PAF Deploys to Northern Territories

[SQ8]

Regarding Doklam, I do not think that we were less aggressive than China because we are more mature, rather i say that we were forced to be relatively much quieter and appear mature because we know China is a lot more powerful economically and militarily than India. And as you said, we value ourselves; at least we think and are somewhat convinced that eventually our destiny will be bright.

Yes there were comments, possibly even a couple from our Home Minister during the Doklam incident. But it seemed to me to be less aggressive, relative to Pakistan's against India, since it was tempered by our understanding of our position vis-a-vis China.


For the sake of trying to dominate over Pakistan we will try to negate this Samson option.

I think that you are over-reading the Hindutva influence on Indian strategic and military thinking on the nuclear issue. If Pakistan tried no such thing during the past and present mullah influence, then why would India? We'll still keep concentrating on conventional aspects though adopting a more hardline stance is almost a given.

The danger isn’t of me overreacting to the Hindutva influence but of saner Indian elements underestimating them. It is the same mistake Pakistani establishment took against extremism and the results are clear to see.

As far as conventional capabilities go, India already has a significant edge(not instantly overwhelming such as US vs Iraq but enough to ensure a reduction in Pakistani fighting ability after a week) that automatically translates to a bloody victory ; which in turn factors into Pakistani calculations for nuclear threshold.
Once the first nuclear weapons fly then all conventional forces become irrelevant,

 

[araz]

The danger isn’t of me overreacting to the Hindutva influence but of saner Indian elements underestimating them. It is the same mistake Pakistani establishment took against extremism and the results are clear to see.

As far as conventional capabilities go, India already has a significant edge(not instantly overwhelming such as US vs Iraq but enough to ensure a reduction in Pakistani fighting ability after a week) that automatically translates to a bloody victory ; which in turn factors into Pakistani calculations for nuclear threshold.
Once the first nuclear weapons fly then all conventional forces become irrelevant,

The problem in my mind is does one wait till the first missile has landed to assure oneself that it was not a Nuke one or respond with a Nuke one as soon as the enemy has launched. This unsurity is where the danger lies and this is where the conundrum is in a full blown war between 2 Nuke armed countries. Taking this further one thinks whether you want to loosen one salvo and wait for a response or do you avail the opportunity and decimate the enemy irrespective of what it takes. I cannot work this out in my brain and to me this is a damned if you do and damned if you dont scenario.
A

 

[thinkingcap81]

The danger isn’t of me overreacting to the Hindutva influence but of saner Indian elements underestimating them. It is the same mistake Pakistani establishment took against extremism and the results are clear to see.

It will take a longer time for India to become what you suggest, that too provided the same line of thought prevails.

There are negative things going on like politicization of the IA top brass, and getting these types of people in higher positions; these people can eventually become 'yes men' and delude the political leadership.

But we'll not take such an extreme step if we truly believe that as a nation our future is bright and we should not jeopardize it. Whether this realization will be accompanied by getting more aggressive against Pakistan without crossing thresholds (a bit like China against some smaller countries) or taking a more softer stance is not known.

The problem in my mind is does one wait till the first missile has landed to assure oneself that it was not a Nuke one or respond with a Nuke one as soon as the enemy has launched. This unsurity is where the danger lies and this is where the conundrum is in a full blown war between 2 Nuke armed countries. Taking this further one thinks whether you want to loosen one salvo and wait for a response or do you avail the opportunity and decimate the enemy irrespective of what it takes. I cannot work this out in my brain and to me this is a damned if you do and damned if you dont scenario.
A

I think that the Indian establishment would have already thought of the response, its just not being revealed.

 

[SQ8]

It will take a longer time for India to become what you suggest, that too provided the same line of thought prevails.

There are negative things going on like politicization of the IA top brass, and getting these types of people in higher positions; these people can eventually become 'yes men' and delude the political leadership.

But we'll not take such an extreme step if we truly believe that as a nation our future is bright and we should not jeopardize it. Whether this realization will be accompanied by getting more aggressive against Pakistan without crossing thresholds (a bit like China against some smaller countries) or taking a more softer stance is not known.

