Ballistic missile Nasr: A bigger threat from Pakistan

[arbit]

Bhaiyo in logo ka kuch nahi ho sakta. False bravado. Stupid analysis. Misjudgement of enemy's capability and resolve. This is the undoing of these folks.
On this forum the only person who is grounded and a realist (and shockingly a pakistani) is @Oscar. The rest are delusional or too busy trying to justify their "think tank" status. I wonder what his views are on this subject.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

How come some foreign org can estimate the number of weapon India or Pakistan have?
Pakistan, i can understand as CIA and MOSSAD are fully monitering their activities. But Indian Nuclear is very secret thing.
I believe we may already have more than 100-150 weapons.

 

[Mitro]

Wow what a thread let me also contribute in this wonderfull thread talking about complete destroying of civilised world.


1)Pakistan Using Nasr tactical Nuke Only When Indian IB are in a position to bisect pakistan or pakistan survival in danger .
I don't see this happening bcoz they are of same strength .

2)Pakistan Red Line is when india cross its border and india red line is if enemy uses nuke on indian soldier or against india .
If india cross the LOC then pakistan can use Nuke when ever it think its survival is in danger.

3)Pakistan Tactical Nuke is only against cold start doctrine [we are getting ready to implement this doctrine for quick deployment of our strike corp ASAP by buying Boeing C-17 Globemaster III]

4)If Pakistan uses battle field Nuke he will make sure that india will be in no position to retaliate with nuke so it will nuke indian major cities to destroy command and control center.

i think it will never happen because our politician will never risk the nation survival and will never cross loc [the biggest evidence is 2001 india - pakistan stand off even the BJP the extremist party cannot do it so we can imagine about congress].

 

[INDIC]

my question to my indian friends is simple do they think if IA captures pakistani areas will the war be finished

We don't have interest in any Pakistani area

 

[Guest01]

Wow what a strategy. so if this purpose being quoted of this Nasr is true then surely it will be a first that a country is planning to nuke its own territory. So the idea is that to stop the enemy from advancing to the interior, nuke the territory up to which there has been advance. So which area will the nasr nuke? Lahore? or Hyderabad? Surely 60 Kilometers will not take it even up to Jaisalmer. And nuking Indian territory anyway will bring a totally different package for the marde monims.

I would rather believe that considering the successes with the guidance systems of the No-Dongs, this is rather just a totally new feel good assurance for the Pakistani Generals. Nothing else. India will not even bother to adapt the PAD or the ABM systems for this rocket.

 

[Mitro]

Its all assumption not even close e.g they still think china have 300 but we all know they have far more then people think.

How come some foreign org can estimate the number of weapon India or Pakistan have?
Pakistan, i can understand as CIA and MOSSAD are fully monitering their activities. But Indian Nuclear is very secret thing.
I believe we may already have more than 100-150 weapons.

 

[The Deterrent]

India and Pakistan have similar number of nuclear weapons and delivery systems , but what Indian does have and Pakistan does not, is 4 times bigger land area to disperse its present nuclear weapons.
And will very soon have all the worlds oceans to disperse considerable more number

USA and Russia also have huge landmasses to disperse their nuclear weapons, but this didn't stop the adversaries from tracking the sites by HUMINT. Unless the number of nuclear weapons is much greater in India, both Pakistan and India stand at the same level.

Yes Indian and Pakistani weapons are dismantled kept separately to ward of accidental launch.But that scenario will also be changing soon..because in SSBN ...nukes are always in ready to fire mode.

We will talk when that scenario changes. If Pakistan doesn't announces the developments it makes (till the product is ready) it does not means that they are not working on a similar solution.

A number of factors coupled with a certain scenario(as presented here).. exponentially increases chances of India surviving a nuclear war with Pakistan.

The factors are.

1) India has 4 times the land area and 7 times higher population..SO Pakistan will need launch atleast 4 times higher number of nuclear weapons to cause similar damage to India, as India need to destroy Pakistan.

Similar damage - in your opinion - seems to be complete destruction. In my opinion, similar damage means equal amount of destruction. Now I don't want to take the discussion towards nuking civilians, but I'll quote the early French doctrine in post # 248.

