What's new

Why has Pakistan not tested a ICBM yet?

Abid123

FULL MEMBER
Jan 1, 2021
1,245
-4
1,710
Country
Pakistan
Location
Norway
Yes the Economy and education should be priority.

Our Economy is barely $300 billion dollars Nominal GDP wise.

Pakistan has a lot of potential. Especially the Textiles and Carpet industry.
We should be doing better than Iran in the carpet industry.

Pakistani Bukhara carpets are world renown.
The size of Pakistan’s informal economy is estimated 56% per cent of our GDP. That is a massive amount. Our total economy in terms of nominal GDP is close 600 billion USD.
 

Abid123

FULL MEMBER
Jan 1, 2021
1,245
-4
1,710
Country
Pakistan
Location
Norway
I was citing wikipedia for Pakistan's Nominal GDP

Economy of Pakistan
You are right bro our “official” nominal gdp is 300 billion USD right now, but once you take into our informal economy it is close to 600 billion USD. An informal economy is the part of any economy that is neither taxed nor monitored by any form of government.
 

GumNaam

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 23, 2016
12,410
-13
17,242
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
I think everyone here knows that Pakistan has the capability to build a ICBM missile. Why has Pakistan not tested one yet? Are there poltical reasons? Maybe international sanctions? Building a MIRV is way way complicated than ICBM. So there is no reason to doubt that Pakistan does not have ICBM technology. Even North Korea has two operational ICBMs. The Hwasong-14 with 10,000 km range and Hwasong-15 with 13,000 km. Pakistan can easily test a 10,000 km ICBM.

P.S. I may have said something wrong. If you see a mistake correct me. I am new here.
I haven't given them permission to test yet. :enjoy:
 

R Wing

SENIOR MEMBER
May 23, 2016
3,194
9
5,121
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Simply not needed

I think everyone here knows that Pakistan has the capability to build a ICBM missile. Why has Pakistan not tested one yet? Are there poltical reasons? Maybe international sanctions? Building a MIRV is way way complicated than ICBM. So there is no reason to doubt that Pakistan does not have ICBM technology. Even North Korea has two operational ICBMs. The Hwasong-14 with 10,000 km range and Hwasong-15 with 13,000 km. Pakistan can easily test a 10,000 km ICBM.

P.S. I may have said something wrong. If you see a mistake correct me. I am new here.

Essentially, every capability is linked to your requirements.
Presently, Pakistan has no need for a ICBM, Pakistan's primary threat is India, for the time being.

Hence, Pakistan has the capability to reach every inch of Indian territory, on the mainland and the distance islands. It also helps, that if we point our missiles to another direction, we cover many other countries towards the West, it gives Pakistan plenty of threat capabilities that very few countries have, so, for the time being, it is not required.

The core purpose of Pakistan's nuclear deterrent is to deter its prime adversary, that is India.
The entire mainland and all other India centric crucial military targets are very much covered by a Medium Range Ballistic Missile. Therefore ICBM is not required.
North Korea has developed ICBM to deter United States by threatening a nuclear strike over its mainland.

ICBM development is chiefly related to nuclear Doctrine which vary from country to country and time to time.

This.

Why do we need an ICBM when we can't even stamp out RAW-backed terrorism?

The investments we need are in deniable, sophisticated kinetic and non-kinetic capacities in the 'gray zone' (under the threshold of open/conventional conflict).

Funny how people are mentioning that India is the only threat to Pakistan. Must say that I disagree with that. Do you guys seriously think that US and many western european countries are Pakistan's allies?

LOL. Having a few ICBMs (which is all we'll be able to afford) is a meaningless deterrent against global and regional superpowers like the US and Israel. They have highly sophisticated, layered missile defense systems. You are delusional if you think having an ICBM or two will deter the US. The US can destroy us with a single signature on a sanction document (we don't have oil/gas like Iran nor are we a hermit dictatorship like N. Korea).

