New Threat to Pakistan with India,s New K4 SLBM test next month

[Bang Galore]

Well , I have provided links and even asked you to read up on previous programmes to accomplish that which didn't succeed . The point is that the cost becomes so high that it itself nullifies the advantage of the shield , which you are trying to put in place , nothing more . So you are back on discussing the effectiveness , interesting , you keep moving back and forth .

Not really - " some protection " as per you will not nullify any blackmail . At least , be clear on what you are talking about . You want to discuss the previous ABM systems but dont want to know their ability and feasibility , it doesn't work that way .

Why does the government of Pakistan bother about Indian ABM systems if, according to you, they are useless & a waste pf money?

 

[Dillinger]

I wish to discuss something without wanting to discuss its feasibility/effectiveness

My argument was beyond the nitty gritty's of the successes and the feasibility of an ABM system - I am not here to discuss the costs and the probabilities of success of it as well. A credible ABM in the future will nullify Pakistan's nuclear blackmail and will give us some safety against it.

Pakistan Seeks To Counter Indian ABM Defenses | Missile ThreatMissile Threat
Broadsword: Anti-Ballistic Missile Defence: Star Wars over India



No problem other than the mere typical comprehension problems.

If the subject is the feasibility of an ABM then there are various aspects which need to be figured in. The intercepting vehicle itself is not a very big hurdle albeit the technology involved needs to evolve at an appreciable pace since the target of interception also becomes harder to kill as the opponent factors in the plausible challenges that said delivery platform will face, as such we see the move towards combined seekers (for greater target discrimination) and KKVs. The second big issue is early warning, wherein we lack certain resources or at least the quantum of resources required, credible early warning will require an appreciable amount of AEW&C platforms and orbital sensors akin to the IMEWS system.

At the end of the day nuclear weapons are political weapons, using nuclear weapons for counterforce rather than countervalue is a cold war relic (and at best TBMs will be used for the former in the sub-continent, which require a wholly different solution) as such the decision to implement an ABM is also largely a political decision and investment since it fundamentally alters the dynamics of the region. Now let us be clear, no ABM will provide complete cover but to be able to dull the impact of the opponents blow and then retaliate in tandem with a second strike capability brings relatively greater robustness to a country's potential response options. The monetary costs and the willingness to employ an ABM system (is a country willing to exploit the capabilities of said system to its full potential extent by lowering their nuclear threshold so as to present a potentially more active threat to the opponent, an act which will also require factoring in the possibility that if we are more willing to engage in a nuclear face off then we will also have to be more willing to accept the quantum of casualties which being albeit relatively lower will still represent a rather large number) is based on a cost-benefit analysis and looking at the related ROI. If the potential employment of the ABM system, the advantages associated with said employment which are a reward for the heightened risk assumed, is politically not feasible then it will not present an active threat to the opponent. To wit, America was willing to bank on its ABM and early warning capabilities to an extent that it was willing to maintain a very low nuclear threshold (launch on detection/warning) going as far as to be willing to employ nuclear weapons in defense of certain allies and strategic interests (rather than just as a weapon of last resort only to be used when the American nation itself is facing immanent defeat or annexation), such an active employment of nuclear weapons required the American administration to be willing to accept the resultant casualties which would occur despite their ABM capabilities if they actually had to exercise the particulars of the posture they had assumed. Now our employment and cost-benefit analysis might be completely different wrt the ABM system and its deployment, regardless of that there are still technical hurdles involved (which will require the remainder of this decade to iron out) before a coherent policy can be developed on the employment of said system.

 

[OrionHunter]

we don't need an ICBM to counter India

Ok, but you guys keep threatening to use your nuclear toys against Israel. And for them you require men not boys - meaning IRBMs, not those pesky little firecrackers like the Nasr!!

 

[illusion8]

Well , I have provided links and even asked you to read up on previous programmes to accomplish that which didn't succeed . The point is that the cost becomes so high that it itself nullifies the advantage of the shield , which you are trying to put in place , nothing more . So you are back on discussing the effectiveness , interesting , you keep moving back and forth .

