Countering Cold Start doctrine by PAF

[prototype]

Cold Start is failed doctrine unless of course the attacker is huge like NATO and defender is someone like Iraq.Cold War is highly based on assumptions and wars are not based on assumptions.General Ayub Khan started 1965 war based on assumptions that Indians won't cross international border so long as we keep it in Kashmir only but he was wrong now Indians are repeating the same mistake.Pakistan will not surrender as Indians think it will.All our main cantts are just across the border so mobilizing for us is no big deal and lastly guys just because Army/AF is silent does not mean it is not working.They're already working on it.The AWACS will alert Pakistan immediately of any massive movements across the border.Besides this is based on the fact that India will attack after terrorist attack so if thats the point then what if Pakistan Army mobilize during the terrorist attack in India?I think AWACS Have been our biggest asset in terms of countering Cold Start as they will inform us immediately of any movement across the border which will alert all our forces and the element of surprise would be gone

u r talking on the basis of some wrong information,the cold war doctrine was just a suggested theory,it does not mean that Indian defense ministry accepted it with open arms,because of difference in strategies of both the militaries,while i can say this strategy may b a possibility against China and they have also a similar kind of policy against India only because of a single fact....both of them have a no strike first policy

Indian military is undergoing rapid modernization,growing much more network centric,is investing heavily on spy satellites,and now started to create rapid strike forces,all this purchases of globemasters and hercules r only part of package

a short and swift war with Pakistan in which majority of its military establishment destroyed is a possibility given the huge superiority Indian military enjoy over Pakistan in terms of both assets and work force but the doctrine become a failure is were no war is short and swift for Pakistan,as sounded earlier by both Pakistani military and its political establishment that it will go for the first strike if it feels Pakistani independence is at stake,and India does not have a responce against it other than going for mutually assured destruction which is not a case falling under cold start

 

[muse]

BTW since you have those nukes + you strategy for first use of them, Why don't you disband your armed forces. Why build more JF which cannt deliver nukes? I guess between 2 of us, you are in more need of $$.

Why don't you just eat ***** and die? - Either make sense or fcuk off.

 

[HariSeldon]

Why don't you just eat ***** and die? - Either make sense or fcuk off.

Tx. I know why you wrote this.

Anyway one more person on ignore list.

 

[Ratus Ratus]

So a few more C17's will up the ante for Cold Start. Give me a break.

Its about time the armchair generals about here did a bit of deep reading on Cold Start.

Also factor in India has not replaced their OLD artillery, big lack of officers, supplies out of date and I suspect a few more issues yet to fall off the back of a truck and become public intel. Logistic problems comes to mind very quickly as well.

Also cold start is supposed to be a limited war, ie keep it under the nuclear threshold. CRAP!
Once a war starts you don't suddenly say Ok end lets start talking. It will not take much for this limited war to go nuclear. If that happens it will not matter who wins because neither of you will.

Rave on at least its amusing if not verging on the looney side.

 

[Ratus Ratus]

u r talking on the basis of some wrong information,the cold war doctrine was just a suggested theory,it does not mean that Indian defense ministry accepted it with open arms,because of difference in strategies of both the militaries,while i can say this strategy may b a possibility against China and they have also a similar kind of policy against India only because of a single fact....both of them have a no strike first policy

You have NO idea about cold start. It was designed explicitly for use against pakistan, NOT China.

Also it was a doctrine initially developed by the Indian army and that development made some assumptions that have not fully gelled with all services.

Go do some real reading on the subject.

Indian military is undergoing rapid modernization,growing much more network centric,is investing heavily on spy satellites,and now started to create rapid strike forces,all this purchases of globemasters and hercules r only part of package

But they still have not replaced old artillery and I still have doubts about your new and wondrous tank.

Do some reading before spouting.

 

[HariSeldon]

Its about time the armchair generals about here did a bit of deep reading on Cold Start.

RR, This is main reason. There is not much information available in public domain regarding IA's CS.
In general we can agree what CS is all about, but how IA envisages when they talk abt CS is just speculation.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I was refering to Joe Shearer and your posts as examples of thinking from the lunatic fringe. Just when India after a super human effort to put a dent in poverty and create lives of dignity, can at least raise her head with pride, the lunatic fringe envision the creation of an entire infrastructure deicated to the invasionof a adversary whose reliance on battle field tactical nukes seems to have escaped your attention. just plain stupid!

