Pak swelling nuclear arsenal to counter India'

[Secur]

Empty vessels make more sound.. the reason you guys got thrashed every single time..

Do not make me delve deeper in history ... Who mobilized troops in '02 , lost 800 + in the process and then backed off ? ...

Face it , you do not have the determination to deal with a nuclear Pakistan ...

 

[IND151]

But but it managed to save Pakistan after 26/11..didn't it?I mean your loud mouthed politicians could only threaten but deep down they weren't willing to sacrifice India.

the price of attacking Pakistan after 26/11 would have been enormous compared to the gains of it

it was very clever plan to provoke India, to launch war

result would have been massive financial damage and India earning tag of irresponsible nation, and probably sanctions against India

and Pakistan would have got excuse to redeploy a significant portion of its troops deployed on eastern border

plan failed as India showed restraint

 

[IND151]

But but it managed to save Pakistan after 26/11..didn't it?I mean your loud mouthed politicians could only threaten but deep down they weren't willing to sacrifice India.

the price of attacking Pakistan after 26/11 would have been enormous compared to the gains of it

it was very clever plan to provoke India, to launch war

result would have been massive financial damage and India earning tag of irresponsible nation, and probably sanctions against India

and Pakistan would have got excuse to shift a significant portion of its troops from western border to eastern border


thus i would have got excuse to not fight WOT

plan failed as India showed restraint

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Do not make me delve deeper in history ... Who mobilized troops in '02 , lost 800 + in the process and then backed off ? ...

Like i mentioned earlier, why will India deprive Pakistan her traditional role of starting the conflict?

Face it , you do not have the determination to deal with a nuclear Pakistan ...

If that is true, then Kargil and Siachen should be under Pakistani control.

Though i'll admit, nuclear Pakistan makes repeat of 1971 impossible.

 

[KRAIT]

Do not make me delve deeper in history ... Who mobilized troops in '02 , lost 800 + in the process and then backed off ? ...

Face it , you do not have the determination to deal with a nuclear Pakistan ...

Actually we adopted different strategy. making you spend more on your weapons and increasing your nuclear stockpile. As I have said earlier, world now sees you as a threat due to militancy and increasing number of nukes.

Also our addition of weapons will force you to make you buy more especially when your economy is in dire state. Why do we want to fight with you if we can weaken you from within.

With cherry on top, our increasing presence in Afghanistan will make more easier for Indians to keep pressure on your govt. and army.

Its about strategic maneuvers rather than emotional decisions.

Keep increasing your nukes and drain your resources but we all know they will never be used.

India just want Pakistan to be isolated from the rest of the world and post 2014, US and other allies will jump in the wagon when they don't have to depend on you for supply route.

 

[Secur]

the price of attacking Pakistan after 26/11 would have been enormous compared to the gains of it

it was very clever plan to provoke India, to launch war

Fair Dinkum ? Really and do enlighten us all what really would have Pakistan achieved by provoking India to start a war ?

Just because you couldn't attack because of the critical delay in mobilization and the nuclear threat , there's reason to make an excuse that your country showed restraint , since your countrymen were advocating for open war and press screaming for blood ...

 

[IND151]

double post

 

[Secur]

Actually we adopted different strategy. making you spend more on your weapons and increasing your nuclear stockpile. As I have said earlier, world now sees you as a threat due to militancy and increasing number of nukes.

Debatable to say the least , no country mobilizes troops and then backs off without any significant fear ... You have tried in '87 , '02 and '08 and failed to bring Pakistan to your terms ... You may have adopted a different strategy , but you do admit the effectiveness of the nuclear armed Pakistan ... Do tell me since when are we spending more on weapons ? ... Is it yet another speculation ? ... Islamabad plays its cards well , spends on cost effective and necessary weapons and tries to keep every single purchase or military project top secret so to keep the enemy guessing ... We have merely modified our doctrine of First Use Policy and lowered the thresholds ... The world doesn't only consist of India , US and a couple of western countries , friend ...

If that is true, then Kargil and Siachen should be under Pakistani control.

Though i'll admit, nuclear Pakistan makes repeat of 1971 impossible.

Well , I do not know where you get your information from but still IA didn't dare cross the LOC or IB in Kargil and Pakistan never had any delivery system for nukes at the time when Siachen was invaded ...

