Indian minister threatens Pakistan with 'bigger blow'

[maximuswarrior]

I don't know if I understood your "post" completely, but with the width that I see from the map, any half way competent war-planner will take out Pakistan's air bases with few well placed cruise missiles. Given --from what I read from this forum-- a lack of substantial air-defence, it won't be harder than starting the war itself.

Lastly, as I have mentioned elsewhere, I don't think India is going to attack Pakistan if there are no terrorist attacks there from Pakistan. On that front India is using economic sanctions and diplomacy to keep Pakistan in check. I mean, read your own politicians.


Its an ALCM. Naval attack will come later in the game -- if it at all happens. I believe, India will first disable all your airbases before venturing anywhere near your coasts.

I know what it is. I was not referring to the missiles' function, but rather its name.

As for India, we have heard the fables before. We proved how vulnerable India is on the 27th. We will twist India's neck and there is nothing anyone can do about that.

 

[Green disc]

Just a small correction, with the distances like India and Pakistan, you will see Pakistan's airbases taken out first by Indian long range artillery before any naval action happens. Meaning, you won't have anywhere to fly your planes from. Its simple geography.

Pakistani war planners have already thought of that, if you take out all your airbases only one option is left, both countries will be wiped out

 

[SIPRA]

As for India, we have heard the fables before. We proved how vulnerable India is on the 27th. We will twist India's neck and there is nothing anyone can do about that.

Wouldn't it do, if we only go for twisting its tail?

 

[sohail.ishaque]

Just a small correction, with the distances like India and Pakistan, you will see Pakistan's airbases taken out first by Indian long range artillery before any naval action happens. Meaning, you won't have anywhere to fly your planes from. Its simple geography.

Wow.. You have made india win the war that their generals are afraid to start. You must be the brother of that #MummyKiQasam who was asking for permission from Modi geee and then never came. I believe you drink cow piss alot and that has taken your mind completely. Btw if those LONG RANGE ARTILLERY is so super then why invest in subs, jets, missiles etc ?

 

[BringHarmony]

Wow.. You have made india win the war that their generals are afraid to start. You must be the brother of that #MummyKiQasam who was asking for permission from Modi geee and then never came. I believe you drink cow piss alot and that has taken your mind completely. Btw if those LONG RANGE ARTILLERY is so super then why invest in subs, jets, missiles etc ?

I cannt understand most of your post because of slangs/local language you use are foreign to me.

As far as definitions go, missiles are actually a part of long range artillery.

I know what it is. I was not referring to the missiles' function, but rather its name.

As for India, we have heard the fables before. We proved how vulnerable India is on the 27th. We will twist India's neck and there is nothing anyone can do about that.

From the looks of it, right now they are executing their plan of annexing Kashmir in Mainland freely. As I said before and elsewhere I neither agree nor support their plan. I just look and analyse it for what it is.

 

[waz]

Just a small correction, with the distances like India and Pakistan, you will see Pakistan's airbases taken out first by Indian long range artillery before any naval action happens. Meaning, you won't have anywhere to fly your planes from. Its simple geography.

Logic obviously fails you, the close distance means that India’s entire northern bases and ports will also be taken out with waves of Pakistani short range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.
This will render your forward operating capacity to nothing.

 

[crankthatskunk]

I have no idea what you are saying. Can you learn to write properly and coherently? Please?

Tere "phooj" ki baat ki hai. It is amusing to see an India asking for coherent reply. The one who cannot speak any language properly. Have you seen Modi killer welcoming Trump!! Man, that was hilarious. My "Phriend".

 

[sohail.ishaque]

I cannt understand most of your post because of slangs/local language you use are foreign to me.

As far as definitions go, missiles are actually a part of long range artillery.

So according to you, India/Indian Navy will level our bases with Long range artillery(missiles) and in that time we'll be waiting for ............... ??? what ??

I mean if long range artillery(missiles, as per you) will be used then they would be used from both sides.. Now i know you won't understand this post. Anyway, your Airforce is sh1t proven again on 27th of Feb and now you are betting on missiles. Well, d1ck, stop living in gaomootar land.

 

[thunderr]

Again, its hard to follow what you are writing or how is it related to this thread. Also, excessive use of makes your writing juvenile at best. I am not sure what should I reply to you. How about I ignore you till you graduate from the elementary school?

You aint worthy enough to be associated with anyone, go play your elementary shithole somewhere else , will rip you yindoos banyas from Kashmir soon.

 

[Flash_Ninja]

I don't know if I understood your "post" completely, but with the width that I see from the map, any half way competent war-planner will take out Pakistan's air bases with few well placed cruise missiles. Given --from what I read from this forum-- a lack of substantial air-defence, it won't be harder than starting the war itself.

Lastly, as I have mentioned elsewhere, I don't think India is going to attack Pakistan if there are no terrorist attacks there from Pakistan. On that front India is using economic sanctions and diplomacy to keep Pakistan in check. I mean, read your own politicians.


Its an ALCM. Naval attack will come later in the game -- if it at all happens. I believe, India will first disable all your airbases before venturing anywhere near your coasts.

A competent war planner yes, but Indian army even during peace time is a logistical nightmare; and firing cruise missiles is not that simple it has very steep consequences not just in the eyes of the world/UN but also because Pakistan has decent missile technology sometimes beyond their own capabilities and shooting one will only result in a severe retaliation.

Also India will and did attack Pakistan even though she did nothing, their so called bollywood inspired air strike on Balakot is proof of how they are hostile without transgression. Their "Economic sanctions" and "diplomacy" are clearly failing by the way, since Pakistan who was on the verge of bankruptcy a year ago has now turned it around and becoming stable and growing, and diplomatically we have become very close with the world powers while also for the first time convincing other nations to speak up about the Kashmir issue.

