India cannot defeat Pakistan militarily

[Joe Shearer]

India invaded Haji Pir first. The contingency plan of Grand Slam commenced after that. India then went ballistic and attacked Pakistan on multiple fronts, an escalation to all out war. Imagine if Pakistan nuked Afghanistan in every time TTP or BLA blew themselves up.

Wrong again. The capture of Haji Pir Pass was during one of the follow-up operations chasing out the nine groups of special forces infiltrated into J&K. Gibraltar preceded Grand Slam.

Yes, and the Mujahideen in Afghanistan were trained and armed by Pakistan, with SSG and ISI personnel often operating alongside them.

Did the Soviets, who unlike India, could certainly decisively defeat Pakistan in a conventional war on favourable terms, attempt to do so?

Let's just agree to disagree - you seem to be under some legal or moral obligation to not oppose your government's narrative, per your own posts.

I am quoting Pakistani sources, and not sitting on my chair dreaming up speculative scenarios.

It is important that you should find out the truth from your own records before entering into a discussion of this sort.

Nahi yaar, Indian keyboard warriors who have more strategic knowledge than P-5+ the world's leaders combined have declared Pakistani nukes are non existent and will be stopped by vedik technology.

Don't waste everybody else's time in this kind of angry retort and resort to insults when you run out of facts.

They do portray themselves to call it Pakistan's bluff but I am afraid they dare not try it in practicality. I do think they all know the truth in heart.

Nobody responsible on the Indian side has ever made light of the fact that Pakistan actually has a greater number of nuclear devices than India has, even though some of the Pakistani devices are understood to be tactical nuclear devices.

India also has a no-first-use policy, as has China. Pakistan does not. That can be understood on its own terms, without having to bring in external influence on the timing of the use of nuclear weapons.

 

[arjunk]

Don't waste everybody else's time in this kind of angry retort and resort to insults when you run out of facts.

I have wasted my own time sincerely trying to use facts to converse civilly with your countrymen to no avail as they shut their ears and scream the same tired IT cell troll talking points again.

India also has a no-first-use policy,

Which "accidentally" was termed NFU against non nuclear states by your NSA as far back as 2010, and now your Hindu nationalist government is trying to go for a first use policy (with your strategic missiles having a mind of their own, I seriously worry about this.)

Also, if you dump all your RAPIDS into the thar desert and Pakistan blows them up in its own territory, per India's doctrine, it is basis for escalating to strategic weapons. Not exactly responsible or proportionate to trade your entire country and its neighbors for a few thousand sq kms of desert, is it?

Nobody responsible on the Indian side has ever made light of the fact that Pakistan actually has a greater number of nuclear devices than India has

India is around seven times bigger - Pakistan should have an arsenal of about 1120 nukes to India's 160, if you want to balance the number.

as has China.

China's maintains a modestly small arsenal for a country of such calibre. India on the other hand is ramping up nuke production and trying to switch to a first use policy.

Pakistan does not.

Because India's invasion of Pakistan while it faced civil war in 1971, Brasstacks, the similar events of 1984, 2002, 2008, 2016, 2017, 2019, and Indian politicains, generals, and defense misters' repeated threats to annex AJK/GB do not inspire faith in India's claims it is a peaceful country. Seriously, a "peaceful nuclear explosion?"

Oh, and Bush's "we will bomb you to the stone age." and "we will seize your nukes" And Isreal whining about the Muslim bomb and its sampson doctrine - Jericho-III is specifically aimed at Pakistan.

Pakistan, since India's oxymoronic peaceful nuclear explosion in 1974, has offered a nuclear missile free zone, nuke free zone, and so on, and India has rejected all of these proposals. India was the one to introduce Nuclear weapons, SRBMs, MRBMs, IRBMs ICBMs, BMDs, SLBMs, and now Hypersonic missiles to the region - Pakistan simply matches these capabilities to maintain deterrence and peace.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I have wasted my own time sincerely trying to use facts to converse civilly with your countrymen to no avail as they shut their ears and scream the same tired IT cell troll talking points again.

