian Cold Start Doctrine which they initiated after the Mumbai Attacks .

Really? Official sources, please.

I personally think that we don't have to Increase the Numbers of our Nukes , but now its time to put some Focus on Conventional Capabilities , we need a Stronger Air force with around 350-400 BVR capable Fighters , with 6-8 AWAC's and 3 Level SAM Defenses , in Fully Net Centric Environment . For Navy , we Need 10 Frigates , 8-10 SSK's and 2 SSBN's along with 4 DDG's and around 10-12 corvette . with a Separate Naval Arm armed with Flankers and JFT sqs ....

Pakistan right now can not just hold but even Repel Indian Armor at any front , we are Evaluating further new MBT's like Oplet M , and our home grown Project AK-2 will be rolling out soon .. I doubt that Nukes will be used in Indo-Pak war in any near Future Conflict .

Do you expect that such a force can be justified as mere deterrence, rather than conquest? And if not, do peace-loving Pakistanis get a say?