The Cold Start Doctrine Watch.

[Secur]

Finally you showed your inertia. Suspected it sir! I told you, am ridiculing your own countrymen for suggesting nuke will be deployed by Pakistan if Indians come. You have not read posts prior to ones you have been quoting. I like it. That's why am surprised about Think Tank tags right now. Before shooting off I thought as a think tank you would have tried to analyse why am I writing what I am.

And its not Indian 'invincibility' ...... no not at all.

There will no TNW strike without any conventional warfare first , why should there be ? The whole notion and the usual " Pakistan will nuke Indians when the first cross the border " is irrational and foolish . We have the seventh largest army in the world for God's sake and we have more than enough to deter/fight the Cold Start in the current form and deployment , The Nasr is a future safeguard against enhanced form of the doctrine , if the conventional forces of Pakistan fail to deter/fight the adversary . I have said to consider it as the final warning before we all go MAD . Consider it a sort of gradual escalation , the other side though so much lesser thresholds due to its conventional disparity and geographical vulnerability . If the army fails to dislocate/free the initially captured ( 50 km inside Pakistan is a lot of area because of its geography and maybe may even cross a redline ) by Indians , only then the TNW can be brought into picture . A weapon of last resort before the last resort measure .

 

[Secur]

I have said it earlier in my posts - the nuclear retaliation is inbuilt into the system and is free of poltical interference. The ultimate authority is with PM no doubt - but in case of a nuclear strike India may strike across the board with the intent to destroy existing strike/second strike capability of Pakistan/China.

Well its funny to say the least and sheer madness and naivety to believe that . Without any danger to the Indian existence and integrity , the command will chose to sacrifice its citizens , because of IBG's being nuked in Pakistan's territory whilst invading it , seriously ? The PM and the democratic setup , you so seem to pride yourself on , will have no say in the matter and ask the army to not risk the citizens and consider other options to control the situation , just because of a doctrine . Actually , the nuclear command and control authority doesn't work like that at all , what if a nuclear strike doesn't even affect Indian soldiers ( falls somewhere else ) and even then a massive retaliation is ordered because its built-in mechanism is in place , just because of the doctrine , the entire subcontinent is put to rest ? What if its a false alarm ? What if its a conventional/accidental launch ? You are assuming irrationality on behalf of decision makers , I will not . With every strike , the nuclear escalation is upped and ultimately ends with no logical winners . The best way to ensure that you do not lose is to not play .

P.S As for some areas would survive , yes they will , its true for both side , only that both will not exists in the same state and wouldn't remain a republic/union and the ones alive will wish for death seeing the radioactivity and other wonders of nuclear fallout . The unacceptable damage is inflicted .

 

[Alpha1]

working on a new thread with a possible damage of Nuclear war b/w Indo-pak

When Pakistan will hit 35-40 Indian cities

India will hit 60-65 Pakistani cities

*Total Deathtoll
*Total Financial damage
*After math

Year=2020

I can help you in this thread i have experience analysing Indo-pak Nuclear exchange scenario

 

[Star Wars]

Well its funny to say the least and sheer madness and naivety to believe that . Without any danger to the Indian existence and integrity , the command will chose to sacrifice its citizens , because of IBG's being nuked in Pakistan's territory whilst invading it , seriously ? The PM and the democratic setup , you so seem to pride yourself on , will have no say in the matter and ask the army to not risk the citizens and consider other options to control the situation , just because of a doctrine . Actually , the nuclear command and control authority doesn't work like that at all , what if a nuclear strike doesn't even affect Indian soldiers ( falls somewhere else ) and even then a massive retaliation is ordered because its built-in mechanism is in place , just because of the doctrine , the entire subcontinent is put to rest ? What if its a false alarm ? What if its a conventional/accidental launch ? You are assuming irrationality on behalf of decision makers , I will not . With every strike , the nuclear escalation is upped and ultimately ends with no logical winners . The best way to ensure that you do not lose is to not play .

P.S As for some areas would survive , yes they will , its true for both side , only that both will not exists in the same state and wouldn't remain a republic/union and the ones alive will wish for death seeing the radioactivity and other wonders of nuclear fallout . The unacceptable damage is inflicted .

