If Pakistan loses territory due to quantitative advantage of Indian Army, there'll be nothing more to lose. For an Army, losing significant territory is unacceptable. Pakistan Army is determined (and Indian spy networks know this well) to use tactical weapons on Indian Army inside Pakistan's territorial boundaries. The weapons are so sophisticated that there's no counter on field and India might lose tens of thousands of soldiers in
Tactical nukes use small missile with low range and hence difficult to intercept. But that doesn't mean tens of thousands of Indian soldiers will be killed. TNW is not strong enough to kill soldiers in that quantity unless Indian soldiers are stupid and stand in a single location. Generally, soldiers spread out to have higher land control. So, you can't kill tens of thousands of soldiers unless you use dozens of nukes. But if you use 10 nukes for 10000 soldiers, then you are only killing 1000 per nuke which is quite small.
If Indian policy says that in that case, it will do a counter attack with full force.. that's fine.. But does India have the guts to do that fully knowing the second strike capability of Pakistan and an unknown reach of Pakistani ballistic missiles? Will it risk lives of 100s of millions and going back to the year 1900 to start over just because it has lost some thousands of soldiers and lost the land that didn't belong to them in the first place?
Nukes are.not magic weapons that war can be won by nukes. If nukes were enough to win war, why develop 5th generation planes, radars, navy etc? Think logically instead of saying that merely nuke strike will kill everyone from other side. No, India will not go back to 1900 o even 1950s due to nuke strike. India has enough industrial capability and infrastructure to withstand attacks amd still maintain production. In war, every country will be willing to lose people. India too will be willing to lose 3-4 crore people to gain permanent solution.
This is the question that confuses Indian strategists.. Pakistan is ready.. and that shows in the response given at LoC from time to time. India is not ready and doesn't want to risk a little progress it has made in the past couple of decades.
India is not ready as it knows it can get stronger. India van develop more technology like BMD and defend against most Pakistani missiles, thus minimising losses. Pakistan knows that it can never develop advanced technology fast enough to counter India. So, the more delay happens, Pakistan will face even greater technology odds. So, Pakistan is just desperate while India is buying time. Nevertheless, it doesn't mean India can't defeat Pakistan now. It is just that India can defeat Pakistan tomorrow with much less losses.
Pakistan might lose its 90% population.. but India will also lose the same percent.. if not quickly, over the years when they will have to deal with post nuclear diseases, waste lands, destroyed industry etc.. It will be all over for the sub continent and the neighboring countries.
India will not lose 90% population. Japan didn't lose half its people because of nuclear diseases or wasteland. In fact, there is no evidence to say that Japanese suffered from nuclear diseases over time. Only those who were hit on the day of explosion were the ones who suffered.
In my honest opinion, west will keep a balance on the conventional theater and keep on providing gadgets that give enough strength to a highly trained Pakistani force. They know that the training and some advanced gadgets will effectively challenge an Indian advance that relies on quantity more than quality.
West is irrelevant. They won't involve themselves beyond a point. So, it will come down to the strength of India and Pakistan and allies. No big country like China, Russia or USA would like to get its people killed in someone else's war.
But we need to look at the positive side of the policies. With Pakistan's resolve of using tactical nukes and India's efforts to build a robust second strike capability balance each other out. (However Pakistan's deployment of long range nuclear cruise missiles on submarines will complicate situation)
Second strike is absurd theory. Nukes are mated on missiles and stored underground or beneath mountains which van be killed by first strike. Nucleae submarine ia mainly for striking long range Targets as im case of USSR - USA which lie half the world away and hence the conventional ballistic missiles can't be accurate while navigating earth's curvature. Hence submarines were brought in to launch the missiles from closer to enemy shores. Nuke missile is nit stored in open ground for someone to strike at it.
You see, the Indian mentality is based around the perceived fantasy that India has a lot less to lose in a nuclear war and Pakistan has a lot to lose, that India will come out as the "winning side" in a nuclear war. Pakistan on the other hand feels that its survival is at stake and if India launches a pre-emptive strike, it might be annihilated, hence Pakistan must make sure secondary strike capability is guaranteed to work in order to decapitate the enemy as a last measure.
Nuclear strike, whether first or second, can only cause so much damage. War can be won only by long term sustained campaign. One shot kills are only fantasy. No, India doesn't think that it can kill Pakistan with some nuclear strikes but that India will destroy Pakistan and wipe out its people through sustained campaign due to superior technology and industrial capabilities.
We have su-30 .....Pakis are no match = Abhinandan happened
We have better nukes , bigger in size .... Pakis are no match = Still don't have the guts to attack and occupy.
Skirmishes doesn't mean anything. Moreover, Abhinandan was using Mig21 which is very old.
Pakistan will wait for you to attack but once you do, Pakistan WILL launch TNW, Pakistan WILL decimate all of your forces in a matter of seconds and once india is out of a military, Pakistan WILL march in and take swaths upon swaths all kinds of indian land AT WILL and if anyone in delhi so much as dares to even think about going nuclear, our strategic thermonuclear warheads will be raining across india even before india gets a chance to launch a single missile.
India has 30 lakh square kilometres of land, can you give me calculations as to how you can destroy so much land by nuclear strikes? How many nuclear strikes will you do?
Its a stupid policy. It should be a proportional response. Lets face it. If a NASR missile roasts 800 indian soldiers indian high command wont have the guts to launch the big guys because it means the end to Indian life as you know it. Pakistan will equal the damage.
India is waiting to destroy Pakistan. But middle east oil powers are stopping it. If India gets an excuse to attack, why would it let go?
Countries build massive nuclear arsenals because they know, most of their weapons would be wiped out , by enemies nuclear decapitation strikes.
No, it is because the land mass ia very large and hence if we calculate the destructive power of nukes, we will need a lot of them to take out all enemy bases.
exercise?
son, this was the real deal...when the Feb 27 attack happened, the missiles were already prepped up & ready to launch a day before the PAF strikes...why do you think the indian army refused to cross the boundry in spite of having moved forces to the front?
Lol! India crossed into Pakistan and bombed Balakot. India didn't hesitate when it had an objective. It doesn't mean India will invade Pakistan arbitrarily
Pakistan having/not having thermonuclear weapons is debatable as Pakistan's security establishment is keeping that capability ambiguous on purpose as some retired generals hints on having that capability and some deny it in interviews.
Show me where anyone has said that Pakistan has thermonuclear weapons? Many have said that Pakistan plans to develop it but never that Pakistan has already developed them.
Why do you think the US Deep State has made peace with the Taliban? And, Pompeo is running Kissinger-style diplomacy with China using Bagram Air Base...
USA does not have land bases to maintain Afghanistan. So, it was compelled to make peace as it started losing support from middle east and Pakistan. Middle East and Pakistan have shifted their support to China instead of USA and hence USA withdrew.
u friggin cowards will be the first one to use.. after just one bashing session you lunghis got wet and you were coming out of statement thst india will reconsider first use policy.. just imagine if war happened, u will be shooting nukes withkut a reason.. u r a highly irresponsible state..
Manohar Parrikar had already said this in 2015-16. You are simply joining unconnected dots
imdia panicked, bombed 3 trees & a crow followed by running with its tail between its legs only to bombed in 6 different locations, loosing 2 jets & shooting down its own helicopters the very next day. please feel free to keep on not hesitating like this in the future...no promise of fantashtik tea though so don't hold your breath. 