Not really - " some protection " as per you will not nullify any blackmail . At least , be clear on what you are talking about . You want to discuss the previous ABM systems but dont want to know their ability and feasibility , it doesn't work that way .

Let me make it reaallll simple for you.

Some protection - for our key installations and major cities.

Nullifying nuclear blackmail - by providing a valid, multi-layered, credible defense system.

Your 1991 link was about the ambitious programs of space based interceptors and it does not prove that the countries working on ABM systems are not confident on their systems.

So you are back on discussing the effectiveness , interesting , you keep moving back and forth .

I was merely responding to your mentioning it.

 

[Secur]

Why does the government of Pakistan bother about Indian ABM systems if, according to you, they are useless & a waste pf money?

Not entirely useless , of course they do provide a certain degree of protection but at a very high costs with a limited successful intercept probability . Pakistan will develop countermeasures for it - regardless of everything - to prepare for worst case scenario , nothing more . Just doesn't mean that the proposed shield can provide total protection or even half of it as some people envision . Even the upcoming addition on MIRV on existing Pakistani missiles can serve as a great challenge ( almost to the point of rendering them useless ) for the system , the primary cause of the lost faith in them . The Govt of Pakistan hasn't sped up anything yet though to suggest any " bother " .

Let me make it reaallll simple for you.

Some protection - for our key installations and major cities.

Nullifying nuclear blackmail - by providing a valid, multi-layered, credible defense system.

Your 1991 link was about the ambitious programs of space based interceptors and it does not prove that the countries working on ABM systems are not confident on their systems.



I was merely responding to your mentioning it.

Yeah , small areas , key locations are understandable , that is where they are good . So , you dont know the effectiveness and feasibility of deploying the system nation wide and yet it is somehow declared credible ? Explain to me how does it nullify any advantage if you do not know the key parameters and want to discuss them neither . I told you earlier to make your mind on what you want to talk on , since you didn't want to go on the technical aspects but still want to prove its credibility . Well , both the Americans and Russians would have destroyed themselves during the Cold war if they had that much confidence in their systems , itching to pull the trigger on different occasions

Yes , its an old link but it pretty much sums up the effort till then and provides a brief history of the programmes back then . Did you see the status/read the article ? . What has changed in that regard ? As for the other links , I have a plenty explaining the ineffectiveness of the ABM , just when I get back on PC .

 

[drunken-monke]

There are no new or old threats to Pakistan.
India has been a threat for Pakistan since 1947 and will remain a threat till we eliminate it.

Or get eliminated by India....

 

[Bang Galore]

Not entirely useless , of course they do provide a certain degree of protection but at a very high costs with a limited successful intercept probability . Pakistan will develop countermeasures for it - regardless of everything - to prepare for worst case scenario , nothing more . Just doesn't mean that the proposed shield can provide total protection as some people envision . Even the addition on MIRV on existing Pakistani missiles can serve as a challenge for the system .

Costs are imposed on the other party too. Countermeasures too are cost, aren't they & with the Asymmetry in resorces, costs will not be inconsiderable to Pakistan. Countermeasures too will have countermeasures, that is how it will play out. In the meantime, India is imposing both costs as well as doubts into the Pakistani system.

 

[Secur]

Costs are imposed on the other party too. Countermeasures too are cost, aren't they & with the Asymmetry in resorces, costs will not be inconsiderable to Pakistan. Countermeasures too will have countermeasures, that is how it will play out. In the meantime, India is imposing both costs as well as doubts into the Pakistani system.

Yes they are " peanuts " too even with the assymetry when compared to the other side too , isn't that true ? Saving things cost much , destroying them is easy , the attack always evolve faster than defense . The game will continue like always , though the Indians aren't imposing any doubts for the Pakistanis , complete the testing first .

 

[Bang Galore]

Yes they are " peanuts " too even with the assymetry when compared to the other side too , isn't that true ? Saving things cost much , destroying them is easy , the attack always evolve faster than defense . The game will continue like always , though the Indiana aren't imposing any doubts for the Pakistanis , complete the testing first .

