How will Nasr's Neutron warhead neutralize advancing enemy columns...

[Soulspeek]

Thats why I say... You are a racist nation as a whole. We value human achievements more than skin color. Our colored people are world achievers and your so called fair skinned people are suicide bombers in the eyes of world.

Well, we have Kashmir and Punjab too... just saying...


Nah they still don't look like the avg. indian... that was my point... i don't really want to post pics here now... i don't want to puke...

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Yes, 31 people have died due to Chernobyl. You should think before yapping.

Shut your trap;


http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-bo...l-death-toll-985-000-mostly-from-cancer/20908

The physics is the same regardless of the yield of the bomb. The bigger the bomb, bigger the damage, more is the money and manpower required to cleanup and rebuild.

What?!

I should say about 30000 to 40000.

Lmao.. That would be enough to burn earth probably thrice... You are too stupid to understand that.

http://www.globalzero.org/blog/how-many-nukes-would-it-take-render-earth-uninhabitable

Yes. It will be deployed all over India. Billions will be spent on it

Not even US has that.. And they are the worlds sole super power with active missile defence shields since decades..

You are confusing hurting with rebuilding. I didn't say we won't get hurt, I'm saying we can rebuild whatever damage you inflict.

With what? And who will rebuild ? The cancer stricken people on Himalayas or Andaman Islands starving on radioactive wasteland ?

Read up on nuclear war.

Enlighten us!

That's between US and Russia who have tens of thousands of nukes each.

US has an estimated 7100 nukes & Russia around 7500.

Followed by France with 300 ,China with around 250.

No, I live outside most of the blast areas. I'll survive the nukes.

Where ?

Read up on MAD.

What about it?

You use Nasr on Indian troops, we use thermonuclear weapons on Pak cities. Please keep it simple. This is the result of Nasr. Our govt has confirmed this.

Do you even have theromobaric nukes? If yes so do we.. As for cities.... As I said before,, say goodbye to your behind..

Such nukes are called strategic nukes, not

Tactical nukes are used for battle.

Nope they are called tactical nukes.. By the world..

It's Little Boy and Fat Man.

Fat man/boy does it even matter? Do you know their yields? That was nothing compared to what you will suffer.

Little Boy killed 90,000 people, not millions. Hiroshima's total population was 150,000 before the bomb was dropped. 90,000 people died. The population of Hiroshima 1 year after the bomb dropped was 165,000. Today it is over a million. So what did that bomb do in the long run? Absolutely nothing.

towards ground zero.

It will never be known exactly how many people were killed immediately, and in the following months, by the atomic bombs: there may have been as many as 140,000 in Hiroshima and 70,000 in Nagasaki; it's estimated another 72,000 were injured at Hiroshima and 25,000 at Nagasaki.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/radiation/story.htm



That was the number of people killed instantly .. Try the ones who died of radiation .. And those suffering from the radiation even in 2016...

And keep in mind the nuclear yield of those bombs which was next to none in comparison with the nukes of today;

http://www.atomicheritage.org/history/little-boy-and-fat-man

When it comes to Chernobyl, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, researchers are still not sure about the long term effects of the radiation, that is genetic defects passed on to children. Too much Hollywood is bad for you.

Your stupidity is astounding;

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...nagasaki-still-inform-health-today-180956185/

Yes, 31 people have died due to Chernobyl. You should think before yapping.

Shut your trap;


http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-bo...l-death-toll-985-000-mostly-from-cancer/20908

The physics is the same regardless of the yield of the bomb. The bigger the bomb, bigger the damage, more is the money and manpower required to cleanup and rebuild.

What?!

I should say about 30000 to 40000.

Lmao.. That would be enough to burn earth probably thrice... You are too stupid to understand that.

http://www.globalzero.org/blog/how-many-nukes-would-it-take-render-earth-uninhabitable

Yes. It will be deployed all over India. Billions will be spent on it

Not even US has that.. And they are the worlds sole super power with active missile defence shields since decades..

You are confusing hurting with rebuilding. I didn't say we won't get hurt, I'm saying we can rebuild whatever damage you inflict.

With what? And who will rebuild ? The cancer stricken people on Himalayas or Andaman Islands starving on radioactive wasteland ?

Read up on nuclear war.

Enlighten us!

That's between US and Russia who have tens of thousands of nukes each.

US has an estimated 7100 nukes & Russia around 7500.