So you expect Pakistan to merrily nuke Indian IBG's one by one while we twiddle our thumbs ? you can't be serious or even naive enough to believe that crap ...like it or not.... thats what the doctrine states any attack on Indian soil or Indian soldiers using nuclear weapons will be met with a nuclear response ... i don't get how that is so difficult to swallow..

Those numerous if's and buts don't help in any way...there are numerous possibilities

 

[Bang Galore]

Do you expect the SPD to sit quiet whilst the first TNW is being launched ? No , they will get ready to launch missile at their disposal and prepare for use it or lose it scenario and be able to launch at a moments notice . Wonder what do not you understand about the final warning to save both countries .

Wonder what it is that you understand. Launching a tactical missile while having Strategic ones ready looks good on paper. Do you actually believe that such preparations will remain unnoticed.? Or unanswered? Maybe you think that you chaps are the sole repositories of intelligence. Regardless of whether they are ready or not, you still will risk either massive retaliation or local. If the retaliation is massive, Pakistani forces will still be at risk. If the retaliation is local, Pakistan's dilemma is acute. What do you actually do in response? Lob a single or a couple of nukes into India? With an ABM in place how do they know with any certainty that they will get past it? The other option would be to go the whole hog, essentially guaranteeing suicide by using a tactical weapon very early on in the conflict. The question, once again, what exactly does the tactical weapon do?

The best way to ensure that you do not lose is to not play .

That would be in Pakistani hands then. Not to make any move within India that might cause India to so retaliate.

 

[rockstarIN]

Wonder what it is that you understand. Launching a tactical missile while having Strategic ones ready looks good on paper. Do you actually believe that such preparations will remain unnoticed.? Or unanswered? Maybe you think that you chaps are the sole repositories of intelligence. Regardless of whether they are ready or not, you still will risk either massive retaliation or local. If the retaliation is massive, Pakistani forces will still be at risk. If the retaliation is local, Pakistan's dilemma is acute. What do you actually do in response? Lob a single or a couple of nukes into India? With an ABM in place how do they know with any certainty that they will get past it? The other option would be to go the whole hog, essentially guaranteeing suicide by using a tactical weapon very early on in the conflict. The question, once again, what exactly does the tactical weapon do?



That would be in Pakistani hands then. Not to make any move within India that might cause India to so retaliate.

Very much sensible post.

nuke = strategic. You can't make it a tactical weapon at all.

 

[Secur]

So you expect Pakistan to merrily nuke Indian IBG's one by one while we twiddle our thumbs ? you can't be serious or even naive enough to believe that crap ...like it or not.... thats what the doctrine states any attack on Indian soil or Indian soldiers using nuclear weapons will be met with a nuclear response ... i don't get how that is so difficult to swallow..

Those numerous if's and buts don't help in any way...there are numerous possibilities

Of course , this is what happens when you start considering arguments in isolation and not read it in full . I said that Pakistan will opt for a tactical nuclear strike only when its threshold(s) are crossed , it will fight conventionally before . Though , retaliatory nuclear strikes after the initial Pakistani one will just keep upping the escalation ladder for both countries until the worst happens , isn't it simple ? Not the doctrine again , we are all past that here ! Whatever appears impractical/unrealistic is difficult to swallow . Otherwise you can start by explaining me the logic of sacrificing Indian citizens to implement any Cold Start because of a piece of paper on which the doctrine is written or just understood in the mind of strategists - tactical nukes exists , you just have to chose your response .

Wonder what it is that you understand. Launching a tactical missile while having Strategic ones ready looks good on paper. Do you actually believe that such preparations will remain unnoticed.? Or unanswered? Maybe you think that you chaps are the sole repositories of intelligence. Regardless of whether they are ready or not, you still will risk either massive retaliation or local. If the retaliation is massive, Pakistani forces will still be at risk. If the retaliation is local, Pakistan's dilemma is acute. What do you actually do in response? Lob a single or a couple of nukes into India? With an ABM in place how do they know with any certainty that they will get past it? The other option would be to go the whole hog, essentially guaranteeing suicide by using a tactical weapon very early on in the conflict. The question, once again, what exactly does the tactical weapon do?

