The Nuclear Battlefield - India vs Pakistan

[Mercenary]

In your honest opinion, does India have the means to significantly degrade the Pakistani military? After all we are still in the process of acquiring much of our equipment. Obviously I'm assuming that a war will break out in the near future before Pakistan can stabilize its internal situation or receive any 'game changers' (ABM's) from China.

India has that by sheer weight of numbers and the danger is growing that India is modernizing too fast. With technology increasing leaps and bounds, Pakistan can ill afford to fall back.

Look at the Powerful Iraqi Army in the 1st gulf War. It was annihilated by modern US Tanks by a simple leap in technology that US Tanks had the ability to fire at 3,000 meters where as the older Iraqi Tanks could only fire 1,800 meters which proved devastating.

Pakistan cannot match India, tank for tank but needs to acquire large stockpile of anti-tank missiles, to neutralize the threat.

Such as the 2006 Lebanon War where Hezbollah destroyed large numbers of Israeli tanks or the initial phase of Yom Kippur War where Egyptian Anti-Tank troops took out large numbers of Israeli Tanks.

Air superiority is vital to the military's plans, India will thus have to act before Pakistan can induct large numbers of JF-17's or F-16's.

I don't think there is going to be a war any time soon. US/NATO is too heavily invested in both countries.

correct me if I'm wrong but I think some of our latest destroyers have a defense against anti ship missiles. If so, how effective are these defenses? Harpoons are deadly nonetheless so I'm assuming the Naval air wing will have to be on its toes.

The Sunburn Missile are designed to over come any counter-measures on these ships. US is currently working on upgrading its counter-measures but India does not have them.

The Sunburn - Iran's Awesome Nuclear Anti-Ship Missile

The Russians aren't selling to Iran, I doubt they'd sell the system to Pakistan, especially when we have so many deals in the pipeline. What other alternatives does Pakistan have?

China has developed the HQ-9 which is a reverse engineered S-300 System. It has a shorter range than the S-300 but they are currently working on HQ-10 which is a more advanced version.

Pakistan should acquire those.

Money is an issue, and wouldn't these missiles be vulnerable if the IAF manages to achieve some semblance of air superiority?

Store them in hardened bunkers or use mobile launchers and use the HQ-10 to guard the air space above these missiles.

That's a little unrealistic given Pakistan defense budget and the number of countries who are willing to supply it with military hardware. The gunships will be out of the question if India buys from the US, we are buying a small airforce from them after all.

Not really. Pak Defence Budget has a huge wastage. Pakistan can maintain the same force with half the budget if the corruption within the armed service is ended.

US has no choice but to give us Gunships due they being an ideal anti-insurgent weapon platform. If not, we can rely on Turkey, china or south Africa for our gunship needs.

Lastly, how much of this can the PA realistically achieve in the next year or two? I sincerely believe that we won't have to wait for too long before India and Pakistan go to war again. It'll only take one successful terrorist strike and the hawks will finally have their way.

- In 2 years, Pak should have 50 - 60 more Fighters (F-16 + JF-17).
- Should be able to install several HQ-10 Missile batteries in sensitive areas.
- Add 500 Tanks to Pakistani Tank Forces, hopefully Al-Khalid II
- Have at least 24 new gunships (Apache or Super Cobra).
- New Frigates from China and USA, and new Submarines from Germany.

 

[HZChinese]

Let's review history,Indian always say they will do something in sometime.But when "sometime" came,"something" still not happended.Just think about their tanks and flight,the results look like big jokes......PAK not like this,you chase your target quiet and silence till "something" comes true.So just work hard for your target!Chinese friend bless you!

 

[Mercenary]

Let's review history,Indian always say they will do something in sometime.But when "sometime" came,"something" still not happended.Just think about their tanks and flight,the results look like big jokes......PAK not like this,you chase your target quiet and silence till "something" comes true.So just work hard for your target!Chinese friend bless you!

China has always been Pakistan's True Friend

 

[ashokdeiva]

Let's review history,Indian always say they will do something in sometime.But when "sometime" came,"something" still not happended.Just think about their tanks and flight,the results look like big jokes......PAK not like this,you chase your target quiet and silence till "something" comes true.So just work hard for your target!Chinese friend bless you!

you should have had some sence atleast not to post crap in your very first post.
but alas, it just shows how much you read NEWS paper or was it written in CHINESE news papers that we lost all the wars that PAKISTAN ignited in the past by their direct or indirect foolishness

 

[JonAsad]

you should have had some sence atleast not to post crap in your very first post.
but alas, it just shows how much you read NEWS paper or was it written in CHINESE news papers that we lost all the wars that PAKISTAN ignited in the past by their direct or indirect foolishness

right- there is always a ceasefire- so fools think they have won it-
and-
the indian newspapers says we started them all-
here comes the rationality- No?-

 

[Shinigami]

right- there is always a ceasefire- so fools think they have won it-
and-
the indian newspapers says we started them all-
here comes the rationality- No?-

do u want to argue about that?

because u r going to lose

 

[Slayer786]

do u want to argue about that?

because u r going to lose

Ok lets argue. India lost the 1948 war as it lost territory which was one-third Kashmir, in 1965 it was a stalemate. In 1971, Pakistan lost the war due to Bengalis were against us and due to their back stabbing we lost the war and East Pakistan.
When you lose territory after a war, that means you have lost. If not then it is a stalemate. If you win territory than you win the war.

So what do you want to argue about?

 

[Mav3rick]

Ok lets argue. India lost the 1948 war as it lost territory which was one-third Kashmir, in 1965 it was a stalemate. In 1971, Pakistan lost the war due to Bengalis were against us and due to their back stabbing we lost the war and East Pakistan.
When you lose territory after a war, that means you have lost. If not then it is a stalemate. If you win territory than you win the war.

So what do you want to argue about?

In 1965, India accepted CF a day earlier then Pakistan. It was India that wanted the CF more then Pakistan. In 1971, it was an internal matter and whatever we lost, we lost to the 'other' Pakistan which is now called Bangladesh. Surrender was signed with India because there was no official Bengali Government operating at that time and India was the acting proxy.

But my friend, it's not only territories that define winners/losers of a war. As in Kargil, around 4k fighters withstood 30-35k Indian Army troops and 10 Squadrons of IAF yet they could not be dislodged from all the posts and India had to beg the world to force our withdrawal yet we still hold a very important strategic observing post but politically it was India that won the war as they achieved their political objective and we could not. It is the political objective that matters the most, at times.

But, even in '99 and again in '02, India could never muster the courage to cross even an inch of LoC or the border.

 

[Riteon]

Ok lets argue. India lost the 1948 war as it lost territory which was one-third Kashmir, in 1965 it was a stalemate. In 1971, Pakistan lost the war due to Bengalis were against us and due to their back stabbing we lost the war and East Pakistan.
When you lose territory after a war, that means you have lost. If not then it is a stalemate. If you win territory than you win the war.

So what do you want to argue about?

1] thanks for indirectly accepting kashmir is ours

2] Indian army entered Kashmir only after the Raja agreed. hence We gained the kashmir we have now.....

3] 1965 was no stalemate . From operation gibraltar to grandslam....none of your objectives were fulfilled...on top of that from invading kashmir...you had to go back to defend Lahore..................in the end all you guys did is cheer up saying....hey we defended lahore against a larger army !!! hurrah hurrah ......and whenver this debate pops up...one khemkharan picture will be posted ....and thats it


On the other hand IA achieved its objectives....repelled the covert operatives in kashmir..thanks to kashmiris , Relieved pressure to Akhnoor by attacking Lahore,thereby forcing diversion of troops...............Thank bhutto for the superman theory of 10 indians !!!
4] Bangladeshi were not against you...you were against them!!...denying politcal power, less investment or infrastructure development compared to taxation,less military prescence and very less defence during previous wars ......in the end you brought it upon urself !!! ...........but you lost this one badly

 

[SQ8]

Topic no longer on track..
Closed.