The real deterrent against US arm-twisting is rapid industrialization, huge investments in R&D, a meritocratic system that rewards and values real talent, way (!!!) better people in government/defense/intel/etc. Self-sufficiency and diversification will do the trick. To deter superpowers militarily, you need to be a 1000x bigger economy (with the related defense tech investments), not an ICBM test.

My 2c.
 

Ghessan

FULL MEMBER
Feb 28, 2018
1,389
0
1,695
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Yes the Economy and education should be priority.

Our Economy is barely $300 billion dollars Nominal GDP wise.

Pakistan has a lot of potential. Especially the Textiles and Carpet industry.
We should be doing better than Iran in the carpet industry.

Pakistani Bukhara carpets are world renown.

there was a huge demand of Pak made hand knotted carpet in New York where it was traded.

in the 1990s we were at the top in the hand knotted carpet industry leading every other country in the said field. we did not improvise as our order fulfillment was too slow.

we had khaddis in houses where those carpets were made which took months and those labor (mostly in NWFP) were not even given their due share.

on the other hand what China did?
they prepare huge halls and placed their labor with an instructor narrating them and all of them were working on one design hence knitting carpet in bulk. they also capture the market by offering low prices in the international market.

this is how skillfully we handed over this lucrative market to other countries, Pakistan zindabad.
 

peagle

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 29, 2019
2,108
10
5,063
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
This.

Why do we need an ICBM when we can't even stamp out RAW-backed terrorism?

The investments we need are in deniable, sophisticated kinetic and non-kinetic capacities in the 'gray zone' (under the threshold of open/conventional conflict).

You are literally comparing apples and beef, they are not even the same food group.
Your statement is inherently weak because one does not beget the other. You are linking two different topics.

It's like that thinking, why get married , since I can have sex with whoever I want and make as many babies as I want. But marriage is more then just sex and children, although they are central.

Why should I give a damn about my parents because they gave me birth for their own selfish reasons, I did not ask for it, that obviously is a silly point of view.

The Missile program or any other fulfils separate requirements to the one needed to meet foreign backed terrorism in the country. Also, please let's not forget we also have our domestic terrorism that has no links with foreign backers. There are various elements to terrorism in Pakistan, and foreign support and funding is just one aspect.

Each issue or problem requires its own solution, concurrently.
Just like in life you deal with multiple issues at the same time, countries do that on a much bigger scale.
 

Bleek

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 21, 2021
2,038
0
2,883
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
This.

Why do we need an ICBM when we can't even stamp out RAW-backed terrorism?

The investments we need are in deniable, sophisticated kinetic and non-kinetic capacities in the 'gray zone' (under the threshold of open/conventional conflict).



LOL. Having a few ICBMs (which is all we'll be able to afford) is a meaningless deterrent against global and regional superpowers like the US and Israel. They have highly sophisticated, layered missile defense systems. You are delusional if you think having an ICBM or two will deter the US. The US can destroy us with a single signature on a sanction document (we don't have oil/gas like Iran nor are we a hermit dictatorship like N. Korea).

The real deterrent against US arm-twisting is rapid industrialization, huge investments in R&D, a meritocratic system that rewards and values real talent, way (!!!) better people in government/defense/intel/etc. Self-sufficiency and diversification will do the trick. To deter superpowers militarily, you need to be a 1000x bigger economy (with the related defense tech investments), not an ICBM test.

My 2c.
Massive emphasis on meritocracy here! If we implement that, a lot of shit could fall into place very well.
 

R Wing

SENIOR MEMBER
May 23, 2016
3,194
9
5,121
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
You are literally comparing apples and beef, they are not even the same food group.
Your statement is inherently weak because one does not beget the other. You are linking two different topics.

It's like that thinking, why get married , since I can have sex with whoever I want and make as many babies as I want. But marriage is more then just sex and children, although they are central.

Why should I give a damn about my parents because they gave me birth for their own selfish reasons, I did not ask for it, that obviously is a silly point of view.