That would be in Pakistani hands then. Not to make any move within India that might cause India to so retaliate.

Even today both country's missiles are ready to go at 15 minutes notice by expert estimations according to what I have read @Oscar . During the crisis time , the time to " prepare to launch " will significantly come down . Think of it now , this information is available in the public domain . Now what is hard to understand about that the SPD can order its strategic nukes to be ready to " go hot " whilst launching a tactical one and checking Indian response , you have the same intelligence now/then of course , what advantage does it give you ? You had the same intelligence in the previous four encounters where we would have gone nuclear . You know the adversary is going nuclear , can you prevent it ? No , you can just retaliate but it results in lose-lose situation at its logical end . I told you about the unanswered thing . Regardless of what you believe , the Indian forces are going to face a massive dilemma before even crossing the border , not knowing the vague thresholds and hoping to fight a war inside it . What gives them the guarantee that the thresholds remains static and it cant be crossed by mistake and in the fog of war or both . Not a thing . The sole premise of Cold Start to fight a war without giving an adversary a chance/reason to go nuclear is flawed , since that variable keeps changing or remains unknown except for the boys at SPD . Pakistan will be at risk ( threshold crossed and nothing more to lose ) when its forces decide to use a tactical nuclear weapon and expect India to withdraw or keep continuing until there is no more India or Pakistan . Indian ABM is a decade or two away from going operational and Pakistan's MIRV has been in development ( according to the reports ) since 2004 , that is really not going to be a major headache . The effectiveness of such systems even for technologically advanced nations is well known ( 50% for low tech enemies like North Korea with limited resources and launch points ) , read about it .

Why cross the border and risk crossing the red lines in the first place is in the Indian hands actually . You are going to start the whole thing in the first place . Not to do anything that might cross a threshold (s) and cause Pakistan to retaliate .

 

[Bang Galore]

Why cross the border and risk crossing the red lines in the first place is in the Indian hands actually . You are going to start the whole thing in the first place . Not to do anything that might cross a threshold (s) and cause Pakistan to retaliate .

My point is similar. Why do something in India & risk India crossing into Pakistan. Pakistan cannot be the sole arbiter of what constitutes escalation nor can Pakistan be allowed to decide the level of permissible escalation. A massive terrorist attack on Indian soil can and will be considered to have crossed a threshold. That argument has no end.

We are only opening up the argument of whether there is any real space for tactical nukes in a shallow Indian strike & what might be the response to any such use. As for your dismissing of the ABM as not realistic, that's your opinion & you are welcome to it. However the question here is whether you are wiling to bet your country on it. A single Indian retaliatory strike after a tactical nuke use by Pakistan would still pose that question. Is the reason a single strike has been used a warning that India has confidence in an ABM system? Maybe, maybe not. Still a risk. Doubt is all there needs to be.

 

[Star Wars]

Of course , this is what happens when you start considering arguments in isolation and not read it in full . I said that Pakistan will opt for a tactical nuclear strike only when its threshold(s) are crossed , it will fight conventionally before . Though , retaliatory nuclear strikes after the initial Pakistani one will just keep upping the escalation ladder for both countries until the worst happens , isn't it simple ? Not the doctrine again , we are all past that here ! Whatever appears impractical/unrealistic is difficult to swallow . Otherwise you can start by explaining me the logic of sacrificing Indian citizens to implement any Cold Start because of a piece of paper on which the doctrine is written or just understood in the mind of strategists - tactical nukes exists , you just have to chose your response .