Have you noticed the long and laboured conversation I had with the person who calls himself Battlion something or the other?

Have you any idea about how painful it is to go through that? To quote you,"...sincerely trying to use facts to converse civilly with your countrymen to no avail as they shut their ears and scream the same tired...troll talking points again..."

Point is that in spite of that, I have not allowed myself, in that conversation or any other, to get to ad hominem.

Just saying.

Not necessary that you should slavishly follow someone else's example.

Not saying that I am an exemplary person either. But you have been on the forum long enough to know what some of us stand for, and to see that it is not necessary to drop one's standards to deal with laboured and untenable arguments.

Calm down. Nothing is worth letting yourself down, or being undignified.

Which "accidentally" was termed NFU against non nuclear states by your NSA as far back as 2010, and now your Hindu nationalist government is trying to go for a first use policy (with your strategic missiles having a mind of their own, I seriously worry about this.)

This is not going to happen. Making threatening noises is different from actually doing something threatening.

Also, if you dump all your RAPIDS into the thar desert and Pakistan blows them up in its own territory, per India's doctrine, it is basis for escalating to strategic weapons. Not exactly responsible or proportionate to trade your entire country and its neighbors for a few thousand sq kms of desert, is it?

The answer is simple - don't use nuclear devices.

All along I have been told by various authoritative voices that nuclear device or no nuclear device, the PA can take on the Indian Army and beat it.

Why worry, then? You have nothing to fear.

India is around seven times bigger - Pakistan should have an arsenal of about 1120 nukes to India's 160, if you want to balance the number.

Right, let's use your logic.

How is it that a country one seventh our size has more devices than we do? It should have one seventh our number, or around 23 (rounding off).

China's maintains a modestly small arsenal for a country of such calibre. India on the other hand is ramping up nuke production and trying to switch to a first use policy.

What calibre? is the number of nuclear devices linked to something other than the single device needed to cause devastation to an enemy's country? Is it linked to population? Is it linked to GDP?

Please think about this, and what it translates to, if you want to quantify 'calibre'.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Because India's invasion of Pakistan while it faced civil war in 1971, Brasstacks, the similar events of 1984, 2002, 2008, 2016, 2017, 2019, and Indian politicains, generals, and defense misters' repeated threats to annex AJK/GB do not inspire faith in India's claims it is a peaceful country. Seriously, a "peaceful nuclear explosion?"

After that long list, we do not get away from the fact that Pakistan has been aggressor, in fact, so many times, while you can say that only half-heartedly about India on one occasion.

All the events other than that one never resulted in a single shot being fired.

I notice that your active arming of infiltrators who kill our civilians, our policemen and our soldiers, even as there is a ceasefire in force, does not figure in your list.

Pakistan, since India's oxymoronic peaceful nuclear explosion in 1974, has offered a nuclear missile free zone, nuke free zone, and so on, and India has rejected all of these proposals. India was the one to introduce Nuclear weapons, SRBMs, MRBMs, IRBMs ICBMs, BMDs, SLBMs, and now Hypersonic missiles to the region - Pakistan simply matches these capabilities to maintain deterrence and peace.

Other than your need to equate yourself to a neighbouring country that has never tried to whittle down your armed strength, your civilian life or attacked your population or your institutions, what makes you think that any of these nuclear weapons should be aimed at you?

If you stopped reacting and thought instead, why would anyone need more than an SRBM to reach every corner of Pakistani territory from within India? Does anyone seriously suppose that MRBMs, IRBMs or ICBMs are needed to attack Pakistan?

 

[Edevelop]

For 1947-48 - Pakistan's fate was written. Check the comments of Prominent Indian and British Leaders. Everybody knew the plight of Pakistanis. We did not stop it because the narrative of Pakistan had taken shape already in 1943 and dissident was visible in many parts. Partition was a blessing in disguise and this is the only thing why I thank Nehru & Gandhi. Just imagine the situation today if these Zahils and Radical animals were living in Undivided India! We would have become bheekhmanga and we would have been living like the Pakistanis today. Good riddance i say. Thanks to Nehru & Gandhi again. Don't worry we will take Azad Kashmir and GB back. We are bound by our parliamentary resolution.