And that is the irony of today’s India; the more prosperous its future is looking the more hatred the regressive elements are promoting. Religious nationalism can only go so far in pushing economic development as intelligence and religious extremism cannot coexist.
Where India needs more cohesion and uplift of its poor and minorities, the current government is taking the opposite steps(which will be exploited by those representatives of the downtrodden communities where keeping the “woe with us” status quo suits them).
Sure, keeping the Pakistani boogeymen as bait can help distract the population but then boogeymen cango the way of the boy who cried wolf - both ends of that scenario don’t work out.
As I keep telling @Joe Shearer , I sound like a fool today but 50 years later these lost years of hatred will come back to haunt those with the common linguistics and culture when other more cohesive resource hungry nations come for the fertile soil here.

 

[thinkingcap81]

And that is the irony of today’s India; the more prosperous its future is looking the more hatred the regressive elements are promoting. Religious nationalism can only go so far in pushing economic development as intelligence and religious extremism cannot coexist.
Where India needs more cohesion and uplift of its poor and minorities, the current government is taking the opposite steps(which will be exploited by those representatives of the downtrodden communities where keeping the “woe with us” status quo suits them).
Sure, keeping the Pakistani boogeymen as bait can help distract the population but then boogeymen cango the way of the boy who cried wolf - both ends of that scenario don’t work out.

It is common knowledge that the economic rise of a nation is accompanied by narrow nationalism.

I am not anti-BJP like @Joe Shearer , and am against Rahul Gandhi and his immediate ilk. But while appreciating some positive things that Modi has done, one cannot ignore the negative aspects, the lack of intellectual thought in BJP/RSS about how to steer a nation in all aspects towards a better society.

The marginalized people are kept in low-level equilibrium by both Congress and BJP.

As I keep telling @Joe Shearer , I sound like a fool today but 50 years later these lost years of hatred will come back to haunt those with the common linguistics and culture when other more cohesive resource hungry nations come for the fertile soil here.

Sad that this is happening.

 

[HRK]

PA considers Pakistan to be its baby - how can they cause sudden death to the baby?

to save the baby from a long and painful death .....

 

[thinkingcap81]

to save the baby from a long and painful death .....

What kind of death are you referring to - military or economic? If you are referring to the military aspect, then death is death, whether nukes or conventional. India has said that it will retaliate massively, so how can death be avoided? Or do you think that use of tactical battle field nukes will not allow India to escalate with nukes?

As @Oscar said, in about a week Pak military will be degraded enough to make the nukes come out. So even a conflict of 2-3 days will cause significant damage. In this time even if India does not make significant headway into Pak territory still we would have achieved an important objective of degrading Pak military disproportionately compared to us. The economic cost of this on Pakistan will be huge.

So it is worthwhile for us to ensure that a conflict stretches for 2-3 days at max. Then we use our diplomatic relations to force the world to stop the war. The world will listen to that power which is more respected and this respect has a lot to do with the economy and the future potential of the economy.

Just my thoughts...

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

It looks like who's more eager for MAD will be the decisive factor!!! I don't know about the Indian mindsets, but am trying to analyze the Pak mindset from the Muslim points of view.

• Think not of those who are slain in Allah's way as dead. Nay, they live, finding their sustenance in the presence of their Lord; They rejoice in the bounty provided by Allah. And with regard to those left behind, who have not yet joined them (in their bliss), the (Martyrs) glory in the fact that on them is no fear, nor have they (cause to) grieve. -Kur'an-i Kerim (3:169-170)

• Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur´an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.  -Kur'an-i Kerim (9:111)

• The Prophet (PBUH) said, "Nobody who enters Paradise likes to go back to the world even if he got everything on the Earth, except a Mujahid who wishes to return to the world so that he may be martyred ten times because of the dignity he receives (from Allah). -Sahih al-Bukhari

• Fear not; For the crimson banner that proudly ripples in this glorious dawn, shall not fade, Before the last fiery hearth that is ablaze within my homeland is extinguished. - Turkish national anthem (MAD in poetry, but can be made literal by Pak)

