Indo-Pak ties: Who will end up on the losing side?

[Aasimkhan]

It is Pakistan who is isolated on Kashmir not a single significant country has supported Pakistan on Kashmir nor have they Said any thing against Indian on Kashmir.
CPEC has turned out be a bust and total joke.

Also fighting some poorly armed rag tag tribals do not make you battle hardened, by that logic Sudanese army will be most battle hardened.

Also ghazwatul hind fake prophecy is a bigger fail than nostradamus end of world prediction.


Pakistan has yet to test ANY MIRV.
Ababeel test did not have any MIRV payload.

lol@Pakistan is isolated. Today our PM and all 4 CMs were standing with 29 world leaders and 130 countries' diplomats in China on CPEC/OBOR function. Mr Modi was licking his wounds in New Delhi

So, you prefer being dead than being alive.

Dont you know as per Muslim faith real life starts after death ?

 

[Vigneshwara]

Except the fallout. The diseases from radiation. And don't even get me started on the effect of such an engagement on the ozone layer. Many factors come into play when we talk about nuclear weapons.

Yes, that is the is the reason do not threaten India with First Strike.

lol@Pakistan is isolated. Today our PM and all 4 CMs were standing with 29 world leaders and 130 countries' diplomats in China on CPEC/OBOR function. Mr Modi was licking his wounds in New Delhi


Dont you know as per Muslim faith real life starts after death ?

Then people in pakistan are walking zombies, is that what you are trying to say.

 

[Vazir]

Yes, that is the is the reason do not threaten India with First Strike.

You don't want us to use Hatf missiles on your tank regiments, then don't send them to Multan and Rawalpindi, sir. If Cold Start is initiated, we will counter by hitting those formations. I have nothing against your nation's ideals, but expect a reaction when you threaten mine. I love Indians, but I also like peace.
Respectfully, sir.

 

[Aasimkhan]

Yes, that is the is the reason do not threaten India with First Strike.



Then people in pakistan are walking zombies, is that what you are trying to say.

If you think so, waisay it wont change the circumstances

You don't want us to use Hatf missiles on your tank regiments, then don't send them to Multan and Rawalpindi, sir. If Cold Start is initiated, we will counter by hitting those formations. I have nothing against your nation's ideals, but expect a reaction when you threaten mine. I love Indians, but I also like peace.
Respectfully, sir.

Dont worry their tanks wont reach Multan or Rawalpindi even if we dont use the nukes.

 

[Vazir]

Dont worry their tanks wont reach Multan or Rawalpindi even if we dont use the nukes.

Arguable. Both India and Pakistan have some amazing strategists. So can't say for sure.

 

[ito]

There is no visas, or there is no people to people contact...what kind of relations is this? Seriously India stopped caring about its relations with Pakistan. India wants to stop all things with Pakistan including diplomatic relations, but the danger of a war between India and Pakiatan and to manage crisis in case of a war is what is keeping diplomatic missions going in each other counties.

 

[Vazir]

India wants to stop all things with Pakistan including diplomatic relations.

Arguable for several reasons. First, both countries benefit greatly from bilateral trade. Second, no diplomatic relations would mean that they're ready to tear apart many families that function because of the diplomatic relations. Third, that would kill any potential cricket prospects, which is bad news for everyone.

 

[jaatki]

Thus far India is the lone loser. There is nothing which Pakistan is losing because of Indian madness. Infect our economy doesn't depend on India (or trade through it) but reverse of that is true. India's eastern side has smaller countries and miniscule economies which are already saturated with Indian content. If India would ever expand, it would be because it grows its trade westwards West or North which is not possible as it is bad terms with Pakistan and China.

On geopolitics, again, India is standing alone. On Kashmir, intentionally and externally, they are are loser. Pakistan can sit with the same situation and what would it lose? But for India, it is feeling heat of CPEC and Kashmir everyday more. Indian influence over Pakistan is down to a point that ,no military threat, no fake surgical strike, no parliamentary statement from India has any effect on Pakistan. Rather India's decade old terrorist who it used to control in Karachi, FATA and Baluchistan are dead, which is another reason why India is down to its last option of show of power at LOC.

If a war breaks out, 10 years battle hardened army will teach Indian army a lesson it would never forget. Muslims are waiting for GhazwatulHind as well, which will eventually eliminate Hindustaan the way it exists, liberate Kashmir and bring Indian ruler in Chians.

Don't listen to Muslim eschatology, go read your Gandhi.. he too predicted 4 wars with Pakistan but stopped short of telling results of 4th battle with Pakistan.

On trade: it is pakistan that has been deprived economic growth since last 4 decades, when was the last time when pakistan economy was equal or even in good shape? Pakistan always had a dream, a dream that one day it will capture kashmir and then start a new development spree, seems like you people are still stuck in the past.
On Geopolitics: I mean no one is a friend of any other country, there are only mutual benefits, once they achieve their objectives, they just carry on with another objective, Pakistan learnt the lesson hard way and seems still relies on allies, in this century and age, all countries have one or 2 powerful allies, let it be anyone, even China has Russia and M.E on its side, pakistan has China, Russia and Middle East countries on its side, same way India too has USA, EU and Russia on its side.
On Battle hardened army of yours, please keep it to yourself, even we can bomb our territory using LGB's and missiles, but we still operate with utmost care, so that people in the area are not effected, battling an army is diffrent all together, your soldiers would be deprived off supplies and air support when you fight us, we will have an overwhelming number of equipment and a blood thirsty navy on your southern boundaries, in war Army will not think even once before blowing off the infrastructure to pieces, so please mr graphican dont make a blurred graphics of your army....

