This Table will Hurt Much But is needed for "Constructive" Talk

[acid rain]

Billions of dollars are getting invested, India is one of the economic engines of the world - its hard to imagine that pakistan will be allowed to carry out any initial nuclear strike by the world at large.

 

[The SC]

It is hard to imagine that India will take that chance...

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

You've, or someone, war-gamed a Indo-Pak War without considering the influence of the International Community.

1. The world isn't, hopefully, going to allow a genocidal cleansing of an entire Country.
2. You're also assuming that India will cross the Nuclear threshold by conventionally dominating Pakistan.
3. You're assuming the the Indian Leadership isn't going to retaliate with Nuclear Weapons because ~150k troops got vaporized? It's political suicide for any Indian Political Party. If i'm not mistaken India has the tripartite.
4. You're assuming India or Pakistan will cross the Nuclear Threshold.

Too many variables missing.

 

[zip]

Let us do it ..anyway this part of world is so disgusting to live like a human ..better be an example for others not to follow us ..Just an introduction of different way of living can radiate so much enemity within people then they are worthy to end in such situation ..Unless and untill we recognise all religions are man made and a way of systematic life we are not good enough to live ..So let the truth prevail and mad people vanish from this earth along with their almighty

 

[Kompromat]

Idiots who argue that all of India needs to be hit or that all of Pakistan need to be hit for a critical hit are.. well idiots. For the US and USSR it made sense to cover such large areas and hence have the large amount of warheads they have. Considering the geography of India and Pakistan, population centres and the strength of the state to respond to(in terms of disaster management and recovery) .. Pakistan will always need MORE nuclear weapons than India to ENSURE that the Indian state is unable to ever return to normalcy or continue as a single cohesive entity. It is that calculation that goes into the number of nuclear weapons you keep, not exacting in sq km of the entire geographical mass of the country.

Pakistan on the other hand is the target of 20 to 25 odd strikes on its major population centres to essentially end the state of Pakistan. Again, this will NOT stop nuclear warheads from being lobbed at India till they run out...but Pakistan will cease to exist as a state.

Wiki has a rather good article on the effects of nuclear explosions. Effects of nuclear explosions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lets look at a different angle, from the views of a limited nuclear conflagration. Same limited number of bombs are lobbed at each other and then nations decide to back off under international and internal pressure/shock: There was a study carried out jointly by a US Environmental NGO known as NRDC along with professors at Princeton..so the credentials of the study should be pretty well acceptable. I will only paste the excerpts relevant to the post.
Zia Mian - The Program on Science and Global Security
M.V. Ramana - The Program on Science and Global Security
Abdul Hameed Nayyar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They have only targeted the Northwestern Indian cities due to their understanding of Pakistan's nuclear attack capabilities. Considering the study is now 13 years old and the capabilities of both nations are much more advanced and thorough.. it cannot be taken as but a reflection of a likely scenario. Their take on the results of a limited nuclear exchange of 24 ground explosions is as follows.
For the second scenario, we calculated the fallout patterns and casualties for a hypothetical nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan in which each country targeted major cities. We chose target cities throughout Pakistan and in northwestern India to take into account the limited range of Pakistani missiles or aircraft. The target cities, listed in the table below, include the capitals of Islamabad and New Dehli, and large cities, such as Karachi and Bombay. In this scenario, we assumed that a dozen, 25-kiloton warheads would be detonated as ground bursts in Pakistan and another dozen in India, producing substantial fallout.

.........
NRDC calculated that 22.1 million people in India and Pakistan would be exposed to lethal radiation doses of 600 rem or more in the first two days after the attack. Another 8 million people would receive a radiation dose of 100 to 600 rem, causing severe radiation sickness and potentially death, especially for the very young, old or infirm. NRDC calculates that as many as 30 million people would be threatened by the fallout from the attack, roughly divided between the two countries.

Besides fallout, blast and fire would cause substantial destruction within roughly a mile-and-a-half of the bomb craters. NRDC estimates that 8.1 million people live within this radius of destruction.