We never felt like taking over Nepal, Bhutan, Srilanka as these states are not our enemies. Moreover they are part of Indian Civilization and mostly untouched by foreign invadors. They are more Indian culturally than by nationality.

We lost our land to China and faced defeat in 1962 not 1961 (Don't try to play your favorite game of poking with dates here). We were weak and we were in the initial days planning and building of new structures for our nation. Many political decisions hit us adversely at that time. But that has been rectified later in 1967 and 1987. Yes some areas are still under Chinese control and India is policically and constitutionally bound to recover them.

1965 - Zahil Pakistanis thought that India was weak after ther war with China and took the bite and got bitch slapped. No we could not retrieve GB Azad Kashmir because our leadership thought that we won't be able to retain it due to our economic conditions at that time. We rather forced the Zahils to celebrate defence day and allowed them to increase their happiness index.

Not commenting on 1971 as more than 90k were standing with their pants down.

Are you asking me or answering your own questions?

As for India's achievements - We are a global power. We are the 5 largest economy and before the end of this decade we will be the 3rd Largest.

We have reduced our poverty rate from 44% to 18% in 30 years.

We have established India as a prominent player in space sector.

We have a prominent Private Sector. We have a great Info Tech Industry. We have a great Foreign Policy. We are self sufficient in food production. We are diversifying our energy consumption pattern and moving towards energy security.

We have established world class institutions producing leaders, administrators, economists, scientists, Engineers, Doctors, Agriculturists, Entrepreneurs, Accountants and so on.

We have created our political system, Judiciary, Public Services for Indians not for the highest bidders.

we are adding more GDP than the entire GDP of Pakistan each year.
We have achieved $770 b in export last year. Our Foreign reserve is close to $600b and growing.

More importantly, we have managed to preserve and upkeep our Culture, identity, Sanskriti and Sanskar despite of all odds.

Last but not the least - we proudly say that we are a developing country. We still have many shortcomings that need to be bridged. We are working towards betterment of our people. We aspire to be a developed country by 2047.


There are many more but tum itne mei hi kaam chala lo. Kyun ki Paklandion ko na samajh mei aayega na yeh sab unsey ho payega. (After writing all these things, i have a feeling that Pakistani to aakhir Pakistani hotey hai. Mera time waste ho gaya).

Please List down the Achievements of Pakistan if you have any.

Take "GB and AJK" eh? First train your pilots to get back in one piece. Last time your Air Force tried to cross, 2 jets, a Mig 21 and an SU-30 were shot down, one pilot taken in Pak Army's custody and an Indian MI-17 helicopter crashed killing 7 on board due to PAF's electronic warfare capabilities.

You need to concern yourself with Assam, West Bengal, Nagaland, Telangana and Khalistan. Every now and then your armed forces personnel get killed and all this is happening internally. Kashmiri movement will live as long as it takes to get independence with or without Pakistan's support. If the Pakistani military establishment doesn't interfere in our domestic politics and decides to do its job, they need only one bomb to destroy a road in the Valley that carry's supplies to Indian army

We Pakistanis don't care what happens in Bhutan and Nepal. Pakistan's only interference in South Asia was in Sri Lanka and this was upon Sri Lankan government's request that Pakistani military provide them with weapons to crush the Tamil movement which it did embarrassing India who were arming and providing safe havens to terrorists.

China could not end its poverty entirely despite communism and achieving 7%+ growth rate consistently for decades. India on the other hand has poverty that is more than entire African continent and a disparity between rich and poor that is worst than Pakistan and you are here telling me you will be a developed country by 2047 lol.

