Pakistan's bomb has prevented war with India: AQ Khan

[Patrician]

Well nuclear weapons are regarded as the biggest deterrence weapon of all, India's economic boost, massive military spending's are all insignificant when it comes to nuclear confrontation with Pakistan........ i have stated this a numerous times on forum but these statement receives little acknowledgment as the fighter jets fanboys love to see the scenario where fighter jets from both sides are engaged in BVR fights in a NUCLEAR ENVIRONMENT........., limited conflict is always a possibility but it takes mere seconds to escalate. remember the 2001 standoff between India & Pakistan, I don't know about India but Pakistan had deployed Ghauri's then.

So is Pakistan's
So is USA's
So is China's
So is Russia's
So is...

By the way, so why don't you tell your military to stop spending on defence at all? According to you nukes are the answer to everything.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

what's the scoreboard stay on # of times India has been invaded vs. # of times India has invaded?

India invaded the Princely States of Junagadh and Hyderabad when the former acceded to Pakistan and the latter was oscilating between acceding to Pakistan or staying independent.

Scoreboard: India - 2

India also supported rebels/terrorists in East Pakistan and contributed to destabilizing the country and then used that pretext to mass forces against Pakistan to invade.

Scoreboard: India - 3

India supported, trained and equipped the LTTE (Sri Lankan terrorist organization), and in that sense contributed to the rise of arguably the bloodiest and most powerful terrorist organization in the world.

Scoreboard: India - 4

India also assisted the Norther Alliance in Afghanistan in fighting the Pashtun groups and the Taliban

Scoreboard: India - 5

So lets drop the inane rhetoric and canards of 'peaceful India' and 'India has never invaded anyone'.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Well nuclear weapons are regarded as the biggest deterrence weapon of all, India's economic boost, massive military spending's are all insignificant when it comes to nuclear confrontation with Pakistan........ i have stated this a numerous times on forum but these statement receives little acknowledgment as the fighter jets fanboys love to see the scenario where fighter jets from both sides are engaged in BVR fights in a NUCLEAR ENVIRONMENT........., limited conflict is always a possibility but it takes mere seconds to escalate. remember the 2001 standoff between India & Pakistan, I don't know about India but Pakistan had deployed Ghauri's then.

And all this you did not know before Kargil? It was WAR. May be AQ is referring to some other countries where his nukes have indeed caused peace.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

And all this you did not know before Kargil? It was WAR. May be AQ is referring to some other countries where his nukes have indeed caused peace.

Kargil was more of an escalated border skirmish, from the Pakistani perspective at least.

Pakistan did not mobilize anywhere close to the resources that India did in the theater of conflict, ostensibly to prevent a full fledged war from breaking out.

 

[cybertron]

india cud hav taken out pakistan in kargil eazier dan ever but didnt do it even though pakistan didnt hav d so called deterrent 60-100 nuclear warheads then
and wud say right decision
india should remain a peace loving country

 

[gowthamraj]

you right. . If nukes is a only deterrence what Pakistan wants, then why all other for billions



According to my opinion Pakistan can only decide to launch nukes on INDIAN cities if it loose more of territories

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

We can minimise the deterrence one if we develop a strong and multilare bmd and other measures to minimise damage and spreading of nuke effect if our BMD fails.

 

[Patrician]

Kargil was more of an escalated border skirmish, from the Pakistani perspective at least.

Pakistan did not mobilize anywhere close to the resources that India did in the theater of conflict, ostensibly to prevent a full fledged war from breaking out.

Pakistan did not have to.

Whatever resources it did employ were enough to drive any nation in the world crazy.

Indian troops had to attack up the hills. Obviously, the ratio of casualties on the Indian side was (and it had to be) on a far greater scale than it was on Pakistan's.

I hope you do understand that when one guy is sitting on the top, you need 10 at the bottom in order to attack him. The advantage of heights was with Pakistan and hence the large resource allocation by India. We even had to call in our air force to aid the ground troops.

 

[Chanakyaa]

Khan is really a True Hero as far Pakistan is concerned.

Its beyond doubt that Pakistani Nukes have a real importance in preventing war.

The only thing which hurts is, how can such aptriot go careless to distribute technology ..like nuclear bomb... For a few million dollars... That has tendency to swallow million lives....

If libya nukes another country... Who is to be blamed?

 

[Patrician]

Kargil was more of an escalated border skirmish, from the Pakistani perspective at least.

Pakistan did not mobilize anywhere close to the resources that India did in the theater of conflict, ostensibly to prevent a full fledged war from breaking out.

Had that been the case, Pakistan would have avoided kargil altogether.

The truth is, Mushy thought that he could have the element of surprise on his side by sending these troops/infiltrators/mujahideen in winters when Indian army had vacated its higher posts as was the norm back then. He launched the attack and when indian army found out, India retaliated.

Actually mushy's plan was to cut-off leh from India by cutting off the strategic highway.

When the conflict happened and uncle sam realised that there was a real risk of it escalating into a full scale war, Nawaz Sharif was called by Clinton and chastised and told to order his army to back off. When Nawaz tried to do so, mushy was isolated. After a few days, mushy ousted nawaz.

I'm by no means saying what mushy did was right or wrong. He acted in faith that it was in the best interest of his country. Unfortunately for him, it didn't end the way he had anticipated.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan did not have to.

Whatever resources it did employ were enough to drive any nation in the world crazy.

Indian troops had to attack up the hills. Obviously, the ratio of casualties on the Indian side was (and it had to be) on a far greater scale than it was on Pakistan's.

I hope you do understand that when one guy is sitting on the top, you need 10 at the bottom in order to attack him. The advantage of heights was with Pakistan and hence the large resource allocation by India. We even had to call in our air force to aid the ground troops.

While, based on the evidence here, you may not have a career as an artist, you certainly have a knack for hijacking the topic of conversation into irrelevant trajectories and putting arguments into others mouths.

Did I question the casualties on either side?

Did I question why India needed more resources?

Did I question advantages of holding high ground?

I merely pointed out that from the perspective of Pakistan, Kargil was little more than an escalated border conflict, and Pakistan deployed nowhere close to the resources India did. I assume you agree.

 

[Patrician]

Did I question the casualties on either side?

Did I question why India needed more resources?

Did I question advantages of holding high ground?[/B]

NO YOU DID NOT.

I just went into some details. Pssssss...Sorry

 

[Coltsfan]

@Patrician,

If I understand AM correctly, he is contending that had Pakistan no nukes, the Kargil "skirmish" may could well have ended up in a full fledged war all along the border from Kashmir to Gujarat.

I tend to agree with that assessment.

AM: Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Patrician]

@Patrician,

If I understand AM correctly, he is contending that had Pakistan no nukes, the Kargil "skirmish" may could well have ended up in a full fledged war all along the border from Kashmir to Gujarat.

I tend to agree with that assessment.

AM: Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

Of course I agree my friend, read my first post on the thread.
My only point "DON'T COUNT ON IT"

 

[Patrician]

Khan is really a True Hero as far Pakistan is concerned.

Its beyond doubt that Pakistani Nukes have a real importance in preventing war.

The only thing which hurts is, how can such aptriot go careless to distribute technology ..like nuclear bomb... For a few million dollars... That has tendency to swallow million lives....

If libya nukes another country... Who is to be blamed?

I contend the notion that he acted alone.

In a country like Pakistan where Army has such a firm grip on all major affairs, it is next to impossible for a some stand-alone rogue element to go on proliferating Nuke Tech.

He quite obviously was acting hand-in-gloves with people from the establishment/army/whatever.

My point: He was made a scapegoat. Altough he was definitely involved, he definitely was not alone.