khansaheeb
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2008
- Messages
- 17,009
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
Now this is the correct way to address an argument. Thank you.
A great white shark is not a weak animal by any measure. However, an Orca will eviscerate it in a fight, still.
Pakistan is a 'strong' regional power but not a near-peer adversary to US in a fight. There is a massive asymmetry in the capabilities of the two countries in almost any domain. This is the harsh truth we need to come to terms to.
India is our neighbor and vulnerable to our strikes accordingly. However, this is not the case with US. And no! Pakistan doesn't have the firepower to wipe a huge country from the map. Pakistan and India do not have thermonuclear weapons in their arsenal. It will take several nuclear strikes to level Delhi alone.
No! A war with Pakistan will not have catastrophic consequences for the US. This is your imagination, not a reality. US threatened Pakistan in fair and clear terms of dire consequences in 2001, and Pakistan capitulated to the pressure at the time. US now threatened North Korea in fair and clear terms of dire consequences in 2017, and North Korea have got the memo. The two are talking now.
US is not India, and does not have similar set of vulnerabilities vis-a-vis Pakistan.
This is a fairly illogical assessment. Yes, we are a dynamic opponent but we have a fair amount of capacity constraints as well. What advancements Pakistan have to counter any technological edge they may have in their weapon systems? Please tell me.
Some are yet to come to terms to the incident of Abbottabad. We cook all kinds of excuses and narratives to hush embarrassing developments. I hope you have read Abbottabad Commission Report.
Immediately you are wrong:" Pakistan and India do not have thermonuclear weapons in their arsenal. ".
I suggest you go and re-evaluate your knowledge base or source of information.
I bet you are one of those guys who believes Iran does not have nuclear weapons too?