Heavy artillery fire is being exchanged between India and Pakistan

[padamchen]

Just bcuz I joined in 2016 doesn't mean that I didn't exist before 2016. I didn't just materialize out of thin air on the day I joined this forum...just like how u existed and were able to learn things before u became a member of this forum. So what was the point of bringing this up? Absolutely nothing...like ur last post instead of talking substance u tend to create a lot of strawman arguments as if that will somehow prove u knowledgeable.

And this somehow implies that u r knowledgeable? I have yet to see this amazing display of ur knowledge regarding nuclear doctrines. So far u have avoided the subject altogether in ur posts.

Another strawman argument by u. I'm sure there exist many experts out there...compared to them my knowledge is most definitely miniscule. This still however doesn't add any support to ur original argument. I'm still waiting to hear anything of substance from u.

Then plz do show me...show us all what treasure trove of knowledge u have learned from there. It is a defense forum after all...we would all love to learn about such a topic.

I'm not trying to sound intelligent at all. I have clearly stated my argument and stayed on topic instead of going of on unrelated tangents to try and prove my superiority in this regard(everyone can see who is doing that out of the two of us ). What I wrote may very well be textbook 101 but u still haven't been able to counter it.

I do know different levels of threshold that exist...and I told u already. Pak's nuclear weapons have always been a last resort in case there's nothing left to lose. I have clearly stated that Pak will always reply in a conventional manner every time it can. The only time things go nuclear is when Pak is unable to sustain in a conventional manner. An example of this is Pak's development of low yield short range weapons like Nasr. This was a direct response to Indian CSD. Even in case if India is to execute a CSD type of scenario where Pak can respond conventionally that would still be the response...Pak would use Nasr in case where it gets overwhelmed quickly on multiple fronts and conventional options are no longer sufficient.

To sum it all up and repeat myself so maybe u will finally understand and talk substance...even prior to Feb 27 events...Pak's response would always have been a conventional one rather than a nuclear one in any scenario where Pak can respond conventionally in an adequate manner. So what has Feb 27 skirmish changed? Nothing...absolutely nothing.

Sigh ... even more tutoring needed.

Ok ...

One, you do not have a NFU policy. So quit harping on the last resort line. Pakistan's deterrence hinges on no NFU and unpredictability.

Engagements like the 26th and 27th help the enemy suss out your responses and make predictable your doctrine.

Two, battlefield nukes put paid to your last resort argument. They are tactical in nature. Not strategic. They are hardly a nation's last resort. They are the armory of a battlefield brigadier or colonel.

Nuclear warfighting is not nuclear deterrence.

Nuclear 101.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Kaniska]

And if we hard it india at FEB 27, then it would give India reasons to hit hard us again and situation could went into limited conventional war @padamchen


And Islam always respect humanity unlike Hindu religion @Kaniska

Yes...I can easily see by looking at Muslim world..No need to give any example for me..

 

[Cookie Monster]

Sigh ... even more tutoring needed.

Ok ...

One, you do not have a NFU policy. So quit harping on the last resort line. Pakistan's deterrence hinges on no NFU and unpredictability.

Engagements like the 26th and 27th help the enemy suss out your responses and make predictable your doctrine.

Two, battlefield nukes put paid to your last resort argument. They are tactical in nature. Not strategic. They are hardly a nation's last resort. They are the story of a battlefield brigadier or colonel.

Nuclear warfighting is not nuclear deterrence.

Nuclear 101.

Cheers, Doc

Lmao u just embarrassed urself in front of the whole PDF community about ur supposed knowledge of nuclear doctrines.

No First Use policy only means that u as a nation wouldn't resort to using nuclear weapons FIRST in a conflict. U would only use nuclear weapons if another nation used nuclear weapons against u FIRST. Let me breakdown in simpler terms for ur understanding...

If India has NFU policy that means India wouldn't use nuclear weapons in a war UNLESS another nation(like Pak or China...or some other country) used nukes against India.
---> this sets India's threshold at the level of being nuked first. India can decide it's threshold anywhere from just one low yield Nasr type of nuke being used against it to an all out nuclear strike against India.

Pakistan has no NFU policy in place. This means that Pak has a whole range of thresholds to choose from and decide WHEN it's appropriate to use its nukes against an enemy(India in this case).
---> this gives Pakistan a whole range of thresholds to choose from...anywhere from India firing the first bullet
...
...
...
---> to India nuking Pak.