• (For Muslims) Death is like Sheb-i Arus (wedding night) - Mevlana Jelaleddin Rumi

• (For Muslims) Death is like the discharge with honor letter for a soldier in active duty - Ustad Bediuzzaman Said Nursi

• We are born at our homes, and we die at the battlefields - a Turkish saying
• You want to attack us Mr. Gandhi. Be my guest and go ahead. But, folks will forget about Jengiz or Halagu, they’ll talk about you and me. For it’ll be a nuclear war. Yes, Pak will go, but the scores of other Muslim countries will remain. But, the only Hindu country will be gone forever. - Merhum Zia-ul Hak to Late Rajiv Gandhi during a face to face meeting

 

[HRK]

What kind of death are you referring to - military or economic? If you are referring to the military aspect, then death is death, whether nukes or conventional. India has said that it will retaliate massively, so how can death be avoided? Or do you think that use of tactical battle field nukes will not allow India to escalate with nukes?

My dear DEATH is DEATH .... what I said was in the context of STATE as you have said Pakistan (as state) is baby of Pakistan Military (this was your argument and I am quoting again as reference)

PA considers Pakistan to be its baby - how can they cause sudden death to the baby?

though I do not agree with this argument but replied you with same line of argument so that it may become understandable

now continuing with same line of argument plz understand Economy or Military are just two component of the states in Pakistan Military is the Centre of Gravity of Pakistani State now plz tell me what is CG of Indian State ...???
Economy
Political System
Or it Defence Forces

this is important question to consider because even if India manage to defeat Pakistan militarily, imagine a full scale nuclear exchange has occurred b/w India and Pakistan and Pakistan as an State is no more in existence ..... but let say 60%-70% of India has survive the nuclear exchange now what is the future of that India ..... ???

how would that India would manage the STATE AFFAIRS with an economy who have faced a full blown nuclear war recently, with around 40%-50% of its defence forces with questionable operational capability (due to war and then nuclear exchange) ....???

Political system and Economy of India would be strong enough to cater the needs of that STATE.

I hope you are not among those Indians who think Nuclear exchange would occur on randomly selected target based on population and economy, so I want to clear that nuclear exchange (from both side) would target "SPECIFICALLY" those Economic and Political (military is just one tool or component of politics) infrastructure which is necessary for STATE

Keep in mind Pakistan is no more but India has SURVIVED

IF you can answer this question you might get the meaning of slow and painful death of an STATE

 

[thinkingcap81]

My dear DEATH is DEATH .... what I said was in the context of STATE as you have said Pakistan (as state) is baby if Pakistan Military (this was your argument and I am quoting again as reference)

though I do not agree with this argument but replied you with same line of argument so that it may become understandable

now continuing with same line of argument plz understand Economy or Military are just two component of the states in Pakistan Military is the Centre of Gravity of Pakistani State now plz tell me what is CG of Indian State ...???
Economy
Political System
Or it Defence Forces

this is important question to consider because even if India manage to defeat Pakistan militarily, full nuclear exchange has occurred b/w India and Pakistan and Pakistan as a State is no more in existence ..... but let say 60%-70% of India has survive the nuclear exchange now what is the future of that India ..... ???

how would that India would manage the STATE AFFAIRS with an economy who have faced a full blown nuclear war recently, with around 40%-50% of its defence forces with questionable operational capability (due to war and then nuclear exchange) ....???

Political system and Economy of India would be strong enough to cater the needs of that STATE.

I hope you are not among those Indians who think Nuclear exchange would occur on randomly selected target based on population and economy, so I want to clear that nuclear exchange (from both side) would target "SPECIFICALLY" those Economic and Political (military is just one tool or component of politics) infrastructure which is necessary for STATE

Keep in mind Pakistan is no more but India has SURVIVED

IF you can answer this question you might get the meaning of slow and painful death of an STATE

In my posts i have said that the Indian strategy will be to avoid nuclear threshold at all costs, so there is no question of MAD actually happening from our POV. There is nothing left in a country that is even 50% nuked.