Followed by France with 300 ,China with around 250.

No, I live outside most of the blast areas. I'll survive the nukes.

Where ?

Read up on MAD.

What about it?

You use Nasr on Indian troops, we use thermonuclear weapons on Pak cities. Please keep it simple. This is the result of Nasr. Our govt has confirmed this.

Do you even have theromobaric nukes? If yes so do we.. As for cities.... As I said before,, say goodbye to your behind..

Such nukes are called strategic nukes, not

Tactical nukes are used for battle.

Nope they are called tactical nukes.. By the world..

It's Little Boy and Fat Man.

Fat man/boy does it even matter? Do you know their yields? That was nothing compared to what you will suffer.

Little Boy killed 90,000 people, not millions. Hiroshima's total population was 150,000 before the bomb was dropped. 90,000 people died. The population of Hiroshima 1 year after the bomb dropped was 165,000. Today it is over a million. So what did that bomb do in the long run? Absolutely nothing.

That was the number of people killed instantly .. Try the ones who died of radiation .. And those suffering from the radiation even in 2016...

And keep in mind the nuclear yield of those bombs which was next to none in comparison with the nukes of today;

http://www.atomicheritage.org/history/little-boy-and-fat-man

When it comes to Chernobyl, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, researchers are still not sure about the long term effects of the radiation, that is genetic defects passed on to children. Too much Hollywood is bad for you.

Your stupidity is astounding;

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...nagasaki-still-inform-health-today-180956185/



@Gufi. Man these people are retarded.

 

[randomradio]

Smart or Tactical nukes are specifically designed to be used against enemy military assets and hardened targets which may not be destroyed with conventional weapons. This includes , Air bases, Naval dockyards, command and control, Air craft carriers and supporting fleet, etc.

Battlefield usage is just one of the scenario they can be deployed but in the fog of war, the most probably usage is what I mentioned above.

Strategic nukes are used as a last resort, when destruction of the enemy nation is intended by nuking their population centers with stuff like Hydrogen bomb.

Yeah, you're right.

Compare the size of an aircraft with that of Nasr.

The small size doesn't matter. Aircraft generally have smaller RCS now.

Regardless, the Nasr is a solid fueled rocket.

Shut your trap;


http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-bo...l-death-toll-985-000-mostly-from-cancer/20908


What?!


Lmao.. That would be enough to burn earth probably thrice... You are too stupid to understand that.

http://www.globalzero.org/blog/how-many-nukes-would-it-take-render-earth-uninhabitable




Not even US has that.. And they are the worlds sole super power with active missile defence shields since decades..



With what? And who will rebuild ? The cancer stricken people on Himalayas or Andaman Islands starving on radioactive wasteland ?


Enlighten us!


US has an estimated 7100 nukes & Russia around 7500.

Followed by France with 300 ,China with around 250.

View attachment 304330
Where ?


What about it?



Do you even have theromobaric nukes? If yes so do we.. As for cities.... As I said before,, say goodbye to your behind..


Nope they are called tactical nukes.. By the world..

Fat man/boy does it even matter? Do you know their yields? That was nothing compared to what you will suffer.


towards ground zero.

It will never be known exactly how many people were killed immediately, and in the following months, by the atomic bombs: there may have been as many as 140,000 in Hiroshima and 70,000 in Nagasaki; it's estimated another 72,000 were injured at Hiroshima and 25,000 at Nagasaki.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/radiation/story.htm



That was the number of people killed instantly .. Try the ones who died of radiation .. And those suffering from the radiation even in 2016...

And keep in mind the nuclear yield of those bombs which was next to none in comparison with the nukes of today;

http://www.atomicheritage.org/history/little-boy-and-fat-man




Your stupidity is astounding;

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...nagasaki-still-inform-health-today-180956185/

Shut your trap;


http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-bo...l-death-toll-985-000-mostly-from-cancer/20908



What?!



Lmao.. That would be enough to burn earth probably thrice... You are too stupid to understand that.

http://www.globalzero.org/blog/how-many-nukes-would-it-take-render-earth-uninhabitable





Not even US has that.. And they are the worlds sole super power with active missile defence shields since decades..




With what? And who will rebuild ? The cancer stricken people on Himalayas or Andaman Islands starving on radioactive wasteland ?



Enlighten us!



US has an estimated 7100 nukes & Russia around 7500.

