Key targets for both sides

[gambit]

... if we consider that the PAF uses the motorway as a backup runway (not sure if similar measures exist for the IAF) and if we are to assume that especially in the early days of the war, each sides air forces would be stretched pretty thin.

I would not dismiss it. This has been going on in Europe since the Cold War with many aircrafts, not all. The Taiwanese and the Singaporeans does it as well.

That is a Serbian MIG-29 on a motorway. Look how the wing tips overhang the road. As long as there are sufficient concrete for the wheelbase width, a pilot will be daring enough to risk it in war. USAF A-10s often trained on European highways.

 

[Cheetah786]

In case of all out war GOD fogive! wat will be key targets in both Pakistan & India for air strikes?

In case of a war if indians take out all of our politicans and mulhas(and i do mean all) we will not retaliate Promise.

 

[Reddy]

In case of a war if indians take out all of our politicans and mulhas(and i do mean all) we will not retaliate Promise.

Good one mate but we wont be so generous.

 

[Sinnerman108]

As I strongly believe Whoever (India or Pakistan) comes closer to defeat, will surly use its Nukes.

Therefore, for a successful attempt, both have to curb each others Nuke capabilities ASAP and effectively ....

Anyhow, Uncle SAM will do his best to stop an all out war between India & Pakistan.

Novice ! U crazy man ???

What makes u think Uncle SAM will stop war.

Uncle SAM will do every thing possible to eradicate both Pak and India.

That will make it easy for them to come sit here, rule the sub continent one more time, and counter China from below and control the central asain and middle east oil routes.

Lesson:
NEVER EVER trust the west. They'd do any thing for their dominance and money.

If you don't believe this, study history.

 

[Arsalan]

Novice ! U crazy man ???

What makes u think Uncle SAM will stop war.

Uncle SAM will do every thing possible to eradicate both Pak and India.

That will make it easy for them to come sit here, rule the sub continent one more time, and counter China from below and control the central asain and middle east oil routes.

Lesson:
NEVER EVER trust the west. They'd do any thing for their dominance and money.

If you don't believe this, study history.

they never rules the sub-continent before..

anyways i have got your point and what i said was just a joke..
i totally agree with you, no one is going to try and stop the devastation in the area. . . we have to take care of ourselves

regards!

 

[Sapper]

Hi All,

During this thread, I have read a lot about destroying nuclear assets, nuclear power plants and nuclear warhead storage facilities and silos/launchers during first phase of war to eradicate other country's nuclear option. This is NOT an option for either country.

While considering this scenario, "DO" remember that India and Pakistan both are proclaimed nuclear nations and these nations exchange the lists of their nuclear sites, weapon stores and research facilities OPENLY. The reason for this is that, once one of these nuclear facilities is targeted by either warring nation, it is an OPEN declaration of nuclear war and serves in all intents and purposes as first nuclear strike. All bets are OFF after this happens.

Also, while two nuclear armed nations are in conflict, ANY launch of ballistic missiles will be considered as a "Nuclear" launch and first strike by that nation, and the other country has the right to launch its own nukes without confirming if the launched ballistic missile carried a nuclear or conventional warhead.

Cruise missiles is another story. Since 90s cruise missiles have been considered conventional weapons and this ambiguity still remains. Pakistan was heavily criticized by both Indian and Western nations for claiming that it can mate its nuclear warheads with its various cruise missiles, because this will mean that any cruise launch by Pakistan and against Pakistan can be considered a nuclear threat as well. This ambiguity still remains and has been discussed during various meetings between Indo-Pak officials when nuclear details are shared (though i don't know what result was reached).

Conventional wars and skirmishes can still be fought and won/lost by both India/Pakistan. Both countries must refrain from targeting any nuclear assets of either country, because it will surely mean the loss of war for both nations.

Regards,
Sapper

 

[gubbi]

Hi All,

During this thread, I have read a lot about destroying nuclear assets, nuclear power plants and nuclear warhead storage facilities and silos/launchers during first phase of war to eradicate other country's nuclear option. This is NOT an option for either country.