You don't need to worry about our economy. The day there is a government that completes its tenure without Military and Supreme Court interferences which btw will happen one day for sure, that is the day you will see the real us. Just to give you an Idea what we are capable of, a government in Pakistan that lasted between 2013-2017 that dealt with 128 days of street politics, military operations against the Taliban and RAW in 3 provinces fetched $50 billion of investments, ended energy load shedding in the country from 12h to 0h and economic growth rate that hovered around 6% making it an emerging market. If anything, it's easier to pull a 240 million population out of poverty compared to a country like India that has a population of 1.4 billion which also happens to rank below Pakistan in Global Hunger Index.

 

[arjunk]

How is it that a country one seventh our size has more devices than we do? It should have one seventh our number, or around 23 (rounding off

Because you drop nukes on the opposing country, not on yourself.

After that long list, we do not get away from the fact that Pakistan has been aggressor, in fact, so many times, while you can say that only half-heartedly about India on one occasion.

All the events other than that one never resulted in a single shot being fired.

Because Pakistan's nukes achieved their purpouse of deterrence.

I notice that your active arming of infiltrators who kill our civilians, our policemen and our soldiers, even as there is a ceasefire in force, does not figure in your list.

What exactly was the Mukthi Bahini? Was Jadhav sponsoring terrorism against civilians (not even armed resistance against an occupying power in a disputed territory as Pakistan used to) for fun?

If you're referring to PAFF and TRF, they are completely indigenous groups, and your army/paramilitary/police forcefully occupying Kashmir against its will and committing the worst atrocities known to man instead of trying to solve the Kashmir conflict only widens their recruiting base.

Everyone knows Pakistan's establishment has done its best to destroy Kashmiri militant groups. FATF is breathing down our neck and we have implemented stringent reforms. You have thermal cameras, laser sensors, alarmed fencing, watchtowers or all of the above covering every inch of the LoC. The notion that legions of terrorists led by the ghost of bin Laden infiltrate daily is absurd.

Do you think the child traumitised after watching his 12 year old sister and elderly grandmother be stripped naked and tortured by Indian forces, and was radicalized into seeking revenge was a Pakistani infiltrator?

Do you think the 14 year old boy who picked up arms after watching his family be abused was a Pakistani infiltrator?

Do you think the rest of the traumatised and angry locals (OGWs as your forces term them) who work alongside the militants are Pakistani infiltrators?

Even if Pakistan was the big bad magical devil who could make every insurgency succeed, do you seriously think Kashmir seceding is an existential threat to India, like India trying to overrun Pakistan with close to a million soldiers, thousands of jets, and hundreds of ships is?

What calibre? is the number of nuclear devices linked to something other than the single device needed to cause devastation to an enemy's country? Is it linked to population? Is it linked to GDP?

Please think about this, and what it translates to, if you want to quantify 'calibre'.

China is am emerging superpower whose main military adversary is the United States.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Because you drop nukes on the opposing country, not on yourself.

Exactly.

Now figure out how many we need to intimidate the PRC.

Because Pakistan's nukes achieved their purpouse of deterrence.

Doesn't that seem strange even to you? Since we have now clearly established that in 48, 65 and 99, Pakistan attacked India. So how does Pakistan possessing nuclear devices deter Pakistan's aggression?

What exactly

The Mukti Bahini, as you will find out if you ask Bangladeshis, were entirely Bangladeshi.

The infiltrators into Kashmir are rarely Kashmiri; the majority are from parts of Pakistan. This is something that you can determine for yourself if you check where they are mourned.

Was Jadhav sponsoring terrorism against civilians (not even armed resistance against an occupying power in a disputed territory as Pakistan used to) for fun?

Nothing has been proved in an open judicial trial against Jadhav, who, if you remember, was kidnapped from Iran and taken into Pakistan. He was tried in a military court with no representation.

As for your armed resistance against an occupying power, repeating your version of events will convince nobody else other than the Pakistani establishment.

