Pakistan's terrible idea to develop battlefield nukes

[Riteon]

Elaborate , since your words do not make much sense ...

I am not talking about nuking Indian cities here ...

The people you were replying yo was talking about tactical nukes...useful for theatre battles .....mini nukes in small missiles ................Nuking cities is easier ......

 

[Secur]

Yes people in this forum have better credentials that a>30 years veteran with experiences in more 40 countries !!

You cant accept the reality with a biased mind , even if you have a 1000 years of experience , because Pakistan's not the first country to deploy tactical nukes nor with First Use policy

The author should know that repeating the same busted to ad infinitum scenarios of extremist taking over nukes or US neutralizing them or Pakistan failing wont help make his point !

The people you were replying yo was talking about tactical nukes...useful for theatre battles .....mini nukes in small missiles ................Nuking cities is easier ......

I know , it appears you didn't read my post carefully ...

I am talking about Pakistan nuking Indian CBG's and asking if Dehli's willing to risk a billion lives for a couple invading CBG's

 

[ares]

Always nice to have a joker on the thread , thanks for entertaining us



Actually not , its Dehli that is presented with one , if it implements Cold Start and assume Pakistan goes nuclear , would they be ready to risk the lives of billions for a couple CBG's ?

Well Indian Nuclear doctrine clearly states ..that India will respond with massive nuclear retaliation in case of a nuclear, chemical or biological attack on Indian territory or Indian forces anywhere.

So there is no dilemma here..once you throw the nuclear switch..there is no going back.

All that would change is, Pakistan would have used its trump card' too little and too soon'.

It would have proved to India that Pakistan is ready to use nuclear weapons..so Indian retaliatory strike would be designed to take out Pakistani nuclear and missile installations, designed to reduce the Pakistani second strike ability to the a minimum.

 

[Riteon]

Seems iam trolling

 

[TaimiKhan]

Avoid unnecessary, useless & pointless rant.

If can't control then leave the thread and do something else.

 

[Secur]

Well Indian Nuclear doctrine clearly states ..that India will respond with massive nuclear retaliation in case of a nuclear, chemical or biological attack on Indian territory or Indian forces anywhere.

So there is no dilemma here..once you throw the nuclear switch..there is no going back.

All that would change is, Pakistan would have used its trump card too soon and too little.
It would have proved to India that Pakistan is ready to use nuclear weapons..so Indian retaliatory strike would be designed to take out Pakistani nuclear and missile installations, designed to reduce the Pakistani second strike ability to the a minimum.

Such is the basic flaw of your nuclear doctrine then , if its willing to risk a billion people for a couple of CBG's ... There's a going back if only invading forces are stopped dead in their tracks and not Indian cities are nuked ...

Indian retaliatory strikes aren't capable of taking down Pakistan's missile installations , forget it and the same otherwise ...

 

[TaimiKhan]

Well Indian Nuclear doctrine clearly states ..that India will respond with massive nuclear retaliation in case of a nuclear, chemical or biological attack on Indian territory or Indian forces anywhere.

So there is no dilemma here..once you throw the nuclear switch..there is no going back.

All that would change is, Pakistan would have used its trump card' too little and too soon'.

It would have proved to India that Pakistan is ready to use nuclear weapons..so Indian retaliatory strike would be designed to take out Pakistani nuclear and missile installations, designed to reduce the Pakistani second strike ability to the a minimum.

It would be very hard since Pak nuke assets are majorly mobile assets and knowing their exact locations would be difficult. Indian retaliation would be on the cities,God forbid in case that happens while the Pak nuke assets would be somewhere else, thus incase India does launch such a massive retaliation in response to pak using nukes on its own soil on an invading Indian force, pak will then have to retaliate also with whatever is left with it.

So, MAD will kick into place.

Hope, this never happens and this talk keeps to us arm chair generals

 

[Secur]

Pakistan has first use policy . Pak nuclear tech lags behind India...i dont need specs to see that.........the only area wher pak lead is tactical nukes and number of nukes.........nothing else...........India stopped building when deterent levels were made...and focused on OTHER aspects of Nuclear technology....wher clearly Pakistan has no prescence or is lagging way behind..........Hence Pak lags behind comment


Post by ARES '' Pakistan is presented with a dilemma here..If it uses its tactical nukes to neutralize a shallow Indian incursion..It would have used its only ace too soon.It would have given up, before even fighting the war..because Indian response, sure as hell would be nuclear one.

Your reply tually not , its Dehli that is presented with one , if it implements Cold Start and assume Pakistan goes nuclear , would they be ready to risk the lives of billions for a couple CBG's


My reply to you
do you even know what tactical nuke ?? ........

It so appear that you have massive trouble comprehending English , where did I say that Pakistan doesn't have First Use Policy ? ... I commented that Pakistan isn't the first country in the world with " First Use Policy " if you care to read posts properly ... Where exactly does our tech lags behind if your nukes just fizzled according to your very own scientists who led the program ? Post nonsensical and off topic comments and get reply in the same manner !

Yeah , Pakistan is using tactical nukes on Indian invading CBG's and not Indian cities , all I am asking if Dehli's ready to risk a billion lives and start a full scale nuclear war for a couple CBG's ! You do know about the " Cold Start " doctrine right ? IF yes , then what is so hard for you to understand ?