 

[Vigneshwara]

You don't want us to use Hatf missiles on your tank regiments, then don't send them to Multan and Rawalpindi, sir. If Cold Start is initiated, we will counter by hitting those formations. I have nothing against your nation's ideals, but expect a reaction when you threaten mine. I love Indians, but I also like peace.
Respectfully, sir.

We would be going to Azad Kashmir not multan to attack pakistani sponsored terrorists.

 

[Vazir]

We would be going to Azad Kashmir not multan to attack pakistani sponsored terrorists.

Then why is your armoured corps ideally positioned to form thrusts towards these areas? In an Indo Pak war, the land campaigns will entail three areas: AK, upper Punjab, and middle Punjab. Even in '65, IA opened the Lahore front to reduce the pressure and concentration coming from Kashmir, which was a good strategy. But now the tactical missiles act as counter balance. Sorry, but any armoured thrusts will be countered effectively, and a nuclear response on populated areas by India will be met with a counter nuclear response on populated areas by Pakistan. The first use policy exists for disabling armoured thrusts.

 

[Vigneshwara]

Then why is your armoured corps ideally positioned to form thrusts towards these areas? In an Indo Pak war, the land campaigns will entail three areas: AK, upper Punjab, and middle Punjab. Even in '65, IA opened the Lahore front to reduce the pressure and concentration coming from Kashmir, which was a good strategy. But now the tactical missiles act as counter balance. Sorry, but any armoured thrusts will be countered effectively, and a nuclear response on populated areas by India will be met with a counter nuclear response on populated areas by Pakistan. The first use policy exists for disabling armoured thrusts.

But after you use the tactical missile do you that india would give a chance of an after stike, the first tactical nuke strike would be the last for pakistan.

 

[Vazir]

But after you use the tactical missile do you that india would give a chance of an after stike, the first tactical nuke strike would be the last for pakistan.

Um, we do have second strike capability. Even if you dispute Babur 3, India launching missiles would prompt Pakistan to do the same immediately. It's not something done turn by turn, and thinking that Pakistan will wait for a missile to land at Lahore before firing their own is not accurate. SFCs will already have launchers ready in case of an attack by India, and when they receive intelligence of a launch from the other side, they fire away. Result: massive destruction at both sides.

 

[Soumitra]

I disagree. I think that justification of using nuclear weapons depend on the target. If civilians are targeted using WMDs, then use of ballistic missiles on civilians is somehow justified as counterbalance. On the other hand, using tactical missiles on military regiments does not justify the use of ballistic missiles on the population.

India's nuclear doctrine is very well set. Please see my signature

 

[GURU DUTT]

Um, we do have second strike capability. Even if you dispute Babur 3, India launching missiles would prompt Pakistan to do the same immediately. It's not something done turn by turn, and thinking that Pakistan will wait for a missile to land at Lahore before firing their own is not accurate. SFCs will already have launchers ready in case of an attack by India, and when they receive intelligence of a launch from the other side, they fire away. Result: massive destruction at both sides.

forget everything just let me tell you few facts which are very very scary and the main reason why even China is not trying to show us its militarry arm as it use to show us just a decade back

1. we have yes we have 5k+ MIRV with 100Kton+ minurised warhead thermonuclear warheads missiles which also can be tipped on 300mile range Bhramos poindted towards our western borders

2. we do have both radar based SAR and other day & night 24X7X365 Sattelite and land based & aerostat multi layered and multi band PESA & AESA (right now only GaA) but GaN based on order to watch for enemy missile and other hostile ariel threats

3. then we also have Prahaar & Prithvi and you can google range , payload and CEP of prahaar system V/s your NASR for a change as both are same type of systems

4. lets not even talk about indian air force fighter and air defnce AA batteries as you yourself know PAF has nothing to challenge them both in quality or quantity as of now and in near future

so the point is its not that only you have force multipliers and so called tactical battlefield missiles and low yield nuces we have much much more and much much advanced than you can ever imagine its just we dont have to tell it but our prome enemy knows or has an idea what we have thats why he does not flexes his muscels too often with us and tries to talk with us .. kya samjhe

 

[Vigneshwara]

Um, we do have second strike capability. Even if you dispute Babur 3, India launching missiles would prompt Pakistan to do the same immediately. It's not something done turn by turn, and thinking that Pakistan will wait for a missile to land at Lahore before firing their own is not accurate. SFCs will already have launchers ready in case of an attack by India, and when they receive intelligence of a launch from the other side, they fire away. Result: massive destruction at both sides.

Pakistan does not have a second strike capability, even if there we in the near future then indian poisedons would take the submarines out immediately. If pakisan were to fire a tactical missile then India would destroy the launch sites of those misslie sites first and would not attack some random site.