Well, if you hold all the cards, you must tell your government not to bother constantly asking India to talk on limiting ABM. After all, India will do what it sees in her best interest & if Pakistan has a low cost response, Pakistan must simply go ahead without the constant whining. Not like India constantly talks about your "counter measures", time will tell who was right.

 

[deckingraj]

Costs are imposed on the other party too. Countermeasures too are cost, aren't they & with the Asymmetry in resorces, costs will not be inconsiderable to Pakistan. Countermeasures too will have countermeasures, that is how it will play out. In the meantime, India is imposing both costs as well as doubts into the Pakistani system.

Bold part is not practically correct...We are light years away from covering our Mainland with a robust mechanism in place...Whatever counter-measures we are talking about here in terms of cost may be somewhat true but remember it is easily a 1:10 ratio in favor of Pakistan...but don't be disheartened because it all depends upon if we can afford 10 and the quick reply is YES we can....

 

[FOX80]

There are no new or old threats to Pakistan.
India has been a threat for Pakistan since 1947 and will remain a threat till we eliminate it.

DAY DREAMS----FIRST SAVE YOUR *** FROM YOUR OWN PEOPLE PLEASE.

 

[deckingraj]

Well, if you hold all the cards, you must tell your government not to bother constantly asking India to talk on limiting ABM. After all, India will do what it sees in her best interest & if Pakistan has a low cost response, Pakistan must simply go ahead without the constant whining. Not like India constantly talks about your "counter measures", time will tell who was right.

ummm don't agree here as well...in diplomatic arena we all whine on a smallest possible item...Don't we whine when someone gives Pakistan some military gadgets that can't make much of a difference to the overall conventional edge??

ABM is a big leap...We will have a capability of both defense and offense...whereas all they are left with is offense and that too at an extra cost had status quo continued...so they have every right to whine!!

 

[Secur]

Well, if you hold all the cards, you must tell your government not to bother constantly asking India to talk on limiting ABM.

No , we dont hold all the cards but enough to protect ourselves now and in the future too . Just futile routine statements , nothing that you should take seriously . Pakistan will work on what is necessary and well countermeasures to an ABM is relatively quite cheap , let there be no doubt about that . @Dillinger Would like to reply , mate when I am back on primary console , until then have a brief word on ABM's vulnerability to MIRV .

it is easily a 1:10 ratio in favor of Pakistan...but don't be disheartened because it all depends upon if we can afford 10 and the quick reply is YES we can....

Doesn't it increase by another ten each time the Pakistan develop an effective countermeasure ? Well you have started thinking that you have unlimited money now .

 

[bloo]

ummm don't agree here as well...in diplomatic arena we all whine on a smallest possible item...Don't we whine when someone gives Pakistan some military gadgets that can't make much of a difference to the overall conventional edge??

ABM is a big leap...We will have a capability of both defense and offense...whereas all they are left with is offense and that too at an extra cost had status quo continued...so they have every right to whine!!

Very true.
Pakistani members don't really comprehend or want to comprehend a domineering factor in the battlefield.

The crux of the matter is that we will a system to defend ourselves while Pakistan won't.
Even if say, our ABM blocks out 'x' numbers of missiles however less, it IS blocking out 'x' numbers of missiles while Pakistan can't block a single BM; and on top of that with longer ranged SLBMs we will soon have 2nd strike capability.
The only countermeasure they have is attacking us but that would hardly matter when we are better at it than them.
Pak members completely ignore the fact that we too have the means to attack; so what if we are making ABMs that doesn't remove credibility of our offensive capabilities.
So in the end at the cost of being hurt we will end up hurting them more and hopefully deterring them before they could do their worst.

 

[deckingraj]

Doesn't it increase by another ten each time the Pakistan develop an effective countermeasure ? Well you have started thinking that you have unlimited money now .

... what i mean is for every $ spend by Pakistan on countering ABM we will have to spend $10 to counter the counter measure...Now only a fool will say that we have unlimited amount...having said that in present terms and foreseeable future we don't see major concerns in attributing additional money for ABM program should push come to shove...because the benefits of an effective ABM viz-a-viz Pakistan simply out-runs the cost issues...