Most Indians (99 percent of the population) and Pakistanis (93 percent of the population) would survive the second scenario. Their respective military forces would be still be intact to continue and even escalate the conflict.

Study:NRDC: The Consequences of Nuclear Conflict between India and Pakistan

The last line is an interesting point to note. That even with such major attacks, both India and Pakistan are seen as continuing to survive the conflict and still attacking each other(this bears hints to the Sunderji doctrine and brasstacks with its practising NBC warfare). The study naturally states it well that while India will lose more people, it accounts for a lesser percentage of the population than Pakistan.

One thing to note however is that while the NRDC believed that both states would continue with the "limited" scenario, I have my doubts regarding Pakistan. The reason for this is that the NRDC study was carried out in 2001 during a relativly stable government and very little impact of terrorism and extremism in Pakistan. Today there is a lot more polarization along with sectarian and ethnic strife that may lead to "warlords" coming out in the open to declare war within Pakistan within a few years of a limited yet devastating nuclear strike.

Which brings us back to why 200 warheads. This scenario is well understood by the Pakistani state and hence the focus is more and more on sending a covert overt message to the other side that any future conflict will no longer be limited. Pakistan is willing and able to commit suicide rather than die a horrible slow death. With more developed delivery systems with greater range to target all but the farthest of Indian cities, Pakistan will ensure that the devastation to India and Indian ecology is sufficient enough to .. rather dismally.. ensure a horrible life for the surviving Indian state and its people. Again, it is VERY likely that even in this all out conflict most of Indian and Pakistani population will survive.

But you dont need 2000 to have a very damaging or fatal effect on the Indian state. Just enough to kill a substantial number of the population. And then again, there are various studies which show exactly how even a "limited" conflict will result in a disaster which plays not one year, not five year.. but will plague the subcontinent, China, the Middle east...and Central Asia for decades to come.
Five Millions Tons of Smoke in the Stratosphere | Nuclear Darkness & Nuclear Famine

2 billion casualties are projected in that scenario, including all of south asian population. If Punjab (both) wheat belt is destroyed, there would be no food left for any 'survivors'.

 

[truthseeker2010]

Its a table based more about missile strikes and nuclear missiles strikes.

One only needs to check how much is the distance from Indian border to all major cities on the other sides...


View attachment 196921


Some are in rocket ranges ....and the table made me laugh out loud.

you need to study something called "nuclear fallout"

 

[AbhimanyuShrivastav]

Outdated scenarios. With India firmly entrenched within Afghanistan and having revived its network of "assets" in Pakistan (that were dismantled by the moron I K Gujral), we now have the ability to hit Pakistan back in the same asymmetric manner that Pakistan has been using against India. So the need for a full blown, frontal punitive attack, no longer exists. A future Mumbai or Parliament attack (if established to be Pakistani state backed), can easily be answered by insurgent attacks on Pakistani military and civilian centers using Pakistani non state actors only. Given the level of sectarian unrest and religious extremism in Pakistan, its much simpler and low cost than any other strategy. Most of the western world, knowing what it knows of Pakistan's historical affinity towards asymmetric warfare, in all probability will look the other way.

 

[Gufi]

The table is going to end up with the 4th option. After completing successful tests of missiles which could reach the corners of India the Pakistani army has worked on short range missiles with accuracy and speed. There is also a very clear understanding that Pakistan will start a nuclear war if any main defensive line is broken or there is a blockade etc. There needs to be a proper study made on these topics using open source material before suppositions are made. Also the control of nuclear weapons is not going to be in political hands in Pakistan.

 

[OTTOMAN]

Its a table based more about missile strikes and nuclear missiles strikes.

One only needs to check how much is the distance from Indian border to all major cities on the other sides...


View attachment 196921


Some are in rocket ranges ....and the table made me laugh out loud.