 

[Safriz]

Let me put it this way. Showing off PUBLICALLY and showing off to only those who are concerned are two different things. Time and again, Pakistan's SFC passes hints onto the Indian officials, without chest thumping.



The term MAD (mutual assured destruction) arose during the Cold War, long before Pakistan had nuclear weapons. MAD is the ONLY scenario which is preventing nuclear weapons exchange between any two or more nuclear nations.

Kindly do a little research over nuclear weapons, their safety and the strategic equations before bashing Pakistan and Pakistanis without any valid reason.

Western media has hypnotized world population,including indians so much that they are fine with 10,000 megatons of American weapons ready to launch at them...Talk of trusting America with their lives ..The only aggressor of the current world.

Muslims countries and specially Pakistan is at greatest risk from American Paranoia..We are already under direct attack from them via Drones and indirectly from CIA supported terrorism...

Its only Logical that Pakistan should prepare whatever they can to counter their nuclear threat which is always there...

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Well , I do not know where you get your information from but still IA didn't dare cross the LOC or IB in Kargil and

Why was IA supposed to cross IB or LOC?

Pakistan never had any delivery system for nukes at the time when Siachen was invaded ...

I meant by controlling Kargil, eventually Pakistan would have obtained Siachen.

Wasn't refering to 1984 Siachen conflict.

 

[KRAIT]

Debatable to say the least , no country mobilizes troops and then backs off without any significant fear ... You have tried in '87 , '02 and '08 and failed to bring to your terms ... You may have adopted a different strategy , but you admit the effectiveness of the nuclear armed Pakistan ... Do tell me since when are we spending more on weapons ? ... We have merely modified our doctrine of First Use Policy and lowered the thresholds ... The world doesn't only consist of India , US and a couple of western countries , friend ...

Yup world consists of many nations, but we know who favors whom. And you do know you are spending money for submarines, aircrafts, ships, etc. even when you have enough nuke delivery system. If you can threaten us with your nukes, why make these other weapons and purchase them.

India now don't want war with you, even when we have to mobilize our force on people's pressure. Why would we do anything that can hamper our economic growth. Try to understand reason behind deployment of troops but not attacking.

India don't care about your nuclear bombs as economic bomb is doing what we could have done to you. Just see the effect of India in Afghanistan and how your govt. is opposing it.

Buddy try to look at the bigger picture. The entire world w.r.t. to you are now making ties with India, for example KSA, UAE etc.

 

[IND151]

Fair Dinkum ? Really and do enlighten us all what really would have Pakistan achieved by provoking India to start a war ?

Just because you couldn't attack because of the critical delay in mobilization and the nuclear threat , there's reason to make an excuse that your country showed restraint , since your countrymen were advocating for open war and press screaming for blood ...

but our leadership showed restraint

Indian policy makers, off coarse , wont forget this

but we need to concentrate on other issues too

however, when right time comes, we will show what we can do

there was a nation which was trying to create unrest in NE India in 1950s

we kept mum for nearly 20 years and then, at right time, did what was needed

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Western media has hypnotized world population,including indians so much that they are fine with 10,000 megatons of American weapons ready to launch at them...Talk of trusting America with their lives ..The only aggressor of the current world.

Effectiveness of American conventional capabilities gives one an idea whether USA needs to use her nuclear weapons.


America did not use nuclear weapons in Vietnam, why should American nuclear weapons be a concern when American supremacy is unchallenged.

 

[Secur]

Why was IA supposed to cross IB or LOC?

I meant by controlling Kargil, eventually Pakistan would have obtained Siachen.

Wasn't refering to 1984 Siachen conflict.

Well as your Generals and later military analysis pointed out , the reason that India suffered over 500+ causalities was because they couldn't cut the Pakistani supply lines on the other side of the LOC or divert attention by crossing IB ...

Hmmm , Indeed ... I thought otherwise ... But we aren't discussing the Kargil War in a nuclear thread right

but our leadership showed restraint

Indian policy makers, off coarse , wont forget this

Cheery picking my post will not be of any use to you ... I pointed out why India didn't start a war in '02 ...

Oh never they should !

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Well as your Generals and later military analysis pointed out , the reason that India suffered over 500+ causalities was because they couldn't cut the Pakistani supply lines on the other side of the LOC or divert attention by crossing IB ...

Provide that source.

Also only reason IA would have to cross the IB or LOC if gains could not be made in Kargil.

In the end Kargil came to India. So, no reason to cross IB or LOC.