2) All the Pakistani nuclear weapons are land based, Indian nuclear weapons are also land based but are dispersed over many times larger area ..hence much more difficult to eliminate in first strike.

If the locations are known, neither Pakistan nor India have any advantage in this regard.

3)Soon Indian weapons will sea based too, which will give India a assured second strike capability, where as Pakistan still very far from developing such a capability.

Who knows??

4) India will soon be deploying Missile defense systems covering major cities and military installations, which can take of atleast some of Pakistani launches.

Yes, and Pakistan is also shifting its focus towards more survivable missile systems against ABMs. Babur, Ra'ad, Shaheen-IA, Shaheen-III are all part of this strategy.

The scenario:

Scenario as being discussed here previously. India send in its army into Pakistan, in response to a Pakistani terror strike or Kargil type misadventure in Indian and Pakistan responds by firing a tactical nuke or two on Indian IBGs.
Now as per Indian doctrine, India reserves a right to give a massive and puntive, retaliation against Pakistan.
Indian launches missile from SSBNs of Pakistani coast(giving Pakistani absolutely no warning at all) to take out known Pakistani launch sites, weapons site and command centers.

There is a possibility considerable number of Pakistani weapons and delivery systems will be taken out in such a pre-emptive nuclear strikes.

However for sure certain number of Pakistani weapons and missile will survive.

Some of which will take out by Indian missile defense batteries if launched ..some might leak through but ..damage to India, will nearly not be as severe, as to Pakistan.


This entire scenario is predicated on Pakistan launching small tactical nukes in their first strike and India following through with its current nuclear doctrine of massive nuclear retaliation in response to Pakistani using nuclear weapons against its forces.

The scenario is pretty neat, except for how will India justify the act of an all out strike in response to a tactical nuclear strike on the adversary's land in which a few hundred troops perished?

Moreover, do you think that the result of your scenario would be worth of mounting an all out strike at Pakistan? If both countries would resort to a ceasefire after the Pakistani Nasr attack, wouldn't that be a better option for both countries?

 

[The Deterrent]

@Members, do read about the French nuclear doctrine, which is based around a possible Soviet/Russian invasion:

The strategic concept behind the Force de Frappe is one of countervalue, i.e., the capability of inflicting to a more powerful enemy more damage than the complete destruction of the French population would represent. The enemy, having more to lose, would therefore refrain from proceeding any further (see Mutual Assured Destruction). This principle is usually referred to in the French political debate as dissuasion du faible au fort (Weak-to-strong deterrence) and was summarized in a statement attributed to President de Gaulle himself:

"Within ten years, we shall have the means to kill 80 million Russians. I truly believe that one does not light-heartedly attack people who are able to kill 80 million Russians, even if one can kill 800 million French, that is if there were 800 million French.
"

General Pierre Marie Gallois said:

"Making the most pessimistic assumptions, the French nuclear bombers could destroy ten Russian cities; and France is not a prize worthy of ten Russian cities."

In his book La paix nucléaire (1975), French Admiral de Joybert explained deterrence as:

"Sir, I have no quarrel with you, but I warn you in advance and with all possible clarity that if you invade me, I shall answer at the only credible level for my scale, which is the nuclear level. Whatever your defenses, you shan't prevent at least some of my missiles from reaching your home and cause the devastation that you know. So, renounce your endeavour and let us stay good friends."

 

[The Deterrent]

The logic of trying to blend nasr with MRBLs is faulty...
1) With availability of tactical battlefield radars, it will be difficult to achieve
2) Even if it is somehow achieved, it doesn't give any protection... How can you assume that Indian army/ IAF won't target MRBLs. They will be the first targets of the IAF ground attack aircrafts.

It is not

1) How come? Pakistan can mass-produce Nasr systems to be used in conventional role. Pakistan's military forces are not like Iraqi one, neither India has the equivalent power of coalition forces (US/NATO). Spotting out specific vehicles is very difficult even if you have complete air superiority.

2) I'm not assuming that they won't. It is you who is assuming that Nasr vehicles will be parked out in the open for target practice.
Furthermore, as I said before, SRBMs can be used in the similar role from standoff ranges.