Even today both country's missiles are ready to go at 15 minutes notice by expert estimations according to what I have read @Oscar . During the crisis time , the time to " prepare to launch " will significantly come down . Think of it now , this information is available in the public domain . Now what is hard to understand about that the SPD can order its strategic nukes whilst launching a tactical one and checking Indian response , you have the same intelligence now/then of course , what advantage does it give you ? You had the same intelligence in the previous four encounters where we would have gone nuclear . You know the adversary is going nuclear , can you prevent it ? I told you about the unanswered thing . Regardless of what you believe , the Indian forces are going to face a massive dilemma before even crossing the border , not knowing the vague thresholds and hoping to fight a war inside it . What gives them the guarantee that the thresholds remain static and it cant be crossed by mistake and in the fog of war or both . Not a thing . The sole premise of Cold Start to fight a war without giving an adversary a chance/reason to go nuclear is flawed , since that variable keeps changing or remains unknown except for the boys at SPD . Pakistan will be at risk ( threshold crossed and nothing more to lose ) when its forces decide to use a tactical nuclear weapon and expect India to withdraw or keep continuing until there is no more India or Pakistan . ABM is a decade or two away from going operational and MIRV have been in development ( according to the reports ) since 2004 , that is really not going to be a headache . The effectiveness of such systems even for technologically advanced nations is well known .

Why cross the border and risk crossing the red lines in the first place is in the Indian hands actually . You are going to start the whole thing in the first place . Not to do anything that might cross a threshold (s) and cause Pakistan to retaliate .

Isn't cold start about destroying Pakistan's conventional capability rather than taking and holding territory . or are you saying Pakistan has set the threshold so low that it would use nukes in the event of a break through in your lines , in that case that would be irresponsible ..

as for nukes....if nukes are used in sufficient quantity..its game over for the whole world , not just India and Pakistan . I had a friend who is a microbiologist he told quiet clearly even small amount of radiation is enough to reduce worlds food production by 30-40% . that is actually far far worse than it sounds . read up on Stalingrad during world war 2 if you want to get the gist .

 

[Secur]

My point is similar. Why do something in India & risk India crossing into Pakistan. Pakistan cannot be the sole arbiter of what constitutes escalation nor can Pakistan be allowed to decide the level of permissible escalation. A massive terrorist attack on Indian soil can and will be considered to have crossed a threshold. That argument has no end.

We are only opening up the argument of whether there is any real space for tactical nukes in a shallow Indian strike & what might be the response to any such use. As for your dismissing of the ABM as not realistic, that's your opinion & you are welcome to it. However the question here is whether you are wiling to bet your country on it. A single Indian retaliatory strike after a tactical nuke use by Pakistan would still pose that question. Is the reason a single strike has been used a warning that India has confidence in an ABM system? Maybe, maybe not. Still a risk. Doubt is all there needs to be.

Lets agree on something . It is one thing to fight a proxy war ( we both do ) and another to cross the border for an all out war or limited conflict . I hope you understand that , I do not want any country to go to war because there's nothing to gain and everything to lose for both . But even in my argument , I never said that Pakistan will alone decide the permissable escalation or level of thresholds , remember a threshold is based on many things and spreads along different spectrums , it can vary for every country depending on what does it have to lose and its vulnerabilities . Yours are high and ours are low for a reason . Its not static nor false and I have seen members assume both . Islamabad will not go nuclear for no reason , you have to cross a red line first , that its suicidal to go MAD at first Indian crossing the border is for naive to believe .

Yes I know , however it is my opinion that the whole argument of fighting a war inside nuclear threshold or under control is flawed . I do not think that you can achieve your objectives whilst keeping things under check . Because you have to cripple the adversary's war machine first and that is alone to make it insecure and start considering nuclear strikes before it comes to " use em or lose em " . No , I am not dismissing the ABM shield's potential , it poses a threat but its effectiveness is very limited . I intended to type " major " headache there , the initial draft however got published first . Mate , if you see the pattern , Pakistan is developing as per reports (MIRV) and already employing countermeasures on Shaheen 1A , a response is being developed looking at the pattern . Pakistan is willing to bet everything if its existence and integrity is at stake , that is why it went nuclear in the 90's . There would always be doubts and dilemmas , let there be no denial .

