Ballistic missile Nasr: A bigger threat from Pakistan

[Paan Singh]

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.

who told you that?More than 80% of tanks are night visioned now.These probmls have been rectified when drawn attention.

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.

i dont know what made you to say this

you guys have much more loop holes than us

 

[Safriz]

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-08-26/india/33401975_1_brahmos-missiles-brahmos-aerospace-air-version

Only 42 Su-30 "will be" modified to carry Brahmos.
But all Mirages,Jf-17s and F-16s of PAF can carry and fire Raad.

 

[Safriz]

who told you that?More than 80% of tanks are night visioned now.These probmls have been rectified when drawn attention.



i dont know what made you to say this

you guys have much more loop holes than us

Read the above......

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

We are not talking about what 'will come' .. We are looking at whats already there...
At the moments IAF cannot carry Brahmos..may be a few.
But almost all PAF jets can carry RAAD

 

[anonymus]

says who?

Indian Jantaa and many Ministers were war warmongering and media was doing the same very recently..In that "Kashmir borders soldier beheading" case.
But did the Commanders attack Pakistan?
Well by your doctrine they had Public support,Media support and government support and had fired a few missiles on Pakistan..the non-nuclear ones or had sent the air force attacking some targets deep inside Pakistan and "Jantaa" had cheered and jeered them..The political leadership had gained a lot by doing this..
But none of that happened...Any ideas why?

Pakistan had never fired Nuclear weapons on India If they had sent Sukhois to strike a few military bases..But India did not do that.
The fact is that the balance of power between the countries isn't that Imbalanced as we believe...

One more thing is that life is precious and death is ugly...Launching a disproportionate attack that kills civilians is heavy on conscience,heavy on international relations and costs a lot..
This goes for both India and Pakistan..
Tactical nukes will kill soldiers who are attacking but Strategic nukes will kill people in homes..On both sides..and no military commander will randomly do that.

India may not initiate a full on strike on civilian areas,which i don't think would be done until india gets into "don't care for tomorrow mode" but what if it responds with counter force strikes.

Now assess the situation....

you have used nukes giving India a high moral ground to use nukes but you have not used them in maximum strength....

a lot of Indian soldiers have died....

now what if India uses counter force strike against your nukes and degrades your ability to carry out second strike.This may not eliminate all of your nuke but would a pakistani decision maker would have balls to target an Indian city given that India has a missile defense system which may not be perfect but increases the number of nukes that pakistan would require per city while India would require just one nuke per city.

bottomline:while pakistani missiles are threat to India,you should not give too much importance to glorified MRBL's.There is no way that a limited nuclear exchange could end in pakistani favor.


And who would decide the bottom line for Nuclear usage.would it be India encroaching into pakistan by 100m (plausiable) or when it is at the gates of islamabad (which is also quite close to border)[low probability].If you distribute nukes to lower officers they would probably gift them to talibs anyway since as you go down the hierarchy,fundamentalism increases.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

@anonymus

Welcome back

 

[anonymus]

I probably would not be visiting or posting regularly as i have have to prepare for exams.Had cut down on internet time since i was preparing for civil services exams.

 

[ares]

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.



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.



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.



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


Who knows??



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 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?

That is the beauty of Indian nuclear doctrine, justification built right into it.

Indian NFU doctrine with massive punitive retaliation coupled with Cold start is designed to delay nuclear exchange as long as possible. Possibly as the last resort...But Pakistan continues to lower it nuclear thresh hold by introducing battlefield nuclear weapons and if nuclear war has already been initiated, logic dictates Indian to hit back will full force to save as many Indian lives as possible.

In the words of former Indian PM A.B Vajpayee, "India won't sit back and watch Pakistan destroy India." If possible India will prempt an all out Pakistani nuclear attack on India.

It will foolish to assume after Pakistan launches nukes against India forces, India will just sit back and not hit back with nuclear weapons.
Now this response might be a proportional one(Indian using similar yield tactical weapon) or a disproportional one in form a massive strike.

What would Pakistani response be in case India gives a proportional response in form a tactical nuclear strike..will it sit back?

 

[Safriz]

^^^ Obviously if one tactical weapon is used then indian response of whatever magnitude will be expected and likewise all the nuclear assets will be armed and ready to use on short notice.
Or will Pakistani commanders think that angeluc hindis will not do anything?

 

[The Deterrent]

That is the beauty of Indian nuclear doctrine, justification built right into it.

Indian NFU doctrine with massive punitive retaliation coupled with Cold start is designed to delay nuclear exchange as long as possible. Possibly as the last resort...But Pakistan continues to lower it nuclear thresh hold by introducing battlefield nuclear weapons and if nuclear war has already been initiated, logic dictates Indian to hit back will full force to save as many Indian lives as possible.

