Strike Force Would Allow ‘War on Two Fronts’

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Conventional logic dictates, that if would take x nukes to completely destroy India..it would take only x/5 nukes to do same damage to Pakistan. As almost all your river flow from us..you be careful before contaminating those rivers and adjoining soil.

3 rivers.. with Indus originating from tibet etc... as for contaminating water etc..unless we nuke Kashmir wont be an issue...

Lastly your nukes are of lower yields than us..and your are yet to develop a thermonuclear weapon.

Our nukes had a higher yield than indias even in 98... also Pak n (foriegn sources) claims of its nukes having higher yield than urs... as for thermonuclear weapons...a billion sources are available on the web .. some claiming Pak is interested/working in thermonuclear weapons(includin US federal courts documents) ... while others claiming we already have them.... Again we have a bigger stockpile of nukes...

Yes if there is China is also involved, Indian survival would be at stake, but even in such scenario Pakistani destruction is guaranteed.

Yes and india will survive a nuclear fallout? with each n every indian city in range of Pakistani n Chinese missiles?

 

[faithfulguy]

If India is not capable of handling 30 Chinese soldiers as they caused a national crisis inside India, why would India brag about taking on both China and Pakistan? First, build up your economy and have enough troops to take on China itself first before consider taking another step. This is a perfect example of walk before flying.

 

[ares]

3 rivers.. with Indus originating from tibet etc... as for contaminating water etc..unless we nuke Kashmir wont be an issue...

LoL, learn your own geography atleast, 6 not 3 Pakistani rivers come from India transiting through three Indian states Himachal, Punjab and Kashmir ...so go figure.

Our nukes had a higher yield than indias even in 98... also Pak n (foriegn sources) claims of its nukes having higher yield than urs... as for thermonuclear weapons...a billion sources are available on the web .. some claiming Pak is interested/working in thermonuclear weapons(includin US federal courts documents) ... while others claiming we already have them.... Again we have a bigger stockpile of nukes...

Yes and india will survive a nuclear fallout? with each n every indian city in range of Pakistani n Chinese missiles?

What you tested were fission bomb, all of them..we purposely kept are yields low because of space constraint, to avoid harming civilian population in nearby villages.

You might have develop a thermonuclear weapon in the future, we presently have numerous fusion bombs over 200 Kt(enough to completely destroy a midsize city like Karachi) in our arsenal.

Your nuclear arsenal is slightly bigger than ours as you are adding small tactical weapons in you arsenal, which are as useful in an all out nuclear war, as a BBgun in an artillery duel.

 

[lightoftruth]

this mountain strike is a defensive precaution against increasing strength of pla ,it helps in counter offensive if ever needed.

two front war is a probability specially in P.O.K where chinese troops are present nowhere else .

china has no first use so does india ,its only pakistan who lives on nukes and fantasize over nuclear wars.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

LoL, learn your own geography atleast, 6 not 3 Pakistani rivers come from India transiting through three Indian states Himachal, Punjab and Kashmir ...so go figure.

Read abt indus water treaty you are violating...

What you tested were fission bomb, all of them..we purposely kept are yields low because space constraint, to avoid harming civilian population in nearby villages.

No wonder they are classified as failures... u were protecting villages near a "nuclear testing range" ...

Although india claimed tht its nukes had a yield of 45... while in reality 10-12kt..

You might have develop a thermonuclear weapon in the future, we presently have numerous fusion bombs over 200 Kt(enough to completely destroy a midsize city like Karachi) in our arsenal.

We "might" have them already..as for nuclear yields... again Pak claims to have higher yield... even if we forget tht... considering tht even a 20 kt can kill as many as 2,000,000+ people... and considering the population density in indian cities ... not to forget the fallout... what do u think will happen to bombay?

Your nuclear arsenal is slightly bigger than ours as you are adding small tactical weapons in you arsenal, which are as useful in an all out nuclear war, as a BBgun in an artillery duel.

According to sources Pak has over 110+ nukes.. as for tactical nukes.. kid.. they arent for a nuclear war.. but for use in field.. and those bb guns can wipe out ur entire divisions.

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

LoL, learn your own geography atleast, 6 not 3 Pakistani rivers come from India transiting through three Indian states Himachal, Punjab and Kashmir ...so go figure.

Lol Indian wants to use water as weapon against Pakistan..go figure out the source of your rivers

 

[ares]

Read abt indus water treaty you are violating...

What about it, does IWT say that since three Eastern river have been allotted to Indian for buliding storage dams, hence their water will not flow through Pakistan anymore..lol?? Where do you think contaminated water will go, when those dams burst. Unless you are complete doofus there is only one correct answer to that.

No wonder they are classified as failures... u were protecting villages near a "nuclear testing range" ...

Since you are not even familiar with your own country's geography, you can not be expected to know India's.

Pokhran test range's lies short distance from Pokhran city with population of over twenty thousand.

Which is one of the reason why , we down sized a nuclear fusion to 45 Kt instead of hundreds of KTs or Megaton yields

Although india claimed tht its nukes had a yield of 45... while in reality 10-12kt..

While in reality it was 45 Kt, as measured from the size of crater which was created.

We "might" have them already..as for nuclear yields... again Pak claims to have higher yield... even if we forget tht...

Thats is big if, with no evidence to support your claim..for all you know, we might have a death ray already!!

considering tht even a 20 kt can kill as many as 2,000,000+ people... and considering the population density in indian cities ... not to forget the fallout... what do u think will happen to bombay?

10 times less damage than what will happen to Karachi, if 200 Kt were to explode there. ..Considering Bombay's population is 18 million and Karachi's is 21 million...less you talk about the overcrowded cities and population densities, the better.