Also, while two nuclear armed nations are in conflict, ANY launch of ballistic missiles will be considered as a "Nuclear" launch and first strike by that nation, and the other country has the right to launch its own nukes without confirming if the launched ballistic missile carried a nuclear or conventional warhead.

Cruise missiles is another story. Since 90s cruise missiles have been considered conventional weapons and this ambiguity still remains. Pakistan was heavily criticized by both Indian and Western nations for claiming that it can mate its nuclear warheads with its various cruise missiles, because this will mean that any cruise launch by Pakistan and against Pakistan can be considered a nuclear threat as well. This ambiguity still remains and has been discussed during various meetings between Indo-Pak officials when nuclear details are shared (though i don't know what result was reached).

Conventional wars and skirmishes can still be fought and won/lost by both India/Pakistan. Both countries must refrain from targeting any nuclear assets of either country, because it will surely mean the loss of war for both nations.

Regards,
Sapper

A very sane reply, though I beg to differ slightly. India does not have a first use policy. Since Pakistan has a "first use policy", India cannot wait for Pakistani missiles to strike and find out whether they hade nuclear or conventional warheads. Neither can you know about the warhead in the missile inflight, unless you happen to know what kind of missiles are stored in a specific area or are forewarned. Doesnt make sense.

From how I see it, for all intents and purposes, any missile launched by Pakistan will be considered as a nuclear attack and will call for a massive nuclear retaliation by India. Pretty makes Pakistani missile arsenal useless! Btw, wars are not won by missiles, they are only good for psy warfare, even the best of them!

And seriously all those immature kiddos who talk about yields or nuclear attack or MAD know nothing about nuclear power or destruction it may cause. Morons!

 

[Sapper]

A very sane reply, though I beg to differ slightly. India does not have a first use policy. Since Pakistan has a "first use policy", India cannot wait for Pakistani missiles to strike and find out whether they hade nuclear or conventional warheads. Neither can you know about the warhead in the missile inflight, unless you happen to know what kind of missiles are stored in a specific area or are forewarned. Doesnt make sense.

From how I see it, for all intents and purposes, any missile launched by Pakistan will be considered as a nuclear attack and will call for a massive nuclear retaliation by India. Pretty makes Pakistani missile arsenal useless! Btw, wars are not won by missiles, they are only good for psy warfare, even the best of them!

And seriously all those immature kiddos who talk about yields or nuclear attack or MAD know nothing about nuclear power or destruction it may cause. Morons!

Dear, Pakistan has also proclaimed no-first-use policy many many times on diplomatic forums, most of them because we get accused for illegally acquiring nuclear tech more often than India (although some of our insane and emotional politicians are unaware of it). Out of 52 Islamic nations, we are the only ones with Nukes and it is a thorn in the hearts of entire world which blames Islam for every single problem the world faces these days.

If I am an Indian Official, any unscheduled missile launch from Pakistan "SHALL" be considered as a Nuclear Launch, and vice-versa, and dealt with appropriate reply.

India has a no first USE policy and thats good, we appreciate it and reciprocate it with no first use policy from Pakistan as well. What I wanted to convey in my previous post is that (contrary to popular fanboi belief)

"A conventional stike/hit on a nuclear target is as good as a first stike".

I hope my message gets across.

Regards,
Sapper

 

[gubbi]

Dear, Pakistan has also proclaimed no-first-use policy many many times on diplomatic forums, most of them because we get accused for illegally acquiring nuclear tech more often than India (although some of our insane and emotional politicians are unaware of it). Out of 52 Islamic nations, we are the only ones with Nukes and it is a thorn in the hearts of entire world which blames Islam for every single problem the world faces these days.

In my opinion, being Islamic has little to do with the world having problems with your nukes than Pakistan's soft-corner for the "good" taliban, or "moral" support for "struggle" in Kashmir. There lies the problem.