The Missile program or any other fulfils separate requirements to the one needed to meet foreign backed terrorism in the country. Also, please let's not forget we also have our domestic terrorism that has no links with foreign backers. There are various elements to terrorism in Pakistan, and foreign support and funding is just one aspect.

Each issue or problem requires its own solution, concurrently.
Just like in life you deal with multiple issues at the same time, countries do that on a much bigger scale.

Multiple logical fallacies in your comment. You can go through a list of them on Wikipedia and see which ones apply :)

My argument is not weak at all.

There are a finite amount of resources --- particularly financial --- in the overall Army-led defense apparatus (ISI, SPD, etc.). That means it is both fair and legitimate to compare two options of where that money (and general priorities) should go --- especially for a cash-strapped country.

An ICBM that won't create any meaningful deterrence (deterrence isn't created by the possession of a handful of relatively basic (non hypersonic) long-range ballistic missiles against a goddamn superpower
VS.
capacities that will actively deter our aggressive neighbor (responsible for backing groups that constantly kill our citizens) is a fair and logically sound comparison.

My comment was one of priority. If you are starving, you probably want food first to ensure your present security VS fantasizing about capabilities against someone a few blocks down who you (wrongly) think will be deterred by an ICBM.

Happy to engage with you further --- I've studied this stuff for a decade so I look forward to your comments. Hopefully they will be more productive and less engaging
 

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 28, 2011
52,993
86
62,024
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I think everyone here knows that Pakistan has the capability to build a ICBM missile. Why has Pakistan not tested one yet? Are there poltical reasons? Maybe international sanctions? Building a MIRV is way way complicated than ICBM. So there is no reason to doubt that Pakistan does not have ICBM technology. Even North Korea has two operational ICBMs. The Hwasong-14 with 10,000 km range and Hwasong-15 with 13,000 km. Pakistan can easily test a 10,000 km ICBM.

P.S. I may have said something wrong. If you see a mistake correct me. I am new here.
Leadership is scared. They think of too many things or factors. That is also the same reason which has led to return of insurgency and increase in attacks in Baluchistan. Until that mindset remains we would also be a reactionary force even that won't be a proper reaction.
 

peagle

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 29, 2019
2,108
10
5,063
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
Multiple logical fallacies in your comment. You can go through a list of them on Wikipedia and see which ones apply :)

My argument is not weak at all.

There are a finite amount of resources --- particularly financial --- in the overall Army-led defense apparatus (ISI, SPD, etc.). That means it is both fair and legitimate to compare two options of where that money (and general priorities) should go --- especially for a cash-strapped country.

An ICBM that won't create any meaningful deterrence (deterrence isn't created by the possession of a handful of relatively basic (non hypersonic) long-range ballistic missiles against a goddamn superpower
VS.
capacities that will actively deter our aggressive neighbor (responsible for backing groups that constantly kill our citizens) is a fair and logically sound comparison.

My comment was one of priority. If you are starving, you probably want food first to ensure your present security VS fantasizing about capabilities against someone a few blocks down who you (wrongly) think will be deterred by an ICBM.

Happy to engage with you further --- I've studied this stuff for a decade so I look forward to your comments. Hopefully they will be more productive and less engaging

Again, your comment makes no sense, because clearly you do not understand the basic issues.

But, I am interested in my fallacies, please enlighten me, I am always willing to learn. It is an honest request, please teach me.
But, like a grown up, please be open for replies.

Regarding your arguments.
Again, each problem requires a different set of solutions, you clearly do not understand that essential simple fact, but wish to get into a litany or useless arguments, so I'll allow you to wallow in your own fantasies.

Please enlighten me on my fallacies, don't forget.
 

Tamiyah

FULL MEMBER
Feb 21, 2019
581
1
481
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Just pray that our leadership gets the guts to finally test one. As long as we are ruled by cowards we are never going to do it. All the other nuclear powers have tested a ICBM.
I dont think this is the right time.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom