The Cold Start Doctrine Watch.

[Hellfire]

That simply does not make any sense
a single or some small tactical nuclear bombs subkiloton- 5kt yeild detonated inside our territory against the conventional forces of India that are invading our land
New delhi will not simply risk millions of civilian lives because of the destruction of an/some IBGs

I have said it earlier in my posts - the nuclear retaliation is inbuilt into the system and is free of poltical interference. The ultimate authority is with PM no doubt - but in case of a nuclear strike India may strike across the board with the intent to destroy existing strike/second strike capability of Pakistan/China.

Its got nothing to do with sacrifice of 5K or thereabouts (an IBG strength here). The pressure on the government of the day and military leadership will be too great in best of scenarios and additionally the perception does exist in India that Pakistan can not be trusted (albeit proved especially in Kargil issue) to act with genuine good intent/sanely. Post 1999 its been painfully stressed that due to this unpredictable nature India needs to assume the worst in every case. A single nuke deployment against troops who will at max be able to ingress 50 kms (this is because beyond that Indian army is not posturing) will cause India to assume readiness of PA to employ nukes any and every where .... so the issue comes to fore.

what if i told you Pakistan has enough Nuclear arsenal to destroy the infrastructure of India.
Transport, communications , public services
what if i told you 50 detonations of rather trivial 50kt yeild at 50 largest indian cities is all it takes?
you know what , Pakistan's arsenel Is larger than that.
And this is the least you should expect in a full scale nuclear exchange.

I would laugh - what infrastructure? I would be grateful for it if it can happen. Jokes apart - we will suffer ... but some part of country will be left - but even in one nuke deployment by you - retaliation will be across spectrum

 

[Hellfire]

I am quite sure whatever we are discussing here is hypothetical and one that should never happen . I wasn't assuming a rational response from the Indians , hell no , I was just saying that it gives a final warning to the adversary that the " red line " or " threshold(s) " has been crossed/being crossed/in the danger of being crossed and warns them to withdraw , before it all gets to the " Mutually Assured Destruction " , that is something Pakistan places its bet on and something which deters India from crossing the border . Because , if a threshold is to be crossed and the country's existence and integrity is in danger , you cant assume us to play by your rules neither you can assure/guarantee that the Cold Start doesn't cross any thresholds - that is the whole problem in itself . I again pointed out that the retaliation by Indians only result in stepping up on the nuclear escalation ladder and the equation remains the same - we all get closer to MAD . You seem to read too much into the rationality/perfectness of the military planners , I can argue likewise that even Pakistani military planners would have considered the possibility of a counter Indian attack after their initial TNW strike - this Nash equilibrium is no good and not practical since one cant anticipate everything . Well there's no bluff to speak of , in the first place , otherwise the Indians would have crossed it in the previous four close encounters and called it , at least one time , they didn't . Simple thing , the Pakistan Army will only decide to go that way if it cant deter the invasion by conventional means and a threshold is crossed by that , not before . At that time , everything would already be at stake .

Yes its all hypothetical.
The fact is that I accept that we need not jump every time a cross LC BAT action/fire assault takes place because its routine.
But Indian approach has been - although you wont accept it - throughout the history to accept Pakistan as a reality and a neighbor. It was in this context that in 1971 when India could have had Pakistan it didn't, in 1999 tried to make peace (and we know what came of it) et al. We could have crossed the so called threshold but we have not in the past decade. Why should we loose thousands of people when we can achieve what we want with hardly a fraction of that in overall loses? Today your own stooges have created a havoc in your society ... you are paying for Islamic fundamentalisation of generations of Pashtuns to fight USSR in Afghanistan (and then trying it on Kashmiris) by Zia today by fighting the very same ideology which you fanned which today has destroyed your social fabric .... we know that the only way to be a "SUPERPOWER" or whatever we dream of is to be economically strong ..... war achieves nothing ...... we are doing fairly okay economically and although I agree with Fareed Zakaria when he compares India and China - the end of the day we are burdened by democracy which has entailed limitations to our growth story ... so be it.

Quoting us for saying we will retaliate is useless - we know PA wont cross threshold for what our aims are - and so do you ........ and neither will we allow it to be crossed by us ... but I reiterate retaliation will be there and sufficiently strong.

 

[Alpha1]

The minimum response would still be a nuclear response of atleast a similar scale against Pakistani forces. How does that leave Pakistan better placed?

Either the forces will retreat or respond with tactcal nukes as you said, This scenario will eventually lead to a strategic nuclear exchange.
Maybe thats why no one should cross the border in the first place

I would laugh - what infrastructure? I would be grateful for it if it can happen. Jokes apart - we will suffer ... but some part of country will be left - but even in one nuke deployment by you - retaliation will be across spectrum

not enough... Imagine all major cities, ports destroyed?
imagine a country with no government left , all the major government services gone
no hospitals left to treat the injured , fertile plains soaked with radiation and i don't think Indian people are planning to survive the aftermath of a nuclear war. there will be mass panic total destruction of social fabric , economic infrastructure
whatever left of the indian state will tear itself down.
God forbid all this ever happens.

 

[Bang Galore]

Simple thing , the Pakistan Army will only decide to go that way if it cant deter the invasion by conventional means and a threshold is crossed by that , not before . At that time , everything would already be at stake .

Which is why the logic for using tactical weapons fails, essentially opening up the possible scenario & a justification for a massive Indian nuclear strike (almost a first strike)which will be guaranteed to cause substantial damage to Pakistani nuclear forces. What is the logic of risking Pakistan's deterrence in the first place? If Pakistan was in grave danger, strategic would be the way to go, not tactical.

 

[Alpha1]

Which is why the logic for using tactical weapons fails, essentially opening up the possible scenario & a justification for a massive Indian nuclear strike (almost a first strike)which will be guaranteed to cause substantial damage to Pakistani nuclear forces. What is the logic of risking Pakistan's deterrence in the first place? If Pakistan was in grave danger, strategic would be the way to go, not tactical.

when we launch the tactical nuke our Strat nukes will be ready and incase of a massive retaliation by the indian side it will lead to a full scale nuclear exchange by both sides.

 

[Secur]

Quite surprised actually at your approach. A feint - the incredulity or ignorance apparent here? If you have read the earlier parts of the thread itself - its a continuation of the fact that the whole notion that Pakistan will employ nuclear weapons at tactical level even on an ingress of 50 kms or thereabouts at multiple points without first conventionally trying to contain/reverse it, is absurd! If so why the hell are you even bothering with smarter and more lethal weapon acquisition? Just build tactical weapons and sit!!!! The whole idea is ridiculous. Either you are at it (the baiting here) for the heck of it or simply too inertia prone to bother to follow it correctly - that's your problem.

Additionally I like your rejoinder. Continue on it. Lob a nuke or two - invite a massive retaliation across the whole front - not at specific target. Employment will be at strategic level forget your field formations. It shall be a strike for targeting your second strike capability too - period. Nothing will be spared. Yes you will be able to lob a few on us too - and that shall cause terrible losses - but the end result is not changed. Wont even bother about your second part.

You know what I am surprised at ? Being in the senior section an then displaying the same underestimating the opposition and overestimating yourself mentality I see everywhere else across the forum . The same " India can emerge victorious " in a nuclear exchange when simulations and data suggest otherwise . If you want me to believe that somehow you can predict Pakistan thresholds and hence stop yourself from crossing it , then sorry I am not buying it . Pakistan today is very much capable conventionally of deterring an Indian invasion by its conventional power , specially something of this magnitude more than fine , the preparation is for the future when India mass mobilizing capability increases and Pakistanis are no longer able to counter that and thats where Nasr can act as a plughole , the Cold start though is cold for now . Now your whole argument is based on the premise that Pakistan will go nuclear , the moment the first Indian crosses the border , its wrong to say the least . The seventh largest army cant be expected to act like that . So either you read my post wrong or were too blinded by elephants supposed invincibility .

Cross the threhold and your doctrine wont be worth the piece of paper , it is written on . If it comes to existence and integrity and hence its thresholds , the country wont hesitate because it would have nothing to lose . Yes , continue the exchange , contribute to the escalation and face the MAD with 120 warheads , enough to cease the existence of India as a nation and inflict unacceptable damage . Get a billion of your countrymen in danger because of ten or twenty thousand troops . You seem to have doubts about the effects of buclear fallout specially the long term .

 

[Hellfire]

Either the forces will retreat or respond with tactcal nukes as you said, This scenario will eventually lead to a strategic nuclear exchange.
Maybe thats why no one should cross the border in the first place
not enough... Imagine all major cities, ports destroyed?
imagine a country with no government left , all the major government services gone
no hospitals left to treat the injured , fertile plains soaked with radiation and i don't think Indian people are planning to survive the aftermath of a nuclear war. there will be mass panic total destruction of social fabric , economic infrastructure
whatever left of the indian state will tear itself down.
God forbid all this ever happens.

Oh I said laugh much to your earlier post because we Indians rue lack of infrastructure and you are talking about destroying it. A joke! First line not applicable. India will cross border (that is if at all) only to hold ground to put pressure to solve the issue at stake. Otherwise we will not. In addition I thank you for finally saying what we have been highlighting - there is nothing called a tactical nuclear weapon. The whole community is using a foolish word. The moment you use a nuke as a tactical weapon - the existing known nuclear countries will retaliate at a strategic level. So in either case the ball is out of your hands.

In addition in a scenario where Pakistan uses a nuke - forget what happens to us. Because you cant be allowed to get away with it - India will employ. Let the cost be what they be.

 

[Secur]

Which is why the logic for using tactical weapons fails, essentially opening up the possible scenario & a justification for a massive Indian nuclear strike (almost a first strike)which will be guaranteed to cause substantial damage to Pakistani nuclear forces. What is the logic of risking Pakistan's deterrence in the first place? If Pakistan was in grave danger, strategic would be the way to go, not tactical.

Do you expect the SPD to sit quiet whilst the first TNW is being launched ? No , they will get ready to launch missile at their disposal and prepare for use it or lose it scenario and be able to launch at a moments notice . Wonder what do not you understand about the final warning to save both countries .

 

[Hellfire]

when we launch the tactical nuke our Strat nukes will be ready and incase of a massive retaliation by the indian side it will lead to a full scale nuclear exchange by both sides.

That would be ideal if you assume the reports of Pakistan having a very large arsenal and faster etc etc ......... remember we are catering to two - China and you. The speed of expansion and the numbers are being catered for .... all the time

 

[Secur]

In addition in a scenario where Pakistan uses a nuke - forget what happens to us. Because you cant be allowed to get away with it - India will employ. Let the cost be what they be.

Sure , dont . Endanger your whole population for a couple of IBG's which were nuked in another country and during invasion , we are not complaining , boy to destroy the enemy too if our existence and integrity is in danger .

 

[Hellfire]

You know what I am surprised at ? Being in the senior section an then displaying the same underestimating the opposition and overestimating yourself mentality I see everywhere else across the forum . The same " India can emerge victorious " in a nuclear exchange when simulations and data suggest otherwise . If you want me to believe that somehow you can predict Pakistan thresholds and hence stop yourself from crossing it , then sorry I am not buying it . Pakistan today is very much capable conventionally of deterring an Indian invasion by its conventional power , specially something of this magnitude more than fine , the preparation is for the future when India mass mobilizing capability increases and Pakistanis are no longer able to counter that and thats where Nasr can act as a plughole , the Cold start though is cold for now . Now your whole argument is based on the premise that Pakistan will go nuclear , the moment the first Indian crosses the border , its wrong to say the least . The seventh largest army cant be expected to act like that . So either you read my post wrong or were too blinded by elephants supposed invincibility .

Cross the threhold and your doctrine wont be worth the piece of paper , it is written on . If it comes to existence and integrity and hence its thresholds , the country wont hesitate because it would have nothing to lose . Yes , continue the exchange , contribute to the escalation and face the MAD with 120 warheads , enough to cease the existence of India as a nation and inflict unacceptable damage . Get a billion of your countrymen in danger because of ten or twenty thousand troops . You seem to have doubts about the effects of buclear fallout specially the long term .

Finally you showed your inertia. Suspected it sir! I told you, am ridiculing your own countrymen for suggesting nuke will be deployed by Pakistan if Indians come. You have not read posts prior to ones you have been quoting. I like it. That's why am surprised about Think Tank tags right now. Before shooting off I thought as a think tank you would have tried to analyse why am I writing what I am.

And its not Indian 'invincibility' ...... no not at all.

 

[Alpha1]

Oh I said laugh much to your earlier post because we Indians rue lack of infrastructure and you are talking about destroying it. A joke! First line not applicable. India will cross border (that is if at all) only to hold ground to put pressure to solve the issue at stake. Otherwise we will not. In addition I thank you for finally saying what we have been highlighting - there is nothing called a tactical nuclear weapon. The whole community is using a foolish word. The moment you use a nuke as a tactical weapon - the existing known nuclear countries will retaliate at a strategic level. So in either case the ball is out of your hands.

In addition in a scenario where Pakistan uses a nuke - forget what happens to us. Because you cant be allowed to get away with it - India will employ. Let the cost be what they be.

please elaborate your statement

there is nothing called a tactical nuclear weapon.

are you saying that there is no diffrence between a tactical nuke and a strategic nuke?
i do agree to an extent that the line between strategic and tactical nukes is blurred and as NATO found out during Carte Blanche that the effect of tactical nuclear war on the local population was indistinguishable from a strategic nuclear war.
but incase of Pakistan i can imagine a few possible scenarios where Tactical nuclear weapons can do the job they are intended to do..
Match conventinal superiority with awesome firepower

 

[Guynextdoor2]

cold start as a doctrine has not been formalised by Indian planners - Pakistan's Azm-e-Nau-4 which is a riposte to india's cold start is also not formalised or can be implemented because in essence cold start dosnt exist as we know it. so both countries are merely posturing and war gaming.

india has not identified and clustered any of their formations into IBG's. further both the army and airforce are bickering over the control of the armed helos which shows that the level of co-ordination required for a successful foray into pakistani territory by IBG's could face such internal problems.

A new position- Chairman of Chiefs of Staff is being created. Co-ordination and resource allocation issues will not be a problem going forward.

 

[Secur]

Quoting us for saying we will retaliate is useless - we know PA wont cross threshold for what our aims are - and so do you ........ and neither will we allow it to be crossed by us ... but I reiterate retaliation will be there and sufficiently strong.

The problem is the ambiguity of thresholds , I mean what do you know about it ? Are they clearly defined by the SFC ? What are the red lines which shouldn't be crossed first of all ? I know the interview which hints at various spectrum but its vague to say the least . I am not even sure if they remain static , in such case and adding the fog of war , how exactly is the Indian army planning to fight a war in the country with a supposed intent of not crossing the thresholds , not putting the country's existence and integrity in danger when it cant anticipate/not know it ? There's no way , I will repeat again , that Pakistan will take any assurance/guarantee from the Indians to not do it , intentions aren't known . Dilemmas are to be faced by both sides but first its India's turn to face it , because it has to cross the border to start the whole chain reaction , in the first place , knowing that it might cross the threshold in any way and invite a strike . The rest , I explained above .

 

[farhan_9909]

working on a new thread with a possible damage of Nuclear war b/w Indo-pak

When Pakistan will hit 35-40 Indian cities

India will hit 60-65 Pakistani cities

*Total Deathtoll
*Total Financial damage
*After math

Year=2020