What's new

11 Feb '13: Pakistan conducts test fires of two Hatf-IX Nasr BRBMs

Indians hysteria as usual and they are creating stupid things for their own satisfaction.:lol:

If Pakistan use NASR against Indian IBG's then Indian forces will retreat peacefully, only a mentally retard person will risk a full scale nuclear war for what happened in battle field. Its easy to say on internet, i bet in such situation every Indian will pray that things won't escalate beyond battlefield and cease fire. That's why Nasr is so special ideal weapon of choice against enemy evil designs. :smokin:

:lol: Pakistan's forever dream of dictating the boundaries of war.. Did not work in 1965.. Not in Kargil.. Wont work in future either..
 
.
:lol: Pakistan's forever dream of dictating the boundaries of war.. Wont work in future either..

One wonders then " What is stopping you " if the conditions are/were so favorable to you :azn: ... You mobilized and backed off both in '87 and '02 and after Mumbai attacks , you didn't even feel the need to do so rightly understanding that the results cant be different from the previous two experiences because the deterrence on the other side of the border has only grown stronger in years ... Nuclear deterrence has thus prevented three wars between both countries and in '99 didn't allow your boys to cross either the IB or LOC during Kargil even though your defense analysts are unanimous that it would have cut the Indian losses in half by attacking supply lines so it worked then for us right ? ... Basically , as soon as you cross the borders of Pakistan , implement the CSD , cross any nuclear threshold , you will be facing the dilemma I have mentioned and explained , that is for certain ...
 
.
One wonders then " What is stopping you " if the conditions are/were so favorable to you :azn: ... You mobilized and backed off both in '87 and '02 and after Mumbai attacks , you didn't even feel the need to do so rightly understanding that the results cant be different from the previous two experiences because the deterrence on the other side of the border has only grown stronger in years ... Nuclear deterrence has thus prevented three wars between both countries and in '99 didn't allow your boys to cross either the IB or LOC during Kargil even though your defense analysts are unanimous that it would have cut the Indian losses in half by attacking supply lines so it worked then for us right ? ... Basically , as soon as you cross the borders of Pakistan , implement the CSD , cross any nuclear threshold , you will be facing the dilemma I have mentioned and explained , that is for certain ...

Did you even pause to understand the context before replying ? Its very easy to say that Pakistan is insane and will cross the threshold by nuking an Indian battle formation and India will say Thank you and retreat.. Only fools or suicidal generals will think and plan on those lines.

BTW There was no mobilization in 87 or 2008.. In 1987, the Pakistani strategists just had kittens looking at the scale on an Indian army exercise (duly notified ahead to time) Operation Brasstacks..

About not crossing the LoC during Kargil, well armchair generals wont understand that..The amount of ridicule and damage to Pakistan's credibility that maneuver cost was well worth any extra damage India took by not crossing the LoC. The cherry on the cake was the public flogging (figurative) of Pakistan's head of state by the American president.. Wonder if that would have ever happened if India had crossed the LoC

Most of Pakistan Army operations remind me of the saying.. All Brawn, no Brain :) (actually same with all Pakistani diplomatic maneuvers)
 
.
Did you even pause to understand the context before replying ? Its very easy to say that Pakistan is insane and will cross the threshold by nuking an Indian battle formation and India will say Thank you and retreat.. Only fools or suicidal generals will think and plan on those lines.

BTW There was no mobilization in 87 or 2008.. In 1987, the Pakistani strategists just had kittens looking at the scale on an Indian army exercise (duly notified ahead to time) Operation Brasstacks..