Dear Sir,

Unfortunately, Cold Start happens to be Indian Army doctrine, not Joe Shearer doctrine.

Regarding very logical arguments by you about the dent in poverty, perhaps you should extend your arguments to show how tactical nukes eradicate poverty.

There is no need, of course, given your firm grip over the subject, to discuss NBC measures under implementation.

Sincerely,

 

[SQ8]

Dear Sir,

Unfortunately, Cold Start happens to be Indian Army doctrine, not Joe Shearer doctrine.

Regarding very logical arguments by you about the dent in poverty, perhaps you should extend your arguments to show how tactical nukes eradicate poverty.

There is no need, of course, given your firm grip over the subject, to discuss NBC measures under implementation.

Sincerely,

NBC measures are applicable for a short duration, and generally are meant to allow the vehicle to escape the most dangerous radiated areas. It isn't a "radiation proof" walk into gamma rays pass..
And Even with the most comprehensive NBC gear.. I doubt that a soldier will survive for more than a week or so if anywhere near the effected area. So

I believe that muse was pointing at the effort to build an infrastructure to attack a nuclear neighbor rather than any relation of nukes and poverty. Its akin to body building to beat up a guy who has a gun like you do...pretty short-sighted.

 

[Ratus Ratus]

RR, This is main reason. There is not much information available in public domain regarding IA's CS.
In general we can agree what CS is all about, but how IA envisages when they talk abt CS is just speculation.

Some hints:
Divya Astra (Divine Weapon). The first war game to demonstrate aspects of the new Cold
March 2004 exercise.

Vajra Shakti. The second test of the Cold Start concepts was the May 2005

Desert Strike. Six months after Vajra Shakti, the Indian military undertook
a third test of both its new doctrinal concepts and its ability to conduct joint
operations

Sanghe Shakti. May 2006 saw the fourth and largest test of Cold Start doctrine; corps-level exercise

Ashwamedh. The fifth major exercise designed to test the Cold Start doctrine, April–May 2007.

After these the main exercise there has been at best combined exercises on a form of Air Land Battle doctrine, a morphing of the intended Cold Start. These later exercises have been at best battle groups follow the concepts of manoeuvre warfare.

Manoeuvre warfare not quite the original of Cold Start.

 

[Joe Shearer]

NBC measures are applicable for a short duration, and generally are meant to allow the vehicle to escape the most dangerous radiated areas. It isn't a "radiation proof" walk into gamma rays pass..
And Even with the most comprehensive NBC gear.. I doubt that a soldier will survive for more than a week or so if anywhere near the effected area. So

I believe that muse was pointing at the effort to build an infrastructure to attack a nuclear neighbor rather than any relation of nukes and poverty. Its akin to body building to beat up a guy who has a gun like you do...pretty short-sighted.

Dear Sir,

First with regard to NBC gear, I am aware that it is a temporary measure of protection, and is not intended to last long. This was in response to his vague brandishing of tactical nuclear weapons.

However, the point was weak. It is an absurd proposition that one side will use tactical nuclear weapons and the other side will then quietly fade away. As Ratus Ratus has already said, any introduction of nuclear weapons, whether tactical or strategic, will escalate the war straight away. You will understand that in such an eventuality, nobody will stop to calculate kilotonne yield, mode of delivery and target and then conclude that a tactical nuclear weapon is not a use of nuclear weapons. The first reaction to such a tactical nuclear weapon will be retaliation.

Tactical nuclear weapons are a joke in this scenario.

Secondly, nobody is advocating nuclear war, but then nobody is advocating a free license to one neighbour to attack the other at will, and be assured of no retaliation. Such an assurance cannot be given. Unfortunately, there is a very real failure on the part of Pakistanis in general to understand that the present peace drive is a Manmohan Singh initiative; it does not necessarily have much support even in the Congress party, leave alone the mass of the country. These peace drives happen every time there is a sentimental Punjabi seeking peace at any cost.

On his departure, which is a question of time, you may confidently expect a significant change in our foreign policy, and in our state security policy too. The present Home Minister is a hawk, and is inclined to advocate drastic measures. These are not my wishes or my hopes, these are facts available on enquiry.

If there is another large-scale incident, there will be consequences, and the threat of nuclear weapons, tactical or otherwise, will not count. The Pakistani establishment makes a major error in understanding, in assuming that there is a perpetual position of neutralisation due to Pakistan's possession of nuclear weapons. It may prevent an attack, it may not prevent a counter-attack.

