Some Indian Plans

[rashid.sarwar]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=569764043188773

 

[Hamza913]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=569764043188773

That guys voice makes me want to bleach my ears. Sounds like some illiterate transsexual (kinda like Taheer Shah). Not to mention he is exaggerating greatly.

I swear to God if I hear one more Indian say they can decisively defeat Pakistan and get rid of our nukes I am going to throw my PC out my window.

Also, he says Pakistan being smaller is a disadvantage LOL MY @SS! Being smaller means Pakistan is much easier to defend.

 

[shah1398]

Aaaaaaa....My earssssss

 

[RealNapster]

i don't get this. What a Hypocritical world this is.

They will never ever call Israels Atomic bomb as "jewish bomb"

neither will they call American one as "Christian Bomb"

Indian Atomic bomb ko b "Hindu bomb" nahe bola jata.

Then why the hell they call Pakistan's and Iran's nuclear Programs as "Islamic bomb" ??
What are they afraid of ?
ISLAM ?
or BOMB ?

USA tested Atomic bomb in July 16, 1945. and in less then one month they Used it on Japan TWICE.
We have WMD from 1998. it's 18th year now, .. And result is Clear. Which mean's the Problem is not the bomb, but an ISLAMIC country having the bomb.

 

[Red-Bull]

That guys voice makes me want to bleach my ears.

agree with you on that.

but the nuclear threshold barrier aside, the Indians dwarf Pakistan in military capability, be it our space, naval or air components.

pak do have a formidable army, but then you allocate 90% or something to just your land forces (army)

in a conventional situation however, pak gets wtfpwned by the hindustani military, and not just quantitatively, but qualitatively as well.. ssbns, carriers, icbms (which are not required for Pak), milsats, coms, air superiority fighters, you name it..

 

[somebozo]

 

[Hamza913]

agree with you on that.

but the nuclear threshold barrier aside, the Indians dwarf Pakistan in military capability, be it our space, naval or air components.

pak do have a formidable army, but then you allocate 90% or something to just your land forces (army)

in a conventional situation however, pak gets wtfpwned by the hindustani military, and not just quantitatively, but qualitatively as well.. ssbns, carriers, icbms (which are not required for Pak), milsats, coms, air superiority fighters, you name it..

Pakistan's military budget is mostly taken up by land forces, but not by that much.

As for who is more powerful conventionally, the PAF is still much better trained than the IAF and has downed more IAF aircraft than the other way around in every war. However, the IAF's size and makes them equal. Technologically the IAF doesn't have major edge.

The Pakistani army is also much better trained and has more experience, whilst also delivering more casualties to India than vice versa in skirmishes along Kashmir. India's size advantage is the only thing that makes them equal. Again, India has no major tech advantage.

As for the navy, India is better than Pakistan is every department except for submarines. Pakistani submarines are more than capable of anti area access denial and can prevent a blockade. Also, the Indian navy operates a much larger coastline than Pakistan, and can only send a small fraction of it's navy to attack Pakistan without leaving Indian coasts vulnerable. When these two factors are taken into account, India's navy has no major edge in a war.

Overall, I would say conventionally neither side has a major advantage in a war.

 

[Peshwa]

Pakistan's military budget is mostly taken up by land forces, but not by that much.

As for who is more powerful conventionally, the PAF is still much better trained than the IAF and has downed more IAF aircraft than the other way around in every war. However, the IAF's size and makes them equal. Technologically the IAF doesn't have major edge.

The Pakistani army is also much better trained and has more experience, whilst also delivering more casualties to India than vice versa in skirmishes along Kashmir. India's size advantage is the only thing that makes them equal. Again, India has no major tech advantage.

As for the navy, India is better than Pakistan is every department except for submarines. Pakistani submarines are more than capable of anti area access denial and can prevent a blockade. Also, the Indian navy operates a much larger coastline than Pakistan, and can only send a small fraction of it's navy to attack Pakistan without leaving Indian coasts vulnerable. When these two factors are taken into account, India's navy has no major edge in a war.

Overall, I would say conventionally neither side has a major advantage in a war.

Even though I don't agree with your overall assessment to begin with, hypothetically if we say your claims are correct, then please also consider....

why Pakistan is developing strategic and tactical nukes at such a rapid pace? (which in all possibility will be used on Pakistani lands)..
Does not sound like a confident and equally matched (conventionally) armed forces that is willing to nuke its own lands to prevent impending attacks.

