Nuclear Deterrent

[Jay_]

I was just saying that Jay was wrong in saying that Assumptions invalidate the model we use.

You assumed its a check mate, but in reality it was not. So my point that assumption is the mother of all Fu*k ups, still holds.

Pakistan assumed that India will not escalate the war and will come to negotiating table, India just proved it wrong and constrained Pakistan from all sides.

 

[Jay_]

The step down by Pak. in Kargil was because the leadership realised that the entire operation was a mistake. It wasnt worth escalating for.

The leadership didnt realize it out of the blue, they realized it after loosing the whole of NLI, big difference.

However Indian troops breaking across the LOC in Punjab or so forth will certainly result in escalation and probable nuclear exchange.

We didnt need to escalate it along the international border, we know that we can drive Pakistan out of Kargil and they did that.

 

[sigatoka]

1. It means that the guy bringing the gun is ready to kill, not to fool around. Your example is getting weaker and weaker.


2. So, now, you're re-inventing history. This is getting more stupid by the minute. British Regiments were in India. Mughal armies were never in Ireland.


3. And keep watching me tearing your theory apart.


4. People ain't games.


5. Discussion? You throw this tibit out that India is scared crapless of Pak nukes. I challenge you to answer a simple question and you went on a tangent with big boy-small boy and then go around with game theory and when shot down, go onto chess.

6. You can't stay focus. You can't admit to being wrong, even when provided the proof in your face. Well, you are wrong.


7. Then what makes you think India would be cowed by Pak nukes?

1. I dont know what your going on about it here, using nuclear weapons results in ones own destruction which is why its not used immediately in hostilities. (when the other party also has it)


2. It was your stupid eg which i was trying to adjust to better explain the nuclear situation. (it still remained stupid)


3. Firstly Game theory is not my thoery, its been around for over 70 years.


4. When did i say that.

5. I said that India can't destroy Pak. without itself being destroyed. If you are unable to understand eg that doesnt mean im the one going on tangents.

6. I cant admit im wrong when im not becoz of being provided so called "proof" which isnt.


7. I prefer not to use the term "cowed" but it is indisputable that Pak. nukes has changed the behaivour of India than that which would have otherwise have prevailed.

 

[sigatoka]

You assumed its a check mate, but in reality it was not. So my point that assumption is the mother of all Fu*k ups, still holds.

Pakistan assumed that India will not escalate the war and will come to negotiating table, India just proved it wrong and constrained Pakistan from all sides.

You idiot you were saying that an assumption made about an entity acting in its best interest is an incorrect one.

Taking back the hills in Kargil was not an escalation.

 

[Jay_]

You idiot you were saying that an assumption made about an entity acting in its best interest is an incorrect one.

Taking back the hills in Kargil was not an escalation.

you are not even worthy enuff to have this discussion Go make a paper boat and put ICBM's on it

 

[Jay_]

Who ever it is, thanks for editing the content of my post :wall:

 

[JSK]

everyone seems to be complaining about their posts getting edited/deleted. shouldnt there be like an 'edited' message on the bottom if it was infact edited by someone?

 

[Neo]

everyone seems to be complaining about their posts getting edited/deleted. shouldnt there be like an 'edited' message on the bottom if it was infact edited by someone?

'Edited message' only apprears when the mods use the 'soft delete' or 'edit' option. Mods can chose to put their name or not, its optional.

When a post is phisically deleted, it simply disappears from the thread.

But your point is taken, we'll take it under consideration.

Neo