In 1965 your rockets failed to reach any of those cities.
It is well known that Indian army strategy has always been to hit the civilians, despite the fact that Pakistanis knows it, they continue to live in those cities.
However, i think its very stupid of Pakistan army for not striking hindu army proactively, and waiting for some apocalypse to be started by modi.

Please discuss

Will Pakistan Do the unthinkable?View attachment 196908 View attachment 196913

Indians plans always perpetuate along the lines, whether its military rule or democrazy.
Who is the CoAS, how much they control PM of Pakistan.

 

[Cheetah786]

Why is it already assumed by Pakistan, that it will lose and have to resort to using nukes. Then why are we wasting billions on armed forces?

What does India gains by taking over Pakistan?

What does India losses by attacking Pakistan?

What does pakistan gains by launching tactical or conventional nukes against India. Knowing very well that indians will use their nukes and both nations are completely destroyed.




Hypothetically, what if @BDforever Launches missiles on Pakistan and India detects and retaliate against Bangladesh and Somali pirates take over

 

[WishLivePak]

India won't make the mistake of launching nukes in pakistan. She'll carpet bomb major cities where army is located. In addition, she won't face sanctions by international community (or it may if she decides to use nuclear bombs as a response).

Let's face it, in international theatre, whoever uses nukes first will be the bad person. Even if India does in reply, it won't face severe criticism like that of Pakistan. Carpet bombing will be ignored in international media (like how 10 Palestinian is overshadowed by 1 Jewish child) and pakistani nukes will be highlighted, so pakistan will be humiliated.

Thus, pakistan leadership realizes a full scale war is a lost cause as it'll be over run by India and isolated by international community (run out of oil, unable to sustain war etc). And it is our pure patriotism that "we gonna beat India." This is not to say India will win the war, as the leftover pakistanis or other Taliban will start infiltrating India.

India too realizes that a war with Pakistan will results in 100s of millions of their citizens lives. Pakistan may not exist anymore, but India will become a barren desert.

Thus, the pakistani and Indian leadership is not interested in full scale war. It will come to proxy, skirmishes or other mini scale war. Pakistan is already destroying itself (Taliban) and India need not to get its name in the dirt.


The chart is a self boosting, very patriotic piece. Indian can come up with similar things.


Bottom line is, no one is going to full scale war. The nukes were developed for the sake of deterence, not to wipe out other nation. In today's world, economic warfare is the biggest paralyzing warfare (Russia, Iran, etc. they survived cuz oil. Pakistan lacks that and India has tourism, will hurt them greatly in event of war).

Why is it already assumed by Pakistan, that it will lose and have to resort to using nukes. Then why are we wasting billions on armed forces?

What does India gains by taking over Pakistan?

What does India losses by attacking Pakistan?

What does pakistan gains by launching tactical or conventional nukes against India. Knowing very well that indians will use their nukes and both nations are completely destroyed.




Hypothetically, what if @BDforever Launches missiles on Pakistan and India detects and retaliate against Bangladesh and Somali pirates take over

Because it's stupid to use nuclear bomb for wars like kargil. Also protect our air space, sea and stop Indian funded terrorists.

 

[alimobin memon]

For my Research course in szabist im working on pakistan's effectiveness to respond to Cold Start It's been 1&1/2 months and I have to say this we lack lot behind India in conventional war. because of war on terror our reserves aren't much the conventional war wont exceed as much as 10 days. just what I realized.

Reality is this war will on benefit west.

 

[manojb]

2 billion casualties are projected in that scenario, including all of south asian population. If Punjab (both) wheat belt is destroyed, there would be no food left for any 'survivors'.

What wheat belt . We eat rice. Million of them will occupy sri lanka .

 

[WishLivePak]

What wheat belt . We eat rice. Million of them will occupy sri lanka .

Not to mention, once 2 billion people die, the demand for wheat will vastly decrease. The wheat produced in US or other places will be sufficient for the survivors.

 

[nair]

@Irfan Baloch Where did you get this table from?