In the words of former Indian PM A.B Vajpayee, "India won't sit back and watch Pakistan destroy India." If possible India will prempt an all out Pakistani nuclear attack on India.

It will foolish to assume after Pakistan launches nukes against India forces, India will just sit back and not hit back with nuclear weapons.
Now this response might be a proportional one(Indian using similar yield tactical weapon) or a disproportional one in form a massive strike.

What would Pakistani response be in case India gives a proportional response in form a tactical nuclear strike..will it sit back?

Yes, this "lowering the threshold" thing is an attempt to prevent the attacking forces from mounting quick assaults, such as the ones part of the CSD.

I'd say it is foolish to start a full-scale nuclear war for a few hundred dead troops.

Only a proportional response makes sense (that is if Indian Strategic Forces possess deliverable tactical nuclear weapons).
In my opinion, Pakistan's response will still remain tactical and probably would target the place of origin of the attack. If Pakistan intended to go for an all-out strike against India, there is no point for developing Nasr. Our doctrine is based on counter-force responses.

 

[StormShadow]

Why is everybody forgetting Prahaar missile!!?? Prahaar can be launched within 2 -3 mins and it can be armed with nuke/chemical/bio warhead.

 

[arp2041]

Yes, this "lowering the threshold" thing is an attempt to prevent the attacking forces from mounting quick assaults, such as the ones part of the CSD.

I'd say it is foolish to start a full-scale nuclear war for a few hundred dead troops.

Only a proportional response makes sense (that is if Indian Strategic Forces possess deliverable tactical nuclear weapons).

In my opinion, Pakistan's response will still remain tactical and probably would target the place of origin of the attack. If Pakistan intended to go for an all-out strike against India, there is no point for developing Nasr. Our doctrine is based on counter-force responses.

Sir, with due respect, Pakistan cannot dictate India on the response it should make after It has used a nuclear weapon (though tactical it may be) on Indian armed forces, killing few thousand soldiers. Foolish or not, India has made it's nuclear policy as transparent as it can be, maybe u'll agree that among the nuclear weapons state, Indian nuclear posture is the clearest without any scope of doubt arising out of it.

It has made ample clear that it will not be the first to use the nuclear weapons, but if India or Indian citizens or Indian forces are attacked by nuke weapons, than it reserves the right to retaliate (even if few 100s or 1000s are affected by it), now the scale of response will totally be an Indian call & Pakistan cannot say that since we were using a tactical weapon, India shouldn't use a strategic one.

+ I want to make a larger point/a question, which was conveniently unanswered from my previous post on this thread, as to why the Pakistani Establishment threatening to use weapons such as Nasr on Indian forces on it's own land & rather not answering the queries of it's own citizens & pacifying them as to why they will become the biggest victim of such a weapon use by there own country?? As far as I know, no nuclear weapon state has said it so openly that using a nuke weapons on it's own territory & it's own citizens is among the many options it has contemplated.

 

[karan.1970]

Why is everybody forgetting Prahaar missile!!?? Prahaar can be launched within 2 -3 mins and it can be armed with nuke/chemical/bio warhead.

Typical Kargil syndrome.. Strategy whose success is based on the assumption (hope) that India will not escalate disproportionately... We all know how that went down last time

 

[Safriz]

Yes, this "lowering the threshold" thing is an attempt to prevent the attacking forces from mounting quick assaults, such as the ones part of the CSD.

I'd say it is foolish to start a full-scale nuclear war for a few hundred dead troops.

Only a proportional response makes sense (that is if Indian Strategic Forces possess deliverable tactical nuclear weapons).
In my opinion, Pakistan's response will still remain tactical and probably would target the place of origin of the attack. If Pakistan intended to go for an all-out strike against India, there is no point for developing Nasr. Our doctrine is based on counter-force responses.

As a 'third strike'
Thats after Indian second strike.
Pakistan may target infrastructure such as ports,airports,major roads,oil and gas installations and dams.

That way Indians will live but India will be crippled.

Indian commanders will know that and may avoid escelation to that level.

 

[Contrarian]

^^^ Obviously if one tactical weapon is used then indian response of whatever magnitude will be expected and likewise all the nuclear assets will be armed and ready to use on short notice.
Or will Pakistani commanders think that angeluc hindis will not do anything?

The first use of nukes by Pakistan itself means that Pakistani Army and Airforce have been badly mauled.

Response will in all probability be use of tactical nukes in equal number on the remaining Pakistani defensive lines. This would also mean absolute collapse of Pakistani defense, only nuclear missiles would be left with Pakistani nuclear command.

 

[neutral_person]

I'd say it is foolish to start a full-scale nuclear war for a few hundred dead troops.

Might be the case for you guys, not for us. We would definitely go all-out in the scenario you mentioned.