If I am an Indian Official, any unscheduled missile launch from Pakistan "SHALL" be considered as a Nuclear Launch, and vice-versa, and dealt with appropriate reply.

India has a no first USE policy and thats good, we appreciate it and reciprocate it with no first use policy from Pakistan as well. What I wanted to convey in my previous post is that (contrary to popular fanboi belief)

"A conventional stike/hit on a nuclear target is as good as a first stike".

I hope my message gets across.

Regards,
Sapper

I really hope that what you are saying is true. But unfortunately, Pakistan does have a First Use nuclear policy. However there are reasons to believe that the threshold is not as low as a layman tends to believe, but unfortunately what Indians dont know is where exactly that threshold lies! Hence our CSD!
But yes, Pakistan does have a "First USe" nuclear policy.

You are right about sharing of information regarding nuclear installations. Reason to do so is to,hypothetically, avoid hitting those installation in times of conflict. Now any attack on a nuclear installation, either civilian or military, will definitely be considered a nuclear attack!

Pray THAT never happens.

 

[PakShaheen79]

In my opinion, being Islamic has little to do with the world having problems with your nukes than Pakistan's soft-corner for the "good" taliban, or "moral" support for "struggle" in Kashmir. There lies the problem.

Just add diplomatic and political there as well.

 

[ice_man]

@gubbi the solution to afghan problem and taliban problem lies in the solution to KASHMIR ISSUE....but this is not the thread so let's stick to the topic shall we!

 

[Novice09]

That's probably one of few reason why we sit there and allow you to horsing around like a lunatic. We can use our influence on Pak to persuade Pak not to attack; we can send in our troops to the border and line up our missiles to intimidate Indians. For a permanent peace deal, you have some value. But you better make Pak happy. Or we will be very

It's not 1962, when Indian defense forces were weak

Why haven't you sent your troops to the border and lined up your missiles to intimidate Indians in 1971 when India was in a war with Pakistan

Or we will be very

Who cares that you are or not?

Why won't you got angry during Kargil war to do as you stated.

 

[PakShaheen79]

It's not 1962, when Indian defense forces were weak

Why haven't you sent your troops to the border and lined up your missiles to intimidate Indians in 1971 when India was in a war with Pakistan

Or we will be very

Who cares that you are or not?

Sorry about jumping in a debate between you and warprofessor

I think reason was pretty simple... In 1971 China don't have that kind of power and in recent times.. China has no need to do that as Pakistan has its own missile arsenal which is more than sufficient for Indian (proved in 2002 stand off where India was forced to withdraw without firing a bullet.)

 

[Novice09]

Novice ! U crazy man ???

What makes u think Uncle SAM will stop war.

Really I missed your reply...

Salman, no country in this hole world will advocate a war; specially between two Nuke powered countries. Since, US is more active and effective in India and Pakistan, his role would be crucial in such case.

Uncle SAM will do every thing possible to eradicate both Pak and India.

That will make it easy for them to come sit here, rule the sub continent one more time, and counter China from below and control the central asain and middle east oil routes.

they are already here in Pakistan and India, effecting their foreign policies and in case of Pakistan Internal policies too...

Lesson:
NEVER EVER trust the west. They'd do any thing for their dominance and money.

If you don't believe this, study history.

Thank you Salman, let me tell you that Pakistan is in west to India really appreciate your suggestion.

 

[Novice09]

Sorry about jumping in a debate between you and warprofessor

I think reason was pretty simple... In 1971 China don't have that kind of power and in recent times.. China has no need to do that as Pakistan has its own missile arsenal which is more than sufficient for Indian (proved in 2002 stand off where India was forced to withdraw without firing a bullet.)

Look bro, its not as simple as warprofessor has written. can you highlight the 2002 standoff to me so that I can find some stuff on that and China's activity on border during that time.

You will agree that in 1999 China was as stronger as today. why don't they got angry and sent their troops to the border and lined up their missiles to intimidate Indians. I thought that we really make Pakistan to feel unpleasant at that time.

I'm not saying that Pakistan cannot defend its land at his own