About not crossing the LoC during Kargil, well armchair generals wont understand that..The amount of ridicule and damage to Pakistan's credibility that maneuver cost was well worth any extra damage India took by not crossing the LoC. The cherry on the cake was the public flogging (figurative) of Pakistan's head of state by the American president.. Wonder if that would have ever happened if India had crossed the LoC

Most of Pakistan Army operations remind me of the saying.. All Brawn, no Brain :) (actually same with all Pakistani diplomatic maneuvers)

Read up my previous post ... I have said before that implementing CSD in the first place can lead to a full scale nuclear war ... You just expect my country to welcome the invaders at the borders and surrender silently ? :lol: ... Pakistan isn't insane but hasn't developed the nuclear capability for nothing too ... Cross the threshold , you will likely get nuked if we are at a military disadvantage and face the same dilemma of " continue , risk the lives of a billion , or retreat , save them " ... Anything so hard , dear ? Yes , thank you for admitting that the people devising such a doctrine are suicidal ...

Really ? Go read up " Operation Brasstacks in '87 " the Sunderjee's master plan of cutting the Pakistan in half or the Operation Parakram in '02 when Indians were screaming for blood ? What happened ? :azn: Both times , a warning by a Pakistani General was enough for you to back off ... We mobilized our forces and caught you on the border much earlier , both times , if you read the history ... I never mentioned any mobilization in '08 if you read my post carefully and not emotionally ...

Armschair generals are basing their opinion on your defense analysts and ex-Generals analysis of Kargil war who regret on Indians not crossing the IB or LOC to cut the Pakistani supply lines ... The damage to Pakistan's credibility would have provided the justification for such an action easily , not otherwise ... Because if we were the bad guys , the world wouldn't have minded the Indians crossing the borders and capturing some key areas , maybe even bring the Siachen deployment costs down right ? :azn: But there was the nuclear threat to keep some at bay ...

Actually it is " great strategic plans being executed at wrong times " ...
 
.
:lol: Pakistan's forever dream of dictating the boundaries of war.. Did not work in 1965.. Not in Kargil.. Wont work in future either..

Well it should be India who should be ashamed of not winning the 1965 war when its generals were boasting of drinking a toast in Lahore Gymkhana by evening but had to retreat back to its borders with their tails behind their legs. LOL.
And we still have Peak 5353, the highest peak from where 25km of Indian Occupied Highway is within our range. LOL.
:sniper:
 
.
You don't really need to scoot after firing a nuke at an adversary around 60 or km away, because adversary with all it's equipment would have evaporated within seconds and the resulting cloud would be sufficient to provide cover from any possible air strike from any enemy air assets providing air cover to the adversary, that is if they survive the blast wave (though I am not sure what kind of blast wave/or its effect would be on the air assets in the immediate vicinity.


Shoot and scoot at its best - it appears to me now ...
 
.
Read up my previous post ... I have said before that implementing CSD in the first place can lead to a full scale nuclear war ... You just expect my country to welcome the invaders at the borders and surrender silently ? :lol: ... Pakistan isn't insane but hasn't developed the nuclear capability for nothing too ... Cross the threshold , you will likely get nuked if we are at a military disadvantage and face the same dilemma of " continue , risk the lives of a billion , or retreat , save them " ... Anything so hard , dear ? Yes , thank you for admitting that the people devising such a doctrine are suicidal ...

Dude, I am not contesting that CSD may get blown into a nuke response by Pakistan, but its idiotic to assume that Pakistan will cross the threshold and just because they use tactical nukes, India will not up the ante.. And thats what my response was. Pakistanis have a tendency to believe that they can define the boundaries of an engagement.. Like Pakistan's attack in 1965 banked on the assumption that India will not open the front on the IB. Similarly in Kargil, Musharraf assumed that India will not up the ante.. In both cases India did not conform to those assumptions and Pakistan lost the initiative. And its never the doctrines that are suicidal, but the doctrines which assume that the opponent will play by your rules are bound to fail.

btw, have you imagined this scenario.. Indian army opens a front in Punjab and one or more strike corps moves say 40-50 km inside Pakistani borders in Lahore sector. Your contention is that Pak will use Nukes to destroy this strike corps and India will not escalate the Nuke war.. Though the assumption is laughable, but for a moment lets go with it.. So India loses a strike corps, but remember Pakistan just nuked its most fertile area and made it unusable for next 100 years. Along with killing thousands of its own civilians. Think about it.. bet you never did ;)