According to sources Pak has over 110+ nukes.. as for tactical nukes.. kid.. they arent for a nuclear war.. but for use in field.. and those bb guns can wipe out ur entire divisions.

LOL.. so those tactical nukes are not counted amogst those 110 weapons??

 

[ares]

Lol Indian wants to use water as weapon against Pakistan..go figure out the source of your rivers

One has to be an idiot of the highest order, to not read the conversation in it entirety, but just jump in the middle with an idiotic wisecrack.

 

[Omega007]

Read abt indus water treaty you are violating...



No wonder they are classified as failures... u were protecting villages near a "nuclear testing range" ...

Although india claimed tht its nukes had a yield of 45... while in reality 10-12kt..




We "might" have them already..as for nuclear yields... again Pak claims to have higher yield... even if we forget tht... considering tht even a 20 kt can kill as many as 2,000,000+ people... and considering the population density in indian cities ... not to forget the fallout... what do u think will happen to bombay?




According to sources Pak has over 110+ nukes.. as for tactical nukes.. kid.. they arent for a nuclear war.. but for use in field.. and those bb guns can wipe out ur entire divisions.

110 nukes-lol!Pure bs.Use your common sense,you don't have the required capability to produce the necessary amount of fissile material.Seems like common sense is not that common after all.
And even if you have 100+ nukes (highly unlikely),over 70 percent of them are of vintage Uranium 235 based weapons with very heavy weight that can't be delivered by your ballistic missiles.

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

One has to be an idiot of the highest order, to not read the conversation in it entirety, but just jump in the middle with an idiotic wisecrack.

then what is your point to bring up river to discussion, all nukes mean mutual destruction who care about river contaminations, you just want to divert the conversation.

 

[ares]

then what is your point to bring up river to discussion, all nukes mean mutual destruction who care about river contaminations, you just want to divert the conversation.

I reiterate my last post.

In our situation topography might help a little(unless u have enough time etc) to nuke mountains,less populated areas etc... but in urs ... with ur congested n over populated cities?the contamination of water n soil? in short not many will survive... and in a 2 front war... nothing will survive.. unless u think u can nuke Pak n China at the same time n get away with it..

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

110 nukes-lol!Pure bs.Use your common sense,you don't have the required capability to produce the necessary amount of fissile material.Seems like common sense is not that common after all.
And even if you have 100+ nukes (highly unlikely),over 70 percent of them are of vintage Uranium 235 based weapons with very heavy weight that can't be delivered by your ballistic missiles.

Haha.. yeah tell tht to USA and other international sources... besides im sure u 007 knows more abt our vintage nukes tht cant be delivered than Pakistan,USA etc...

 

[Omega007]

continued from above:

Contrary to your situation,all of Indian nukes are built around Pu 239 core from the start.Now lets try to estimate India's capability to produce weapon grade Pu.Our CIRUS is operational from early 60's with capability to produce 15 kg of Pu at 100 percent.Now assuming it was operated at a moderate 65 percent capability,it has produced about 9 kg per year.So till 2010 it has produced total of about 350-400 kg of weapons grade Pu.
Dhruva went critical in 1985 and has been operating at 70 percent which gives us a rough total of 500-550 kg till 2012.

So even with very conservative estimation,India has presently about 800-1000 kg of weapons grade Pu,enough to produce 140-200 nos of boosted fission devices of 250 kt yield.And our boosted fission devices weighs about just 350 kg which can be fitted to the LACMs under development.Though for that we have to narrow down them to fit them into the cramed space.

 

[genmirajborgza786]

Considering India is more than 4 times larger than Pakistan in area and 6 times larger in population..Pakistan will be set in 5 times less nukes..you will still be in the worst state..if war goes nuclear.

not true India plus Indian administered Kashmir plus siachen is 1,240, 000 sq mi

BBC News - India profile - Key facts

Pakistan plus Pakistan administered Kashmir is 338,000 sq mi

BBC News - Pakistan profile - Key facts

divide 1,240,000 by 338,000 that's not more but less then 4 in fact its 3.6

so if it takes say for example 20 nukes to annihilate Pak , then it will take approximately 73 to annihilate India

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

What about it, does IWT say that since three Eastern river have been allotted to Indian for buliding storage dams, hence their water will not flow through Pakistan anymore..lol?? Where do you think contaminated water will go, when those dams burst. Unless you are complete doofus there is only one correct answer to that. [

Calling people names wont make you look smarter... only a potty mouth at best... as for water... those so called rivers are anything except rivers... and the only time there is any water in them is when u face floods...

No wonder they are classified as failures... u were protecting villages near a "nuclear testing range" ...

Since you are not even familiar with your own country's geography, you can not be expected to know India's.

Pokhran test range's lies short distance from Pokhran city with population of over twenty thousand

Which is one of the reason why , we down sized a nuclear fusion to 45 Kt instead of hundreds of KTs or Megaton yields

Unfortunately u arent smart enough to know tht india "claimed" 45kt yield... while it was never over 10-12kt?

While in reality it was 45 Kt, as measured from the size of crater which was created.

Tht reality is only believed by indians...

Thats is big if, with no evidence to support your claim..for all you know, we might have a death ray already!!

Im sure ur 1200+ seater is more close to reality than Pak having thermonuclear weapons..

10 times less damage than what will happen to Karachi, if 200 Kt were to explode there. ..Considering Bombay's population is 18 million and Karachi's is 21 million...less you talk about the overcrowded cities and population densities, the better.

Bombay is bigger population density:

20,482 persons per square kilometre.
VS
17000+

With karachi having a bigger area...

LOL.. so those tactical nukes are not counted amogst those 110 weapons??

Yes im sure in 1 year we made 60+ tactical nukes for Nasr...Although as per reports we have the fastest growing nuclear arsenal in the region.. ...

And again i agree india would survive a nuclear war with Pak n China...