To me , the nuclear thresholds of both Pakistan and India are pure fiction; fiction in the sense that Pak threshold is much higher than they publicly claim, and Indian response may not be massive retaliation or any nuke retaliation at all. If Pak fires even a single small nuke all hell will break loose in world capitals. India does not have to repay in the same coin.

Hence i spoke of a 2-3 day conflict without crossing the nuclear threshold. In these 2-3 days India will look to inflict decent damage and hope that the world powers intervene and stop the war.

I am simply saying that PA will do nothing to jeopardize the existence of Pakistan in terms of MAD.

The CG of the Indian state, till now, has been the political system. Previously they decided on socialism and the country followed that path. When the economy tanked, more than the people's immediate anger, the economic problems forced the political class to liberalize. Now the economy and aspirations of the people are significantly influencing political decisions.

Our military has a much lesser role to play. When the Congress kept them on a leash they kept quiet, when the BJP is telling the top brass to shout, they are doing so. Indirectly the military tries to make its voice heard - heard and that's about it, at the end of the day the politicians take a call based on the inputs of the military.

 

[HRK]

i have said that the Indian strategy will be to avoid nuclear threshold at all costs, so there is no question of MAD actually happening from our POV.

strategist can plan to fight a war on their terms but can they guarantee that no variable will effect their strategy and the expected out come and there will be effective controls available to not let the situation go ugly ....

To me , the nuclear thresholds of both Pakistan and India are pure fiction; fiction in the sense that Pak threshold is much higher than they publicly claim, and Indian response may not be massive retaliation or any nuke retaliation at all. I

Pakistan declare nuclear threshold is based 3 thing
1- Lose of major chunk of Territory (indicating the resolute towards Territorial Integrity)
2- Major lose to its defence forces (Indicating the resolute to keep the minimum force to defend the country)
3- Wide Scale foreign sponsored unrest (to avoid Bangladesh Situation which again Territorial Integrity)

in other words these are the red lines which as per some Indians (your officials have given the statement about this) India will not cross but will fight a [limited] war, If this is the case than it will be another indecisive war like 1948, 1965, 1999, but as far as we know through Indian media and international publications about limited war doctrine of India have objectives of capturing the multiple chunks of Pakistan's territory by shallow incursions at multiple sectors then hold those areas for desirable period and inflict maximum damage possible to Pakistan's defence forces and its infrastructure.

Now these objectives are directly confronting the red lines of Pakistan's nuclear threshold of Territorial Integrity and minimum force to defend territorial integrity.

Hence i spoke of a 2-3 day conflict without crossing the nuclear threshold. In these 2-3 days India will look to inflict decent damage and hope that the world powers intervene and stop the war.

In those two to three days what will be the war objectives of India, if India is not going to cross the red lines as indicated above ...??

secondly at which sector India would like to initiate this [limited] war. ??

This term "DECENT" is quite vague to define quantitative or even qualitative terms I mean what would be termed decent by Indian perspective if Pakistan's offensive capability remains intact or receive just sustainable damage in 2-3 days war ....??

BTW If we try to look in past to find some similarities we find an example in 1971 during the last days of war in which Indian had similar objectives of limited war at western front and Indian PM Indra Gandhi had define those objectives as
1- Liberation of southern part of Azad Kashmir
2- Destruction of Pakistan offensive force (Air force and Armoured forces)

If India achieve to destroy Pakistan's offensive capability like offensive divisions, a big chunk of Air force and missiles infrastructure .... then the India has crossed the red line, so how would you avoid the nuclear retaliation ....???

If that [limited]war will be initiated without the objectives of destroying Pakistan's offensive capability and capturing and holing some of its territory to bargain after the intervention of International community then what will be the objective of that war ...?? and more Importantly who will be the beneficiary of that [limited] war ....???

because in this scenario it seems to me this type [limited] war would be initiated to facilitate some political actors of India rather meaningful objective related to defence.

I am simply saying that PA will do nothing to jeopardize the existence of Pakistan in terms of MAD.