Followed by France with 300 ,China with around 250.


View attachment 304330
Where ?



What about it?




Do you even have theromobaric nukes? If yes so do we.. As for cities.... As I said before,, say goodbye to your behind..



Nope they are called tactical nukes.. By the world..

Fat man/boy does it even matter? Do you know their yields? That was nothing compared to what you will suffer.

You are a Hollywood General. Live in your delusions.


That was the number of people killed instantly .. Try the ones who died of radiation .. And those suffering from the radiation even in 2016...

And keep in mind the nuclear yield of those bombs which was next to none in comparison with the nukes of today;

http://www.atomicheritage.org/history/little-boy-and-fat-man




Your stupidity is astounding;

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...nagasaki-still-inform-health-today-180956185/



@Gufi. Man these people are retarded.

You are a Hollywood General. Live in your delusions.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

Where ?

I think he did his hitchhiking on the Indian MARS probe.

 

[Moon]

The small size doesn't matter. Aircraft generally have smaller RCS now.

Shoot a dish from 1km away, then shoot a bottle cap. Then rethink your statement.

Regardless, the Nasr is a solid fueled missile.

Here. Corrected it for you.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Yeah, you're right.



The small size doesn't matter. Aircraft generally have smaller RCS now.

Regardless, the Nasr is a solid fueled rocket.



You are a Hollywood General. Live in your delusions.

You folks are just damn stupid.

I think he did his hitchhiking on the Indian MARS probe.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Radiation can be washed away with water. Basically, after the explosion, well over 99% of the radioactive elements have dispersed in only a few days.

Within a year, the entire area can be rebuilt and repopulated again. Look at Hiroshima, Nagasaki.

The Japanese surveyed and cleared all the debris in Hiroshima in 4 years. It took that long because other cities were a higher priority. Most of the delay happened because Hiroshima did not have money for reconstruction and it took years for the Japanese govt to release funds. Over the course of a few years, the entire city was rebuilt. It is obvious that Mumbai has the money, the labour and the skills to rebuild in a few short years. Land reclamation will be a very small problem.

Compared to the overall size of an economy, especially that of India, the cost of construction of buildings is minuscule.

And you overestimate your nuclear weapons. They are too small and too tiny to cause significant damage. And this is without counting the BMD shield that India is in the process of deploying, Pakistan has no such system available.

If Pakistan did not have effective nukes to be used against india then the indian military would have attacked Pakistan after mumbai 26/11/2008. Trolls and internet warriors aside, the indian miliary high command know what Pakistan's TRUE capabilities are.

 

[FunkyGen]

Thats why I say... You are a racist nation as a whole. We value human achievements more than skin color. Our colored people are world achievers and your so called fair skinned people are suicide bombers in the eyes of world.

y u givin me feels?

 

[_NOBODY_]

You folks are just damn stupid.


View attachment 304341

Man! these trolls are hilarious. You have already wasted a lot of your energy on these trolls so just report them now.

 

[volatile]

And s400 too

How S400 will be in Indian territor this we will use against Indians in our captured territory

 

[randomradio]

Shoot a dish from 1km away, then shoot a bottle cap. Then rethink your statement.

RCS is more important than just the physical size of a target. The Swordfish can track a cricket ball sized target from hundreds of kilometers away. A bottle cap is a very big target for SAMs.

Here. Corrected it for you.

There's not much you can do with a 60Km missile/rocket in terms of maneuverability. The Barak can shoot down a mach 3 missile flying on a horizontal trajectory, the Nasr is a piece of cake for it. Too slow and too predictable. There's also the SPYDER. The Iron Dome is made for shooting down Nasr. Similar to Nasr, but with twice the range, India has the Prahar as well.

If Pakistan did not have effective nukes to be used against india then the indian military would have attacked Pakistan after mumbai 26/11/2008. Trolls and internet warriors aside, the indian miliary high command know what Pakistan's TRUE capabilities are.

No. In 2008, IA did not have enough weapons. They were already eating into their war reserves. That's why an emergency purchase was made a few years later for an excessive amount. Basically, only IAF and IN were ready to fight, IA wasn't. It's only over the last few years that IA has become ready to fight a conventional war with Pak while dissuading China.

And when I say 'ready', I mean ready to win, not just fight.