 

[Secur]

Isn't cold start about destroying Pakistan's conventional capability rather than taking and holding territory . or are you saying Pakistan has set the threshold so low that it would use nukes in the event of a break through in your lines , in that case that would be irresponsible

Now we are talking . Yes , this is the one of the objectives envisioned in the doctrine without giving Pakistan a reason/need to go nuclear , does it make sense ? Crippling the country's conventional war fighting ability is enough to crossing a threshold , passing which poses a threat to its non conventional ability and is an equivalent to put the country's at enemy's mercy and no Pakistan Army cant afford to let it come to that , its simply unacceptable . It isn't irresponsible when it comes to national security and the country's existence and integrity .

 

[Star Wars]

Now we are talking . Yes , this is the one of the objectives envisioned in the doctrine without giving Pakistan a reason/need to go nuclear , does it make sense ? Crippling the country's conventional war fighting ability is enough to crossing a threshold , passing which poses a threat to its non conventional ability and is an equivalent to put the country's at enemy's mercy and no Pakistan Army cant afford to let it come to that , its simply unacceptable . It isn't irresponsible when it comes to national security and the country's existence and integrity .

I don't think its enough , unless the existence of your country is threatened using nukes is nothing but irresponsible considering the massive dangers it poses for the entire world . destroying conventional military means destroying the military enough for it to pose a threat to India . Keeping and holding territory inside Pakistan is something India will not even dream of doing .. Destroying conventional capability is in no way a threat to the existence. You will still have the military necessary to defeat terror outfits as full scale invasion is out of the question for India or any of its neighbours.

 

[Secur]

I don't think its enough , unless the existence of your country is threatened using nukes is nothing but irresponsible considering the massive dangers it poses for the entire world . destroying conventional military means destroying the military enough for it to pose a threat to India . Keeping and holding territory inside Pakistan is something India will not even dream of doing .. Destroying conventional capability is in no way a threat to the existence. You will still have the military necessary to defeat terror outfits as full scale invasion is out of the question for India or any of its neighbours.

You are making me laugh now , boy . What do you mean that it isn't " enough " ? You seriously expect Pakistan to take India's assurance/guarantee for its existence and integrity ? You want your country to set my country's thresholds ? Its funny even talking about it or in my case typing and you well actually believe it . Whatever you assume/intend is valid for you , not for us . Using nuclear weapons will not be considered irresponsible ( there are no morals in this business first of all , to make it clear ) if the country's conventional forces aren't able to fight/deter the Indian invasion or its capabilities are crippled/the war machine is done-with because the Islamic Republic of Pakistan will then hypothetically be at enemy's mercy and unfortunately for you , we cant let it come to that because the next to be threatened will be its non conventional forces effectively bringing the whole equation to " use em or lose em " . Believe it or not , but the destruction of conventional capability and by extension its ability to use non conventional ability - a necessary prerequisite for Indians to achieve their objectives in Cold Start poses a direct threat to Pakistan's existence and integrity .

 

[Star Wars]

You are making me laugh now , boy . What do you mean that it isn't " enough " ? You seriously expect Pakistan to take India's assurance/guarantee for its existence and integrity ? You want your country to set my country's thresholds ? Its funny even talking about it or in my case typing and you well actually believe it . Whatever you assume/intend is valid for you , not for us . Using nuclear weapons will not be considered irresponsible ( there are no morals in this business first of all , to make it clear ) if the country's conventional forces aren't able to fight/deter the Indian invasion or its capabilities are crippled/the war machine is done-with because the Islamic Republic of Pakistan will then hypothetically be at enemy's mercy and unfortunately for you , we cant let it come to that because the next to be threatened will be its non conventional forces effectively bringing the whole equation to " use em or lose em " . Believe it or not , but the destruction of conventional capability and by extension its ability to use non conventional ability - a necessary perquisite for Indians to achieve their objectives in Cold Start poses a direct threat to Pakistan's existence and integrity .

its not assurance its basic common sense , India should be mad to try to destroy or destabilize Pakistan

 

[Secur]

its not assurance its basic common sense , India should be mad to try to destroy or destabilize Pakistan

There's no sense or logic applied in war , I can assure that these things doesn't work like you think . I was really surprised to see that last post of yours . Actually , now with the ever increasing warheads and robust delivery systems , one would be mad enough even to cross the border for whatever reasons , the stakes are very high and no one can predict anyone's response .