And I am saying MAD will come into action if India would cross the red line of

1- Territorial Integrity of Pakistan
2- Destruction of Offensive capabilities of Pakistan

In this case the only option remains is the some thing like "Surgical Strike" [this time a real one] in this case what would be Indian response when Pakistan retaliate at their place of choice ... this would not initiate a CHAIN REACTION ...?? and what would be the outcome of this chain reaction ....???

If Indian are thinking to involve the international community at this stage as you said in one of your previous post (posted below as reference) my friend mark my word International community would side with that country which will be more 'ACCOMMODATING' to them in that situation.

Then we use our diplomatic relations to force the world to stop the war. The world will listen to that power which is more respected and this respect has a lot to do with the economy and the future potential of the economy.

The CG of the Indian state, till now, has been the political system.

If by political system you means politicians and political parties only then you are wrong but by term political system you are including Administration and Judiciary then you are right the actual CG of India lies with its administration and Judiciary who are the real unsung heroes of Indian state your political class is the weakest link to the Indian political system (this is my assessment as an outside and I know many Indians would disagree)

Previously they decided on socialism and the country followed that path. When the economy tanked, more than the people's immediate anger, the economic problems forced the political class to liberalize. Now the economy and aspirations of the people are significantly influencing political decisions.

Actually CG in India has start shifting from political class to economic class it will still take at least 1 or 2 decades to fully replace the political influence which will be a good sign for the region because vibrant economies don't go to war (America is an exception)

 

[randomradio]

As @Oscar said, in about a week Pak military will be degraded enough to make the nukes come out. So even a conflict of 2-3 days will cause significant damage.

According to India's doctrine, even the threat of nukes is enough for us to go nuclear.

So it's not necessary that Pakistan gets a chance at first strike.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Actually CG in India has start shifting from political class to economic class it will still take at least 1 or 2 decades to fully replace the political influence which will be a good sign for the region because vibrant economies don't go to war (America is an exception)

About that economic part, before WW1, the world's major economies were fairly well tied!!! And, they had a theory that major powers wouldn't go to war because of extensive trade relations and inter dependence!!! Well, the rest is history!!! I hope in the nd-Pak scenario the economic interest prevails over ideological/religious dispositions...

 

[HRK]

About that economic part, before WW1, the world's major economies were fairly well tied!!! And, they had a theory that major powers wouldn't go to war because of extensive trade relations and inter dependence!!! Well, the rest is history!!! I hope in the nd-Pak scenario the economic interest prevails over ideological/religious dispositions...

Pak-India have minimal economic relations and even if we start today it will take ~1 to 1.5 decade to reach at any sizeable level which can force both countries to stay away from conflict.

In my previous post I was indicating the overall economic progress of India which may act as a repellent factor against any political desire of active conflict, but currently religious based neo-nationalism is a factor which may put the whole region in testing situation at least for coming 5-10 years.

 

[randomradio]

Actually CG in India has start shifting from political class to economic class it will still take at least 1 or 2 decades to fully replace the political influence which will be a good sign for the region because vibrant economies don't go to war (America is an exception)

The CG in India will never shift to the economy. It will always remain with the political class.

The reason why you call America an exception is because as a large country it has multiple economic centres. These economic centres are always competing with each other. And the ruling class will always dominate such a structure. So the same thing will happen in India and China. The differences between economic centres is why the British managed to run India for a long time.

Also, in just 1 or 2 decades, India will still be a relatively poor country. Even in 2 decades, India is expected to have a $20T economy, which is barely $12,500 per capita. That's barely at the level of Eastern Europe today. What you are talking about may take 75-100 years, but even then the competition among the various economic centres will mean the political class will continue ruling the roost.

India will have at least 8 major economic centres and only 1 political class. Delhi, Mumbai-Pune, Bangalore-Mysore, Chennai, Hyderabad, Ahmedabad-Surat, Lucknow-Patna and Kolkata. Only the political class will be able to maintain any sort of cohesiveness between these 8 major power brokers.