What stopped a potential war was American assurances that they will bring the perpetrators to justice. That's why RAW worked with the FBI and CIA. Now we have shown them the middle finger because obviously nothing was done. War reserves will exceed even the maximum threshold over the next two years. And if you didn't notice, you were already bleeding from your WoT. We didn't want you to stop that. Why would we?

Let's see what happens over the next two years shall we? It's going to be very interesting, and people will start noticing the changes soon.

 

[باپ]

Indians and their delusional comments

 

[Dazzler]

The NASR Missile has been tested... Nuclear warheads have not been tested ... the only tests that have been conducted on the so called Miniaturized nuclear bombs have been done in Controlled conditions in laboratory.... Are you guys so naive...

Share your source who says the warhead hasn't been tested.

RCS is more important than just the physical size of a target. The Swordfish can track a cricket ball sized target from hundreds of kilometers away. A bottle cap is a very big target for SAMs.






No. In 2008, IA did not have enough weapons. They were already eating into their war reserves. That's why an emergency purchase was made a few years later for an excessive amount. Basically, only IAF and IN were ready to fight, IA wasn't. It's only over the last few years that IA has become ready to fight a conventional war with Pak while dissuading China.

Apologies, I honestly took you as a "Sane" member.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

RCS is more important than just the physical size of a target. The Swordfish can track a cricket ball sized target from hundreds of kilometers away. A bottle cap is a very big target for SAMs.



There's not much you can do with a 60Km missile/rocket in terms of maneuverability. The Barak can shoot down a mach 3 missile flying on a horizontal trajectory, the Nasr is a piece of cake for it. Too slow and too predictable. There's also the SPYDER. The Iron Dome is made for shooting down Nasr. Similar to Nasr, but with twice the range, India has the Prahar as well.



No. In 2008, IA did not have enough weapons. They were already eating into their war reserves. That's why an emergency purchase was made a few years later for an excessive amount. Basically, only IAF and IN were ready to fight, IA wasn't. It's only over the last few years that IA has become ready to fight a conventional war with Pak while dissuading China.

And when I say 'ready', I mean ready to win, not just fight.

What stopped a potential war was American assurances that they will bring the perpetrators to justice. That's why RAW worked with the FBI and CIA. Now we have shown them the middle finger because obviously nothing was done. War reserves will exceed even the maximum threshold over the next two years. And if you didn't notice, you were already bleeding from your WoT. We didn't want you to stop that. Why would we?

Let's see what happens over the next two years shall we? It's going to be very interesting, and people will start noticing the changes soon.

Oh really? As far as 2008 is concerned, Pakistan has militarily made massive strides as well. Either way those purchases have now been checkmated by Pakistan as of 2011. So as far as Pakistan is concerned, indian conventional military superiority is null and void from our perspective. Also if what you say is true then india would have launched an attack against Pakistan in December 2015 after the military base attack in pathankot both to avenge that attack and for mumbai 26/11/2008 Let me explain: Before May 1998, high ranking indian politicians, scientists, military officials and other so called experts all vehemently and confidently claimed that Pakistan could NEVER EVER possess nuclear weapons with or without Chinese assistance. They got the shock of their lives when we tested our nukes and could not believe or fathom how this was possible. Now keeping in line with severe underestimations of Pakistan's military, the following independent and factual article from 2011 is very pertinent:

http://isis-online.org/isis-reports...g-nuclear-weapons-time-for-pakistan-to-rever/

The above confirms the fact that Pakistan does indeed have the capability to produce H-bombs and thermonuclear weapons in 2011. Imagine what Pakistan's strategic weapons capabilities are now in 2016. Especially in light of increased assistance by China in our missile and other military programs.This is very telling. Pakistan now in all probability has the ability to annihilate our enemy in any war that gets out of hand. The indian military high command is aware of this reality which is why it is reluctant to attack Pakistan regardless of whatever internet trolls and armchair generals say on PDF.

 

[Gufi]

Your stupidity is astounding;

I told you, tried to explain things to these posters... funny thing later happened, the same stuff about mated missiles and bunkers came in defencetoday
There should be a ban for being mentally incompetent to talk in adult forums... maybe a basic IQ test asking will washing radioactive areas cure the area or will the radioactivity stay... Car wash mentality or maybe those river side people who clean clothes... We can get any stain out -.-

Apologies, I honestly took you as a "Sane" member.

I had a few pages of explaining things to these posters.... do not waste your time trust me I wish someone had given this advice to me