 

[Joe Shearer]

If you're referring to PAFF and TRF, they are completely indigenous groups, and your army/paramilitary/police forcefully occupying Kashmir against its will and committing the worst atrocities known to man instead of trying to solve the Kashmir conflict only widens their recruiting base.

This has been discussed threadbare.

Pakistan has no legitimacy for its claims, under the conditions on which both India and Pakistan were given independence. The dispute exists only in the aspirations of Pakistan.

 

[PDF]

Nobody responsible on the Indian side has ever made light of the fact that Pakistan actually has a greater number of nuclear devices than India has, even though some of the Pakistani devices are understood to be tactical nuclear devices.

I do hope that is true. At least what is being written both by journalists and thinktanks etc tells otherwise. Statements from the top military and cabinet ministers are also alarming in the past. I think these people are actually responsible for policy and operational decisions.

Indian no first use policy itself is shaky and of debate.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Everyone knows Pakistan's establishment has done its best to destroy Kashmiri militant groups.

If Pakistan's establishment had twitched even a muscle to restrain Kashmiri militant groups, there would be no violence today. Even today, the leaders of those groups walk about freely, address public meetings (not in Kashmir), and when they are detained, they seem to enjoy every facility within prison that they might have wanted out of it.

Do you think anybody is fooled by this noori kushti?

FATF is breathing down our neck and we have implemented stringent reforms.

Name a single reform that affects sponsored terrorism. One.

You have thermal cameras, laser sensors, alarmed fencing, watchtowers or all of the above covering every inch of the LoC.

You keep identifying yourself as a Kashmiri, and then say things that undermine that statement. If you really were Kashmiri, you would have known that there are many points on the LOC where it is possible, even for an elderly man like myself, to step across and travel a considerable distance without detection. None of the sensor systems and networks offer complete coverage; they can't, especially in the more craggy or forested portions.

 

[PDF]

Jadhav

Are you talking of Hussain Mubarak Patel or Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav being Kidnapped?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Do you think the child traumitised after watching his 12 year old sister and elderly grandmother be stripped naked and tortured by Indian forces, and was radicalized into seeking revenge was a Pakistani infiltrator?

Do you think the 14 year old boy who picked up arms after watching his family be abused was a Pakistani infiltrator?

Do you think the rest of the traumatised and angry locals (OGWs as your forces term them) who work alongside the militants are Pakistani infiltrators?

Did you read what I posted?

China is am emerging superpower whose main military adversary is the United States.

And we are a nation that has been attacked by two hostile and aggressive neighbours repeatedly, a nation that has seen one aggressor slacken its efforts due to its intense internal problems, and is left with China as our military adversary.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I do hope that is true. At least what is being written both by journalists and thinktanks etc tells otherwise. Statements from the top military and cabinet ministers are also alarming in the past. I think these people are actually responsible for policy and operational decisions.

For one thing, the Indian media today, now that NDTV has been forcibly taken over, echoes whatever is said by the ruling party. That is why they are fondly known as the 'godi media'.

As far as thinktanks are concerned, I invite you to listen to two or three of them; it is unbearable to listen to them more than that. They quite clearly have no idea of what to set as policy, although among the retired staff of the three services, there is enough talent to undertake policy formulation. and if we go by their public expressions of opinion, they are none of them of the views that have been expressed by irresponsible people.

There is one exception, perhaps two.

Indian no first use policy itself is shaky and of debate.

Is this what you are referring to? Did he state anywhere that he was recommending first use? If you had read the entire article at that time, he was making the point that, short of facing national annihilation, Pakistan would not use the bomb. Therefore, in his opinion, it would be possible to fight short duration military clashes.

Since then, this suggestion has been seen by all on both sides to be inaccurate.

Any possible war is likely to be an exchange of fire lasting a few hours, at worst, a few days, OR a long-drawn-out battle involving all available resources, and heavily consumptive of arms and ammunition. So even that brief moment when there was some thought that something that could be achieved is now proven false.

I am not sure why Indian no first use policy is thought to be shaky and of debate. What grounds are there for thinking so?