 

[TaimiKhan]

Pakistan has first use policy . Pak nuclear tech lags behind India...i dont need specs to see that.........the only area wher pak lead is tactical nukes and number of nukes.........nothing else...........India stopped building when deterent levels were made...and focused on OTHER aspects of Nuclear technology....wher clearly Pakistan has no prescence or is lagging way behind..........Hence Pak lags behind comment





Post by ARES '' Pakistan is presented with a dilemma here..If it uses its tactical nukes to neutralize a shallow Indian incursion..It would have used its only ace too soon.It would have given up, before even fighting the war..because Indian response, sure as hell would be nuclear one.

Your reply tually not , its Dehli that is presented with one , if it implements Cold Start and assume Pakistan goes nuclear , would they be ready to risk the lives of billions for a couple CBG's


My reply to you
do you even know what tactical nuke ?? ........

Riteon, when you first joined this forum and we started to notice some of your posts, we thought we have another good Indian member, but that thought vanished in due course of time after we started to see the trollish posts like above and our thinking changed to yet another Indian troll is here. Alasssss !!!!

Anyway, since we all pakistanis believe and truly believe that Indian tech is from Mars, thus nothing can beat it. Thanks for reminding that to us, yet again.

 

[Secur]

It would be very hard since Pak nuke assets are majorly mobile assets and knowing their exact locations would be difficult.

So, MAD will kick into place.

Hope, this never happens and this talk keeps to us arm chair generals

Soviet style to be precise ...

Exactly , no victors , no Pakistan and no India , the end result is always a mutual suicide ...

Hope so !

 

[ares]

Such is the basic flaw of your nuclear doctrine then , if its willing to risk a billion people for a couple of CBG's ... There's a going back if only invading forces are stopped dead in their tracks and not Indian cities are nuked ...

Indian retaliatory strikes aren't capable of taking down Pakistan's missile installations , forget it and the same otherwise ...

Call it flawed, or a fair warning, Indian has only one nuclear threshold i.e an enemy nuclear strike...and if you cross that, then all hell breaks loose.

Plus you are the one talk about "flawed nuclear doctrines"..when you yourself are ready to use nuclear weapons in smallest of confrontations..even in cold start scenario..where Pakistani territorial losses will be small and there will not be any existential threat to Pakistan's existence!!

 

[TaimiKhan]

Call it flawed, or a fair warning, Indian has only one nuclear threshold i.e an enemy nuclear strike...and if you cross that, then all hell breaks loose.

Plus you are the one talk about "flawed nuclear doctrines"..when you yourself are ready to use nuclear weapons in smallest of confrontations..even in cold start scenario..where Pakistani territorial losses will be small and there will not be any existential threat to Pakistan's existence!!

Not necessarily and not written somewhere else also.

We all know that Pak has no major offensive capability, enough to capture huge parts of India or some strategic part, but India does have that capability with respect to Pakistan.

But in the Indian - China scenario, China may have or might be having massive offensive capability which can lead to China capturing major Indian territory (1962) or Chinese forces launching an invasion kind of thing of huge scale, that may become the Indian nuke threshold, same scenario which we are facing, tomorrow India can face from the Chinese side.

So the no first nuke policy is good on paper to calm down international players, but in practical world, no one has no first strike policy, the moment a certain threshold specified earlier or reached while during a war, nuke will or may be unleashed.

You never know.

india might have no first strike policy with respect to Pakistan, sri lanka, nepal etc, but not in case of when it comes to China.

 

[Secur]

Call it flawed, or a fair warning, Indian has only one nuclear threshold i.e an enemy nuclear strike...and if you cross that, then all hell breaks loose.

Plus you are the one talk about "flawed nuclear doctrines"..when you yourself are ready to use nuclear weapons in smallest of confrontations..even in cold start scenario..where Pakistani territorial losses will be small and there will not be any existential threat to Pakistan's existence!!

I will still go with flawed ... Your country's the one invading , losing no land and facing no threat to its existence but still willing to risk a billion citizens for a couple CBG's

No , the invading CBG's pose a grave threat to the sovereignty , territorial integrity and the very existence of our country hence we will use if we deem it necessary , we are faced with a rival with massive conventional superiority being 5 times larger than us therefore the need for " First Use Policy " ! If nukes cant defend the country , what is the use to have them ?

 

[RazorMC]

Not necessarily, In some future time, India might use nuclear submarine for power projection in the Indian Ocean.

That's the point I made as well. Auto-assumption only leads to a misconstrued perception of the situation. Hence my intention to point out the author's error in judging all HATFs to be nuclear-equipped.

You are quite right, that nuclear capable doesn't mean that it will have a nuclear warhead, but when you talk about the long range missiles, they are only equipped with nukes. There is no point on wasting millions of Dollars sending a missile 2000 kms away just to destroy a building....

I agree, but the author seemed overly-concerned about Short-range missiles and nuking Pakistani territory ourselves. He and Hoodbhoy might have been pre-school buddies, the way they think

 

[Secur]

"With 70 to 80 kilos of highly enriched uranium, it would be fairly easy to make one in the basement of a building in the city of your choice," said Pervez Hoodbhoy, a distinguished nuclear physicist at Islamabad's Quaid-i-Azam University.

Yes , Uranium is found in the common sand to be taken in kilos by any terrorist !

What exactly does he smokes whilst being on CIA payroll ?