Out of these Pak would logically go for the one that is MOST BENEFICIAL to Pak. Why would Pak respond with nukes for firing or shelling from Indian side on LOC and get destroyed(nuked by India in response) when it can just respond conventionally? Why would Pak use the nuclear option against India if IAF carries out an airstrike and get destroyed(nuked by India in response) when it can reply with a retaliatory strike of its own? So for the nth time...the only time it is worth it for Pak to use its nukes on India...is when all is lost anyway(conventional defeat).

Now go read up on first use policy and no first use policy before embarrassing urself further.

 

[padamchen]

Ok we are done.

I don't have the patience for this.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Ultima Thule]

Sigh ... even more tutoring needed.

Ok ...

One, you do not have a NFU policy. So quit harping on the last resort line. Pakistan's deterrence hinges on no NFU and unpredictability.

Engagements like the 26th and 27th help the enemy suss out your responses and make predictable your doctrine.

Two, battlefield nukes put paid to your last resort argument. They are tactical in nature. Not strategic. They are hardly a nation's last resort. They are the armory of a battlefield brigadier or colonel.

Nuclear warfighting is not nuclear deterrence.

Nuclear 101.

Cheers, Doc

So you mean if you attacked Pakistan by IAF, We should used Tactical nukes to retaliate, do thing what was the consequence of this act, what a stupid logic you have @padamchen

Yes...I can easily see by looking at Muslim world..No need to give any example for me..

Currently most Muslims divided and disguised by western countries/agencies like CIA/MI-6/Mossad/ RAW etc etc @Kaniska

 

[Cookie Monster]

Battlefield nukes put paid to your last resort argument. They are tactical in nature. Not strategic. They are hardly a nation's last resort. They are the armory of a battlefield brigadier or colonel.

Nuclear warfighting is not nuclear deterrence.

Nuclear 101.

Cheers, Doc

Tactical nukes would be used as a LAST RESORT at a battlefield level in case Pak is unable to respond to a CSD type of attack by India in a conventional manner. Comprehend first what I'm saying. Nothing new has come to light...Pak WILL ALWAYS RESPOND CONVENTIONALLY when it CAN...when it can't and all seems lost then MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION awaits bcuz in no scenario is India going to win. This is and has been Pak's approach so far.

Ok we are done.

I don't have the patience for this.

Cheers, Doc

Nice face saving...almost as good as IAF parading around that AMRAAM.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Ok we are done.

I don't have the patience for this.

Cheers, Doc

You have no valid opinion left in your pocket @padamchen

 

[NA71]

Remember what I said in more than one post earlier.

The Hindu is slow cooking the Pakistani Muslim frog.

He does not care about losing some planes or even pilots.

He is pressing buttons. Gauging responses.

And he is exposing your so called redlines.

And he is not going to stop. And he will push both the onus as well as the cost on you. Incrementally.

The whole board including my close friends Imran, Mangus orgasmic about February 27.

Only in a less than handful of you (the usual old suspects) did I glimpse the really station of what you lost.

How you lost.

And what Feb 27 and the surgical strikes prior actually meant ....

Cheers, Doc

OK... which Bollywood movie script? have some shame...got beaten by weaker and planning to get beaten again.

 

[The Eagle]

So you mean if you attacked Pakistan by IAF, We should used Tactical nukes to retaliate

India wanted to raise the bar and expected Pakistan to issue N threats in-case of such kind of attack. Their media was ready and propagated all the way for full blown war. India did not expect the conventional capability and following whooping in day. India was expecting N threat and was ready to go gaga all over the world against Pakistan and to portray us like some kind of irresponsible N state. However, after a fine beating into the hands of PAF; India proven that it is actually India who is mad man in the club and is a danger for the whole region - -

India threatened with missile attacks against Pakistan and then the message was sent in reply that as we have already shown the capability; expect us with maximum retaliation like 3:1 for India. So what really happened is that Pakistan did retain the escalation ladder, put India in place conventionally on that day and proven our capability & will to retaliate and also, Nuclear deterrence was the order of the day that kept India at bay and forced to retreat.

Actually, it is India that helped us to prove Pakistan deterrence Policy as well as enforces us for the readiness and not to be trapped into Indian so-called peaceful drums. The world has seen what India did and how Pakistan retaliated like any other sovereign nation and so also the Indian Missile threats and then-after Pakistan deterrence policy being a responsible nation.

Just because Pakistan rise above in both conventional retaliation & Nuclear Deterrence orders, Indian troll brigade is having sleepless nights since 27th Feb, as were disappeared and now coming back with 1000 of more stories in an attempt to save face.

 

[NA71]

As mentioned in other threads, the monkeys will not sit calmly and quiet until they try to settle the score ...LOC has become noisy again ...with CAP on both sides...

