deckingraj
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2009
- Messages
- 5,192
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
It appears that you didn't get me...(hell,most Indians don't)
With all due respect you post sounds as if there is hardly a difference b/w a suicide bomber and Pakistan state which is very very wrong....Let me explain why...
I'm saying,the threat of a first-strike from Pakistan will prevent India from starting a declared war,hence stopping the thereafter retaliation in the first place...
You are absolutely correct here...2003-2004 showdown after the parliament attack is a clear indicator that Pakistan has managed to deter India using this first strike option...However it ends there...It is after this debacle ABM system got its full backing from GOI...There is a reason that a country where almost everything is delayed, this system has been on track....Talks about so called cold start(pratical, possible or not is a separate debate) also starting circling around the defense establishment...Lot of procurement has been done post 2003-2004 around this arena...In short what our establishment is trying to do is defeat this deterrance and sneak in a low yield conflict to punish Pak if provoked by a terror attack...
Look i am not trying to say that Pak is doomed or India has achieved what it wants, all i am saying is that we are trying to reach there...Pak is doing the opposite which is deny us....
Think from this perspective...
- Indian ABM will at a minimum force Pakistan to invest heavily in developing/getting technologies to overcome the system...
- Indian ABM will at least knock off certain number of missiles and prevent damage to some/larger extent on our side...
- This can prove to be a deterant for Pakistan first strike option...Because now not only Pak risk a massive retaliation but also risk a condition where she is not able to cripple India the way she would have liked before going out for good...
You have to understand...we have very less to lose as compared to India in an event of war.
I am sorry but this line of thinking is very flawed...You will loose everything you have, so it doesn't matter how much the opposition loose...I am back to stone age and so are you...So how does it matter that i lost only 300-400 billion economy vs 1.6 trillion dollar???
BTW,the Military Strategists and we fully understand the term "massive retaliation"...so no need to describe it.
You are right here...However our emphasis is only on nuclear war. Let me try to bring your attention to another headache that ABM will bring in for Pak...
Scenario
There is a mumbai like attack on India which is planned, supported and carried by Pak nationals...Indian ABM system is in place...Indian establishment decides enough is enough and give a green signal to defense forces for a retaliation....A couple of low yield cruise missile got fired in P-O-K to take out some terrorist camps...Obviously this will not get well with Pak establishment...They will have to retaliate in some way...Now the question is go for an all out full-flede war or keep the sector small but give a punitive reply to India...With ABM in place what you think your options would be????