Using a nuclear bomb to destroy the enemy forces(that too, on your own land) is like slapping yourself on face while trying to squash a fly!

Not every nuclear bomb is Hiroshima-equivalent, low-yield warheads have very less fallout.

 

[Kompromat]

Wow what a thread let me also contribute in this wonderfull thread talking about complete destroying of civilised world.


1)Pakistan Using Nasr tactical Nuke Only When Indian IB are in a position to bisect pakistan or pakistan survival in danger .
I don't see this happening bcoz they are of same strength .

2)Pakistan Red Line is when india cross its border and india red line is if enemy uses nuke on indian soldier or against india .
If india cross the LOC then pakistan can use Nuke when ever it think its survival is in danger.

3)Pakistan Tactical Nuke is only against cold start doctrine [we are getting ready to implement this doctrine for quick deployment of our strike corp ASAP by buying Boeing C-17 Globemaster III]

4)If Pakistan uses battle field Nuke he will make sure that india will be in no position to retaliate with nuke so it will nuke indian major cities to destroy command and control center.

i think it will never happen because our politician will never risk the nation survival and will never cross loc [the biggest evidence is 2001 india - pakistan stand off even the BJP the extremist party cannot do it so we can imagine about congress].

Pakistan also has around 23000 Mobile ATGMs, a very substantial number of MANPADs, and a proven stand off weapons capability, and 10 year long combat experience of anti armor warfare in Afghanistan, 80% of our armor is night vision capable compared to India's 20%, so i don't know if you can see where i am coming from.

 

[li0nheart]

It is not

1) How come? Pakistan can mass-produce Nasr systems to be used in conventional role. Pakistan's military forces are not like Iraqi one, neither India has the equivalent power of coalition forces (US/NATO). Spotting out specific vehicles is very difficult even if you have complete air superiority.

2) I'm not assuming that they won't. It is you who is assuming that Nasr vehicles will be parked out in the open for target practice.
Furthermore, as I said before, SRBMs can be used in the similar role from standoff ranges.



Not every nuclear bomb is Hiroshima-equivalent, low-yield warheads have very less fallout.

1) are you sure a missile launch vehicle can stay hidden against tactical radars? Then you are the one who is assuming something! All I'm saying is it will be difficult to bring this missile within 60 km range without detection...
2) I said "slap" and not "shoot"!! Low yield warheads indeed! Even a single square km area lost due to this will be lost for next 30-40 years due to radiation. then also the new generations will have genetic defects...

 

[The Deterrent]

1) are you sure a missile launch vehicle can stay hidden against tactical radars? Then you are the one who is assuming something! All I'm saying is it will be difficult to bring this missile within 60 km range without detection...
2) I said "slap" and not "shoot"!! Low yield warheads indeed! Even a single square km area lost due to this will be lost for next 30-40 years due to radiation. then also the new generations will have genetic defects...

1) No, im not. I'm talking about detecting such a vehicle in the midst of hundreds of other vehicles, when the fight is going on.
It isn't, because in these scenarios, special vehicles are concealed and accompanied by other vehicles.

2) I don't think a nuked square kilometer of Cholistan desert would make any difference, nobody lives in a desert hich is already a battlefield.

Anyways, I think this discussion should be stopped, as like the FOUR previous ones, this one too isn't leading to any conclusion, because there are hundreds of factors which could contribute to possible scenarios.

 

[Safriz]

Right now Pakistan has a much larger range cruise missile than India,and has much more credible airlaunch capability than India.
So Pakistan's deterrance has an upper hand at the mo.

 

[MilSpec]

Right now Pakistan has a much larger range cruise missile than India,and has much more credible airlaunch capability than India.
So Pakistan's deterrance has an upper hand at the mo.

Please explain??

 

[45'22']

Right now Pakistan has a much larger range cruise missile than India,and has much more credible airlaunch capability than India.
So Pakistan's deterrance has an upper hand at the mo.

it is only a matter of time,nirbhay will join the arsenal soon in the coming year
but the range is not wide enough
if babur is having a range of 700km then brahmos is also having a range of 300-500km
regarding the second part,only time can tell