Really ? Go read up " Operation Brasstacks in '87 " the Sunderjee's master plan of cutting the Pakistan in half or the Operation Parakram in '02 when Indians were screaming for blood ? What happened ? :azn: Both times , a warning by a Pakistani General was enough for you to back off ... We mobilized our forces and caught you on the border much earlier , both times , if you read the history ... I never mentioned any mobilization in '08 if you read my post carefully and not emotionally ...
Can you post some details about Operation Brasstacks that back your contention from a impartial source? The only mobilization India did and backed away from was in 2002. And the reasons then were more political after Musharraf did a lame cop out by publicly promising to not back terrorism in India. Its funny how you conveniently forget the global embarrassments Pakistan had to go thru because of its shenanigans and only remember India's reactions .. Maybe your mind refuses to accept painful memories of you heads of state's public humiliation ..:)


Armschair generals are basing their opinion on your defense analysts and ex-Generals analysis of Kargil war who regret on Indians not crossing the IB or LOC to cut the Pakistani supply lines ... The damage to Pakistan's credibility would have provided the justification for such an action easily , not otherwise ... Because if we were the bad guys , the world wouldn't have minded the Indians crossing the borders and capturing some key areas , maybe even bring the Siachen deployment costs down right ? :azn: But there was the nuclear threat to keep some at bay ...

That's why Pakistan always loses the plot internationally. No long term thought process...It was not enough to make Pakistan the bad guy.. India needed itself to be seen as the Good guy too.. which all but killed Pakistan's stand on Kashmir. Post Kargil, the regular stream of statements about Kashmir from international sources which use to pop up at regular intervals has slowed down to less than a trickle..

Actually your whole argument is based on defining Pakistan nuclear threshold as extremely low and India's extremely high..Which may be true because today India has much to lose in case of a nuclear exchange, and Pakistan pretty much has nothing and your argument of Pakistan behaving like a suicide bomber may well be true. But strategies need to factor in changing environments and unless you believe that Pakistan will always stay in the dumps like it is today, such a strategy is extremely flawed. Compound that with your assertion of nuking your own land (and your own civilians) to stop an advancing army inside your borders, and you have a failed strategy on your hands...


Actually it is " great strategic plans being executed at wrong times " ...
More like a comedian with a bad sense of timing. :)
 
.
Well it should be India who should be ashamed of not winning the 1965 war when its generals were boasting of drinking a toast in Lahore Gymkhana by evening but had to retreat back to its borders with their tails behind their legs. LOL.
And we still have Peak 5353, the highest peak from where 25km of Indian Occupied Highway is within our range. LOL.
:sniper:

:rofl: :rofl:
 
.
Nasr on 19th April 2011

Pakistan+Tests+Hatf-9++IX+Nasr+Ballistic+Missile+Nuclear.jpg


Nasr on 29th May 2012

3510.jpg



See any difference?

29th may 2012 Launcher from another angle.

nasr6.jpg


Only two missiles are loaded in 4 tubes.

Now look at this Video grab picture (By Windjammer) on 11 Feb 2013

screenshot20130211at623.png


All 4 tubes have missiles.


These Pictures should answer all Questions why Pakistan has Test fired the same missile 3 times.


So limited war option of India in Pakistan is also minimized.
 
. . . . . .
Offtopic...But Apparently Pakistan has attained MARV technology and had it for some years now.
shaheen01.jpg


Note these Black circles on the side of Shaheen II warhead assembly...These look like side thrusters..The Re-entry vehicle can make course corrections post boost by using these sideways rocket motors,increasing Accuracy.Also the RV can change course mid-flight,confusing ABM.
Another thing is that this feature of Re-entry vehicle is needed for carrying Multiple warheads..as RV is able to manoever post boost and able to keep flying using a thruster while releasing Warheads at designated intervals angles and altitudes for different targets...So by the looks of Pakistan already has the ability of MIRV,but may be no need for it at the mo..
 
.
Back
Top Bottom