Secondly, you downplay the role of economy and oil in fighting wars.
India has the money, war reserves and oil reserves to fight a month long war.
Pakistan on the other hand lacks both and is at a risk of being blockaded.
Conventional advantage as you posted has to be backed by a lot of other variables that Pakistan does not control. So how are India and Pak equally matched?

 

[Hamza913]

Even though I don't agree with your overall assessment to begin with, hypothetically if we say your claims are correct, then please also consider....

why Pakistan is developing strategic and tactical nukes at such a rapid pace? (which in all possibility will be used on Pakistani lands)..
Does not sound like a confident and equally matched (conventionally) armed forces that is willing to nuke its own lands to prevent impending attacks.

Secondly, you downplay the role of economy and oil in fighting wars.
India has the money, war reserves and oil reserves to fight a month long war.
Pakistan on the other hand lacks both and is at a risk of being blockaded.
Conventional advantage as you posted has to be backed by a lot of other variables that Pakistan does not control. So how are India and Pak equally matched?

Tactical nukes are for a just in case situation, and will be used within Indian territory. they are designed to cause major damage to India's military whilst not being large enough to justify a full scale Indian nuclear response.

Also, Pakistan is not at risk of being blockaded. The Pakistani navy is more than capable of preventing a sea blockade, and the PAF are too powerful for the IAF to completely overwhelm. A blockade is impossible.

Pakistan can also handle a war, and if it drags on then nukes can always be used if Pakistan is pushed to the edge.

 

[Peshwa]

Tactical nukes are for a just in case situation, and will be used within Indian territory. they are designed to cause major damage to India's military whilst not being large enough to justify a full scale Indian nuclear response.

I urge you to read upon the use of tactical nukes in the Pak-India scenario. You are totally off mark..
If you are going to nuke Indian lands, why use a tactical nuke giving India a full fledged option to retaliate with maximum force and a second strike capability?! Makes no sense.
Do note that nuking Indian land or armed forces (tactical or strategic) equates to full scale nuclear response...this is the Indian stand.
So does not justify the use of tactical nukes or their development..

Also, Pakistan is not at risk of being blockaded. The Pakistani navy is more than capable of preventing a sea blockade, and the PAF are too powerful for the IAF to completely overwhelm. A blockade is impossible.

Is it? how?
Pakistan has just enough ships and firepower to protect its coast from an amphibious attack. It lacks a dedicated naval wing which is restricted by its land based operations (the radius of your JF-17 naval does not allow it to be useful against naval blockades) . Its submarine force is still in rebuild mode and will need to escape P8i's India possesses in in addition to dedicated ASW surface ships... In addition, PN does not have enough surface ships (modern) to deter a blockade
So how are you going to handle breaking a blockade and protecting the coastline from an amphibious invasion?
Mind you, its not easy for India, but India does have the naval pieces in place to create this scenario.
Pakistan on the other hand, does not have the necessary ships (today) to prevent a naval blockade.

Pakistan can also handle a war, and if it drags on then nukes can always be used if Pakistan is pushed to the edge.

No it cannot.
You have 7 days worth of fuel reserves and 20 billion (on its upside) in Forex reserves.
How is Pakistan (today) geared to a prolonged war with India?

 

[ravi gupta]

Tactical nukes are for a just in case situation, and will be used within Indian territory. they are designed to cause major damage to India's military whilst not being large enough to justify a full scale Indian nuclear response.

Also, Pakistan is not at risk of being blockaded. The Pakistani navy is more than capable of preventing a sea blockade, and the PAF are too powerful for the IAF to completely overwhelm. A blockade is impossible.

Pakistan can also handle a war, and if it drags on then nukes can always be used if Pakistan is pushed to the edge.

What does PAF have to face 272 Sukhoi,MKI,Rafales,Miraj 2000,Mig-29etc in Quality.Forget quantity.
and how PAF will face SAM S-400,S-300.Now dont come up with the justification SuperMan Pilots.
and pls dont hide behind nuclear umbrella,We have neutrilise your capacity to strike fast by BMD,and AAD.
Needless to mention by Arihant we have completed nuclear triad shifting balance towards INDIA.

 

[Hamza913]

What does PAF have to face 272 Sukhoi,MKI,Rafales,Miraj 2000,Mig-29etc in Quality.Forget quantity.
and how PAF will face SAM S-400,S-300.Now dont come up with the justification SuperMan Pilots.
and pls dont hide behind nuclear umbrella,We have neutrilise your capacity to strike fast by BMD,and AAD.
Needless to mention by Arihant we have completed nuclear triad shifting balance towards INDIA.

