Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The whole idea behind nuclear weapons is 'gun to ones head - we die you die' - so if anyone needs to be blamed for this, blame those that invented the idea of 'Mutually Assured Destruction', and that certainly was not Pakistan.
Stick to the topic.
Buddy, your brethren are not talking MAD here.. MAD refers to balancing out nuclear arsenal of 2 enemies to ensure the Assured destruction never happens.. Not whipping out the nuclear silver bullet to solve every thing from domestic violence to full scale war..
hmmmm, wasn't one of the charges against the kasab guy "waging war against hindoostan" ?
as for my credentials, you dont need to worry about them, kid. You can just discuss the subject.
MAD is precisely what they are talking about:
Our Armed Forces might be smaller then India but we have the capability to take the India down with us.I can assure you that that will happen before Pakistan goes under..all in good time of course.
And MAD never actually occurred because both sides were willing to 'put a gun to their heads and threaten the destruction of themselves and their enemy', that is precisely what Patriot referred to here. He is certainly not arguing about trying to destroy India, and therefore invite similar destruction, unprovoked.
His statement, and those of many others, are meant in response to Indian aggression of some kind, and therefore act as a 'deterrent' through the threat of 'MAD'.
Nope We will not use nukes against US America however I won't mind seeing couple dozen Indian cities as nuclear graveyard ( A very much real possibility) and according to General Aslam Beg (Retired Pakistan Army Chief) Pakistan will nuke the sh!t of India if our survival is in danger (From any country)India will be the collateral damage.
A 'vague' threshold keeps the other side on their toes and potentially prevents escalation and aggression that normally would fall below any 'overt and clearly stated threshold'.MAD without a credible threshold is pretty useless in preventing the famed mutual destruction...
btw, this is also what your friend patriot said a couple days back.. So the mindset is pretty apparent. Taimi got 1 of these and deleted it but missed the one below. Given the trend of his posts, I will stick to my position about Patriot's post being on the lines of Pakistan blackmailing the world by putting a gun to its head.. You may chose to differ but unless you make a case on how making Indian cities a nuclear graveyard helps Pakistani in its tango with USA, your opinion wont carry much weight.
We need more leaders like Indra Gandhi, she was someone who took action rather than just sit there just like our current PM. If she was alive and remained in power, the regional mess that Pakistan has created would not have existed in the first place. She was the Iron lady of India and im sure if she remained in power for some more years she would have also executed her invasion plans as well, again which would have benefited India so much in the long run. If we had taken action then, we would not have been handicapped by the nuclear shadow that protects all the problem creators in Pakistan today. Now we are helpless in the face of an enemy that uses the ""N" word as a means to protect terrorist that it claims to be fighting in the first place.
Alternately one could argue that Indira Gandhi, through her support for terrorists/rebels in East Pakistan, her role in pouring fuel on the fire of civil conflict in East Pakistan and therefore playing a significant role in the breakup of formerly United Pakistan, set the stage for the subsequent decades of Pakistani distrust of Indian intentions, and contributed to the current impasse.
Alternately, if Nehru had implemented a UN conducted plebiscite, with both sides retaining control of the territory they controlled during the plebiscite, rather than resorting to legalistic semantics as excuses to avoid a plebiscite (since the very same legal semantics did not prevent Nehru/India from invading, occupying and annexing Junagadh), J&K would not still be a festering dispute and the history of relations between the two nations could be very different.
Did not get any reasonable or good replies.I think countless times you got the reply for plebiscite and UN resolution.
And will India then commit to allowing the UN to hold a plebiscite in IAK?1. Why don't pakistan does the plebiscite for pakistan kashmir?
Did not get any reasonable or good replies.
And will India then commit to allowing the UN to hold a plebiscite in IAK?
Did not get any reasonable or good replies.
And will India then commit to allowing the UN to hold a plebiscite in IAK?
Pakistan should hold a plebiscite first in pakistan kashmir. After that you can tell the world that it is India's time to do.