View attachment 928007
Are you talking of Hussain Mubarak Patel or Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav being Kidnapped?

Does his possessing an identity other than his own, for illicit transactions across the Pakistan-Iran border, legitimise his kidnapping? Or his mockery of a trial?

Would you like to read what one of your former members has written about the abusive nature of Pakistani military trials? I can reproduce it for your consideration in two days. This was written by a loyal Pakistani who was totally opposed to these trials.

 

[PDF]

I am not sure why Indian no first use policy is thought to be shaky and of debate. What grounds are there for thinking so?

India’s no-first-use dilemma: Strategic consistency or ambiguity towards China and Pakistan

On 14 October 2020, in a statement to the Conference on Disarmament, Indian ambassador, Pankaj Sharma, reiterated India’s commitment to a policy of no first use (NFU) of nuclear weapons.

www.sipri.org

https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/09/26/much-ado-about-india-s-no-first-use-nuke-policy-pub-79952

I do not have access to internal chatter, but I can only take hints from the statements and what they are signaling towards.

Any possible war is likely to be an exchange of fire lasting a few hours, at worst, a few days, OR a long-drawn-out battle involving all available resources, and heavily consumptive of arms and ammunition. So even that brief moment when there was some thought that something that could be achieved is now proven false.

We saw how in 2019, without too many significant miltary exchanges, the skirmish was at the brink of missile exchanges. And when missiles are to be exchanged, I can not predict the play of nuclear warheads in the conflict especially given Pakistan's full spectrum deterrence.

“Night of Murder”: On the Brink of Nuclear War in South Asia

After a suicide attack in Kashmir that killed 46 policemen, India conducted an airstrike against what it called a “terrorist training camp” in Pakistan.

www.nti.org

Rumors of blackout in Karachi were viral Post 2019 events with threat of Brahmos and Pakistan also deploying Shaheen IIs.

and then there is Mian Channu Missile misfire itself. It makes anyone suspect both operational and policy usage of India.

Brahmos misfiring into Pakistan: Wing Commander Abhinav Sharma files case against Defence Ministry and IAF chief

Wing Commander Abhinav Sharma claimed that at the time of the incident, he was assigned as an engineering officer to the squadron and was only providing professional and practical training for maintenance duties., India News, Times Now

www.timesnownews.com

What I actually see is that Pakistan has been very restraint despite historically being the aggressive one. It's almost like reverse role-playing.
I do not think Pakistan will in any near future conflict with India be as restraint as before, primary because both the politics and public pressure at military ties their hands. A conflict will be the easy way to divert the attention and it might even be tempting due to poor economical situation. (Military always have reserve for short term conflict and I believe even with bankruptcy, Pakistan can afford a conflict calculating that it will go the missile route within a few days and then either peace will be forced by international community or we shall really know if the bluff is real or not) I have to say the Indian govt's prior actions for elections or whatever reasons have eroded many understandings and made the relations much more fragile than they were.

 

[Joe Shearer]

India’s no-first-use dilemma: Strategic consistency or ambiguity towards China and Pakistan

On 14 October 2020, in a statement to the Conference on Disarmament, Indian ambassador, Pankaj Sharma, reiterated India’s commitment to a policy of no first use (NFU) of nuclear weapons.

www.sipri.org

https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/09/26/much-ado-about-india-s-no-first-use-nuke-policy-pub-79952 I do not have access to internal chatter, but I can only take hints from the statements and what they are signaling towards.

I am perplexed.

We have a no-first-use policy. I hope that is not in doubt.

We have a democratic system, and everything including much of our constitution (the same one that we gave ourselves in 1950) is constantly being questioned. Our laws are also questioned. Our banking policies are questioned, economic policies are questioned, the quality of supervision of our institutions is questioned.

So what?

Why should everybody and her husband start jumping about like startled chickens because the no-first-use policy is questioned? Why are we forbidden from talking about it, debating the salient points and expressing opinions about these?