So the question of building up the body to neutralise a gun holder means only that if gun neutralises gun, the stronger man beats up the weaker. If either gun is used, the other gun will instantly be used.There is no asymmetric doctrine possible, given the ground-level hostility between the two peoples.

Sincerely

 

[muse]

A segment of Indian opinion, frustrated by it's inablity to exert meaningful influence on Pakistani policy asserts that nuclear weapons may not account for much, we'll huff and puff and blow your house down -- a segment of Pakistani opinion sees this for what it is just bluster and another segment of Pakistani opinion offer this bluster a single digit salute.

Yet others hope the Indian will sink in greater treasure in the pursuit of an inflated ego, we cannot but wish them well.

It will go nuclear in an instant, they remind us - and we remind them that is what we have said from the beginning -- irresponsible positions are just that, not strategy.

 

[Ratus Ratus]

NO I DID NOT SAY THAT:
As Ratus Ratus has already said, any introduction of nuclear weapons, whether tactical or strategic, will escalate the war straight away.

I pointed out that no such thing as a limited war exists considering the two countries concerned. It will by natural behavior move to a nuclear one. You can not have a limited war and stop at some designated point and say lets talk.
Cold Start by its original intent leads to this scenario contrary to all portrayed public beliefs on the topic.

 

[Joe Shearer]

A segment of Indian opinion, frustrated by it's inablity to exert meaningful influence on Pakistani policy asserts that nuclear weapons may not account for much, we'll huff and puff and blow your house down -- a segment of Pakistani opinion sees this for what it is just bluster and another segment of Pakistani opinion offer this bluster a single digit salute.

Yet others hope the Indian will sink in greater treasure in the pursuit of an inflated ego, we cannot but wish them well.

It will go nuclear in an instant, they remind us - and we remind them that is what we have said from the beginning -- irresponsible positions are just that, not strategy.

Dear Sir,

Most laudable objectives, most lofty thoughts. Truly an elevating sermon.

However, the topic of discussion was the Cold Start doctrine, and I prefer to restrict myself to that: evidently, any excursus was and will be an error, and will allow the introduction of all kinds of displays of manly valour on the pages of this blog. As far as the protection of nuclear devices is considered, it is a protection for a legitimate member of the comity of nations. How far that protection will extend in the kind of open abetment of terrorism that has been on display remains to be seen; none of the contributors to this forum will decide, so debate on that is superfluous. Live with your nuclear pipe dreams. Try not to forget where you kept the screwdriver (a hint may be available if you ask nicely).

Sincerely,

 

[Joe Shearer]

NO I DID NOT SAY THAT:
As Ratus Ratus has already said, any introduction of nuclear weapons, whether tactical or strategic, will escalate the war straight away.

I pointed out that no such thing as a limited war exists considering the two countries concerned. It will by natural behavior move to a nuclear one. You can not have a limited war and stop at some designated point and say lets talk.
Cold Start by its original intent leads to this scenario contrary to all portrayed public beliefs on the topic.

Dear Sir,

I stand corrected. Perhaps I could ask for a clarification, wholly off the topic though it is.

If I have understood correctly, a limited war between the two countries concerned will by natural behaviour move to a nuclear one. Could you dilate on this 'natural behaviour'?

Another question.What is the point at which a limited war becomes a nuclear one?

Sincerely,

 

[alibaz]

Dear Sir,

Precisely. Indeed, a shrewd insight.

You may have overlooked this passage in my post:

The point is that there is nothing in the Cold Start doctrine that requires significant airlift across major distances. Other geopolitical circumstances do.

The point is that the IA is equipoised between its focus on Pakistan and its focus on China. While the Mountain Divisions really ought not to be deployed on the plains, or the plains divisions in the mountains, war does not permit these niceties.

The IA has the need to move formations rapidly between the western front, the northern front and the eastern front.

It appears that we find ourselves in agreement.

Sincerely,

Sir we are in agreement that these aircrafts are purchased for shifting of troops but we look at the whole scenario with 180 degree different view . What I think is India creates a Mumbai like situation maligns Pakistan, uses its forces deployed close to boarders western borders and within a very short time it moves its forces from peace locations and a final blow within a week by moving reserves from EAST. So to me its an aggressive plan not a defensive with the main purpose of getting west in unprepared state. Am sure you will not agree to my perspective but this is what I believe in.