 

[mourning sage]

View attachment 571637

View attachment 571638

View attachment 571639

View attachment 571640

If I were to guess, I'd say PEMRA has instructed news channels to avoid priming up this issue. Unlike India, our mighty warrior neighbor, where LoC and cross firing is used to hype up the nation and sensationalize national media, we don't give any importance to it apart from running a mere one liner at the bottom of the news channel.

Tells you a lot about our priorities. We are not here to indulge India over its non-sense. At this point, importance of India has diminished to the extent it's nothing more than a detractor. And will be dealt as such. Give it more importance than is due will delude it into thinking it's more than what it actually is - pitiful nation.

The world has its eyes on Pakistan and IK. We can't let Modi's cheap tactics get in the way.

 

[War Thunder]

From the video evidence this clearly looks like them firing into civilian areas after a death of one of their soldiers. This is a regular thing for them to to do.

What else can you expect from coward women disguised under manly skin and having been recruited into indian army.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Just bcuz I joined in 2016 doesn't mean that I didn't exist before 2016. I didn't just materialize out of thin air on the day I joined this forum...just like how u existed and were able to learn things before u became a member of this forum. So what was the point of bringing this up? Absolutely nothing...like ur last post instead of talking substance u tend to create a lot of strawman arguments as if that will somehow prove u knowledgeable.

And this somehow implies that u r knowledgeable? I have yet to see this amazing display of ur knowledge regarding nuclear doctrines. So far u have avoided the subject altogether in ur posts.

Another strawman argument by u. I'm sure there exist many experts out there...compared to them my knowledge is most definitely miniscule. This still however doesn't add any support to ur original argument. I'm still waiting to hear anything of substance from u.

Then plz do show me...show us all what treasure trove of knowledge u have learned from there. It is a defense forum after all...we would all love to learn about such a topic.

I'm not trying to sound intelligent at all. I have clearly stated my argument and stayed on topic instead of going of on unrelated tangents to try and prove my superiority in this regard(everyone can see who is doing that out of the two of us ). What I wrote may very well be textbook 101 but u still haven't been able to counter it.

I do know different levels of threshold that exist...and I told u already. Pak's nuclear weapons have always been a last resort in case there's nothing left to lose. I have clearly stated that Pak will always reply in a conventional manner every time it can. The only time things go nuclear is when Pak is unable to sustain in a conventional manner. An example of this is Pak's development of low yield short range weapons like Nasr. This was a direct response to Indian CSD. Even in case if India is to execute a CSD type of scenario where Pak can respond conventionally that would still be the response...Pak would use Nasr in case where it gets overwhelmed quickly on multiple fronts and conventional options are no longer sufficient.

To sum it all up and repeat myself so maybe u will finally understand and talk substance...even prior to Feb 27 events...Pak's response would always have been a conventional one rather than a nuclear one in any scenario where Pak can respond conventionally in an adequate manner. So what has Feb 27 skirmish changed? Nothing...absolutely nothing.

You are unfortunately beating at the shadows!!! It was India who wanted to induce MAD on 02-28 following the “surprises” on 02-27!!! Why do you think the US policy makers are alarmed?

 

[Cookie Monster]

You are unfortunately beating at the shadows!!! It was India who wanted to induce MAD on 02-28 following the “surprises” on 02-27!!! Why do you think the US policy makers are alarmed?

I was just trying to dispel the notion he had that Feb airstrike by India was some sort of "brilliant calculated move to test Pak's nuclear threshold". It's just another one of the many ridiculous excuses we keep hearing from the Indian side.

It's absurd to believe that Pak's first response to an airstrike by India would be to launch a nuke. An amateur with no understanding of warfare/strategy/nuclear doctrines/etc. could've predicted that Pak wouldn't default to using nukes(risking a MAD scenario) over an airstrike. The conventional response of PAF to IAF's strike was the obvious choice. The poster made it seem like it was some coin toss and India was just trying to test whether or not Pak would go nuclear...it's just laughable.

@padamchen

 

[Champs Trophy 2017]

Sigh ....

You joined in 2016.

Three years before you joined, I spent 2+ years on a board of US and NATO and Russian veterans.

Just bcuz I joined in 2016 doesn't mean that I didn't exist before 2016. I didn't just materialize out of thin air on the day I joined this forum...just like how u existed and were able to learn things before u became a member of this forum. So what was the point of bringing this up? Absolutely nothing...like ur last post instead of talking substance u tend to create a lot of strawman arguments as if that will somehow prove u knowledgeable.