 

[WarKa DaNG]

Let the dogs bark

 

[BringHarmony]

Logic obviously fails you, the close distance means that India’s entire northern bases and ports will also be taken out with waves of Pakistani short range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.
This will render your forward operating capacity to nothing.

India’s investment in air defence may offer some resistance to that. Besides having depth helps.
Lastly once Pakistan’s airbases gone, it will mean Indian warship and carrier can do the mop up operation on Pakistan.

A competent war planner yes, but Indian army even during peace time is a logistical nightmare; and firing cruise missiles is not that simple it has very steep consequences not just in the eyes of the world/UN but also because Pakistan has decent missile technology sometimes beyond their own capabilities and shooting one will only result in a severe retaliation.

Also India will and did attack Pakistan even though she did nothing, their so called bollywood inspired air strike on Balakot is proof of how they are hostile without transgression. Their "Economic sanctions" and "diplomacy" are clearly failing by the way, since Pakistan who was on the verge of bankruptcy a year ago has now turned it around and becoming stable and growing, and diplomatically we have become very close with the world powers while also for the first time convincing other nations to speak up about the Kashmir issue.

To believe in incompetence of your enemy is not a good sign. I do agree that such escalation will mean all out war. But if it comes to it, as I was replying to the person who mentioned about ALCMs, the above is likely to happen. Before Indian navy is deployed, India --if it is competent enough-- should take out all the airbases of Pakistan. Most likely with long range artilleries since Pakistan has so little investment in ground based air defence.

On other point, Pakistan is still in FATF grey-list. Signs are not good on that side. Last I checked, it was discussed on this forum that a number of lacunas were found in expectation from FATF. It is still very vulnerable to sanctions.

Tere "phooj" ki baat ki hai. It is amusing to see an India asking for coherent reply. The one who cannot speak any language properly. Have you seen Modi killer welcoming Trump!! Man, that was hilarious. My "Phriend".

I have no idea what you are writing.

So according to you, India/Indian Navy will level our bases with Long range artillery(missiles) and in that time we'll be waiting for ............... ??? what ??

I mean if long range artillery(missiles, as per you) will be used then they would be used from both sides.. Now i know you won't understand this post. Anyway, your Airforce is sh1t proven again on 27th of Feb and now you are betting on missiles. Well, d1ck, stop living in gaomootar land.

All I am saying is that if it comes to war, before deploying Naval forces, India will -- if they are competent war planners -- take out all your airbases. That means ground based air resistance will be mostly absent against naval force. You might still have costal defense systems but you cann't rely on your airforce to take on the naval theatre of the war. Indian navy will be mostly for mop-up operation or to choke Pakistan by implementing a blockade.

Your -- and the poster to whom I replied-- assumption of using airforce to repel Indian naval attack is a bad one. This vulnerability comes from your lack of strategic depth and geography.

 

[Flash_Ninja]

To believe in incompetence of your enemy is not a good sign. I do agree that such escalation will mean all out war. But if it comes to it, as I was replying to the person who mentioned about ALCMs, the above is likely to happen. Before Indian navy is deployed, India --if it is competent enough-- should take out all the airbases of Pakistan. Most likely with long range artilleries since Pakistan has so little investment in ground based air defence.

On other point, Pakistan is still in FATF grey-list. Signs are not good on that side. Last I checked, it was discussed on this forum that a number of lacunas were found in expectation from FATF. It is still very vulnerable to sanctions.

Like I said bringing missiles ballistic or alcm opens a can of worms and opens the ability for Pakistan to retaliate with its own missile arsenal. They know this, thats why they wouldnt use missiles on the outset of conflict to prevent the risk of escalation. Yes Pakistan has airbases inside the range of their longer range weapons, but the accuracy of those equipment are garbage, and if their failed balakot strike is any indication as to how precise their strike capabilities are then there cant be much to worry about.

Not to mention Pakistan air force reguraly practices operating from highways so they are prepared if all the airbases are somehow compromised.

As for FATF, thats more subservient to US foreign policy more than anything and with the current developement in relations Pakistan will be eased out of this.

 

[BringHarmony]

Like I said bringing missiles ballistic or alcm opens a can of worms and opens the ability for Pakistan to retaliate with its own missile arsenal. They know this, thats why they wouldnt use missiles on the outset of conflict to prevent the risk of escalation. Yes Pakistan has airbases inside the range of their longer range weapons, but the accuracy of those equipment are garbage, and if their failed balakot strike is any indication as to how precise their strike capabilities are then there cant be much to worry about.

Their weapons are Israel-made and Russian. The equipment is not bad at all. I don't know why they missed on 27th Feb. But yes, if used properly, they can indeed take out airbases using missiles.

As far as non-escalation goes, I have commented on this on this thread and elsewhere. Their plan is to integrate Kashmir in their mainland. Their two phases are done. One was annexation and another was legitimacy. They have acquired both. Now they will grab properties and will migrate population and businesses in the region. Its the same playbook used by Israel and China.

 

[Haris Ali2140]

Their weapons are Israel-made and Russian. The equipment is not bad at all. I don't know why they missed on 27th Feb. But yes, if used properly, they can indeed take out airbases using missiles.

As far as non-escalation goes, I have commented on this on this thread and elsewhere. Their plan is to integrate Kashmir in their mainland. Their two phases are done. One was annexation and another was legitimacy. They have acquired both. Now they will grab properties and will migrate population and businesses in the region. Its the same playbook used by Israel and China.

Launching CMs is not child's play. Once one side starts its game on. Any attack on a military installation will be considered an act of war. And Pakistan will have every right to retaliate with EVERY weapon it has in its arsenal.