240 Sukhoi's actually, and the Rafales still haven't come yet. The MiG-29 and Mirages aren't much of a challenge. The PAF's better training will triumph. Our pilots have shot down Israeli Mirages whilst flying crappy Syrian MiG's, and considering how much better trained the Israeli's are compared to India, I am sure we can handle the IAF.

I urge you to read upon the use of tactical nukes in the Pak-India scenario. You are totally off mark..
If you are going to nuke Indian lands, why use a tactical nuke giving India a full fledged option to retaliate with maximum force and a second strike capability?! Makes no sense.
Do note that nuking Indian land or armed forces (tactical or strategic) equates to full scale nuclear response...this is the Indian stand.
So does not justify the use of tactical nukes or their development..




Is it? how?
Pakistan has just enough ships and firepower to protect its coast from an amphibious attack. It lacks a dedicated naval wing which is restricted by its land based operations (the radius of your JF-17 naval does not allow it to be useful against naval blockades) . Its submarine force is still in rebuild mode and will need to escape P8i's India possesses in in addition to dedicated ASW surface ships... In addition, PN does not have enough surface ships (modern) to deter a blockade
So how are you going to handle breaking a blockade and protecting the coastline from an amphibious invasion?
Mind you, its not easy for India, but India does have the naval pieces in place to create this scenario.
Pakistan on the other hand, does not have the necessary ships (today) to prevent a naval blockade.


No it cannot.
You have 7 days worth of fuel reserves and 20 billion (on its upside) in Forex reserves.
How is Pakistan (today) geared to a prolonged war with India?

Pakistan can more than handle a full scale war with India, and our navy can certainly prevent a blockade.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature...sh-5-pakistani-weapons-war-india-should-11140

http://tribune.com.pk/story/593180/pakistans-underwater-force-stronger-than-india-report/

http://tribune.com.pk/story/941512/...other-war-erupts-with-pakistan-nyt-editorial/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India–Pakistan_border_skirmishes_(2014–present)

 

[ravi gupta]

240 Sukhoi's actually, and the Rafales still haven't come yet. The MiG-29 and Mirages aren't much of a challenge. The PAF's better training will triumph. Our pilots have shot down Israeli Mirages whilst flying crappy Syrian MiG's, and considering how much better trained the Israeli's are compared to India, I am sure we can handle the IAF.



Pakistan can more than handle a full scale war with India, and our navy can certainly prevent a blockade.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature...sh-5-pakistani-weapons-war-india-should-11140

http://tribune.com.pk/story/593180/pakistans-underwater-force-stronger-than-india-report/

http://tribune.com.pk/story/941512/...other-war-erupts-with-pakistan-nyt-editorial/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India–Pakistan_border_skirmishes_(2014–present)

You are overestimating yourself and under esteeming your enemy,Its good for us in case of conflict.
Also during peace time you will not prepare to be ready.
For eg i dont know what will be the PAF strategy or reaction after india induct 36 rafales.Sukhoi upgrade to Super Sukhoi,
Sam S-400 etc

 

[Hamza913]

You are overestimating yourself and under esteeming your enemy,Its good for us in case of conflict.
Also during peace time you will not prepare to be ready.
For eg i dont know what will be the PAF strategy or reaction after india induct 36 rafales.Sukhoi upgrade to Super Sukhoi,
Sam S-400 etc

Rafales are for China, and they can be beaten by F-16 block 52. The Rafale is not some Godly plane. Besides, we can always get another plane to match it.

If India was so much more powerful than Pakistan, then why did India back down in 2002 and 2008? Answer: They are not. Indian generals themselves have stated that India does not have some overwhelming power over Pakistan in any military department.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/could-indias-military-really-crush-pakistan-13247

 

[ravi gupta]

Rafales are for China, and they can be beaten by F-16 block 52. The Rafale is not some Godly plane. Besides, we can always get another plane to match it.

If India was so much more powerful than Pakistan, then why did India back down in 2002 and 2008? Answer: They are not. Indian generals themselves have stated that India does not have some overwhelming power over Pakistan in any military department.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/could-indias-military-really-crush-pakistan-13247

Reason is simple,Why will we attach you when your army is already busy in military operation in 3 province.
When you are fighting with your own men,y should INDIA send there.
Importantly india want to focus in his own economy and development and to avoid any stupid war as of now.
Currently we are modernising our defence massively,I hope the message and INDIA plan is very clear.