That was not under US pressure, but rather the immaturity of the leadership at the time.
Why going ' MAD ' won't work for India ?
- Thread starter Indo-guy
- Start date
That was not under US pressure, but rather the immaturity of the leadership at the time.
Lol that's what you guys always claim ...
( I am just kidding ..please , don't get angry ! )
Well, I rarely claim things until Im sure of it. the "you guys" attitude has led to many misunderstandings and mistakes made by people with those ideals.
Umair Nawaz
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2012
- Messages
- 13,407
- Reaction score
- -20
- Country
- Location
Indians r already mad.
gslv mk3
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2012
- Messages
- 13,840
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
about what ?
Thəorətic Muslim
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2012
- Messages
- 5,006
- Reaction score
- 17
- Country
- Location
You know ....
Why not just start a war and get this $Million question out of here?
We'll see how the International Markets respond to India being a waste land.
Pakistan wiped off the map, with radiation sweeping down to India, west to Iran, maybe North?
Why not just start a war and get this $Million question out of here?
We'll see how the International Markets respond to India being a waste land.
Pakistan wiped off the map, with radiation sweeping down to India, west to Iran, maybe North?
Kompromat
ADMINISTRATOR
- Joined
- May 3, 2009
- Messages
- 40,366
- Reaction score
- 416
- Country
- Location
"A Pakistani threat to use a TNW on its own soil against Indian military targets -- killing at the most a few tens of our soldiers -- would be obviously more plausible than the Indian counter-threat of "massive retaliation", which involves destroying multiple Pakistani cities and the deaths of millions of civilians.
With Pakistan's second-strike capability likely to cause equal damage in India, India's obviously rational (and historically ultra-cautious) decision makers are unlikely to prevail in a MAD chicken game with Islamabad."
With Pakistan's second-strike capability likely to cause equal damage in India, India's obviously rational (and historically ultra-cautious) decision makers are unlikely to prevail in a MAD chicken game with Islamabad."
Muradk
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,403
- Reaction score
- 2
Yes very true: The sheer size alone is no guarantee of success but survival yes, India is a big country. All boils down to this having a NW gives you a slight advantage over a bigger state they will think twice before jumping the fence that's it.
The SC
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2012
- Messages
- 32,233
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
He thinks it is a grenade!!!It is about time that we relook at our nuclear policy, but many of the arguments in this article aren't really valid.
India is in the unenviable position of being the only country in the world that faces three different kinds of credible nuclear threats. As a result, creating a single nuclear policy that can respond all the different threats is a highly complex challenge.
India's nuclear threats come from 3 different actors -
China:
The most rational player in the Indian nuclear stage. China's nukes are mainly a lever against US aggression but will at a pinch be used against India. China will nuke India either as a reprisal against Indian strike or to stop Indian conventional movement into too much of Chinese territory. Or it can nuke military or civilian targets as a precursor to a full scale invasion (despite its avowed No First Use policy - but who cares about policy in wartime?). Given the fact that currently China is superior to India in conventional strength, the first case is unlikely. And India's MAD based massive retaliation posture actually is a decent foil against potential Chinese first strikes.
India would actually be "mad"to abandon NFU - any preemptive strike against China would invite a devastating retaliation.
Pakistani Army:
The nuclear goal for the Pakistani army is to protect against a massive incursion of Indian conventional forces into Pakistani territory. This is where MAD falls short - because a countervalue Indian strike in response to a Pakistani tactical nuke is overkill and I don't think the Indian politicians have the balls to authorize such a strike. There is an additional problem with massive retaliation - the moment there is a Pakistani nuclear attack on Indian forces, the global diplomatic community will definitely go into overdrive to pressurize the Indian gov to not retaliate. So here we need a graded response mechanism - you baby nuke us, we baby nuke you and so on. But there needs to be one more critical addition - any response to Pakistani (army) nuclear attack will invite a Counter Force response. So the Indian nuke will target to cause disproportionate damage to armed forces installation. This disincentivizes the Pakistani army from attacks.
Pakistani Terrorists:
The biggest wildcard in the equation. The terrorists (unless stopped by there ISI minders) are not likely to even respond to MAD. They would actually want to provoke a massive Indian attack - this gets them to their martyrdom faster and gets a bunch of innocent Pakistanis & Indians killed to boot. Also, the terrorists are also likely to use dirty bombs when they can't get their hands on a nuclear device. There is not much we can do to here (except for catching them before the attack), but the graded Counter Force response is a workable option - the Pakistani army is incentivized to control the crazies (for whatever that's worth).
So for TL/DR - abandon MAD for a Graded Counter Force response, but retain NFU.
PS: Why the hell does the author think that a tactical nuke will kill "at the most a few tens of our soldiers"?
The SC
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2012
- Messages
- 32,233
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
If your government has the same foolish tought, then you'll be wipet out before being able to use your full force.
Just think, you have 500 million people incapacitated with famine, Pakistan has only to hit your elite cities and you are back to stone age, with some few hundred years to get rid of the fallouts on your agriculture for example. So what would you be doing, eating each other eventhough infected with radiations.
Think before talking about wiping out a nuclear country with more advanced nuclear heads than yours.
On top of it, do you seriously think that China will sit and look? or will it wipe you out before, just after your first move with the first nuclear warhead detonated.
Even in a conventional environment where you think so much of yourselves, Pakistan is no small player, and backed by more than a billion muslims who will see to it that you are wiped out of the face of earth, mostly for the responsable ones amongst you, but the whole of India will pay the price of any such foolishness.
Kompromat
ADMINISTRATOR
- Joined
- May 3, 2009
- Messages
- 40,366
- Reaction score
- 416
- Country
- Location
Pakistan is raising a Special Response Force (SRF) which is a dedicated 'asset protection' force under Strategic Planning Division (SPD) for guarding and protecting 'installations of of national importance'. This security force is given specialist training to protect and handle Pakistan's strategic assets and installations.
Precisely sir, NWs are a 'weapon of deterrent'.
I think you guys jumped fence in Kargil in 1999 !! we all know the END result don't we?
Chinese-Dragon
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 33,932
- Reaction score
- 52
- Country
- Location
Yes, and in order to be a deterrent, the other side must believe you are willing to use it.
Pakistan's nukes work because India believes that Pakistan will use them.
Similar to how China in the 1960's was preparing to "fight and survive" a total nuclear war with the USA, since at that point they clearly had more to lose than we did, and we would have a huge population left.
Similar threads
