USA vs Pakistan scenario.

[Fledgingwings]

In my opinion there are two outcomes:
1. Becoming a loose cannon and threatening with nukes on neighboring nations.
2. Getting occupied by US troops and becoming an insurgency.
In any of the outcomes I personally don't see Pakistan giving a good enough fight to make the invading forces to retreat.

 

[Yaseen1]

u.s can easily destroy some of our nuclear sites any time by bombing them with tomohawk cruise missiles or by using stealth bomber planes.only way to prevent this is to test icbm so u.s will think many times before attack otherwise it is easy for them to boomb our nuclear weapons or airbases without using any ground troops

 

[Reichsmarschall]

u.s can easily destroy some of our nuclear sites any time by bombing them with tomohawk cruise missiles or by using stealth bomber planes.only way to prevent this is to test icbm so u.s will think many times before attack otherwise it is easy for them to boomb our nuclear weapons or airbases without using any ground troops

so what makes you think they cant intercept ICBM and will bomb launch facilities before it could be launch

 

[Mrc]

so what makes you think they cant intercept ICBM and will bomb launch facilities before it could be launch

They can't and they can't

 

[sparten]

replace f-15 with f/a-18 and aircraft carriers



create more problems than they solve

At worst US will carry out airstrikes and incursions inside Pakistan. Why the heck will they invade Pakistan, do you guys have oil? The question is how will Pakistan react, at best what it can do is attack US interests in Afghanistan. And the whole world knows attacking US is equivalent to suicide. US will knock down all defences and go ahead and bomb the hell out of you. It won't come down to that thought as Pakistan will do whatever US will ask it to do.

You don't understand. In a nuclear dimension, you accept that your citizens and cities are forfeit. You have decided that the status that the enemy wishes ti inflict upon you is less acceptable than a full scale nuclear war. That is true of Pakistan. That is also true of the US, Russia, China, UK, France. Its is additionally true of India.

Pakistan's nuclear threshold is unknown, but its very likely to be far less than what the U.S inflicted on Syria or Serbia, which is strategic bombing.

The US absolutely has the ability to destroy our nuclear infrastructure. That's irrelevant. India also has the capability. So does China and Russia. What none of them have is the ability to prevent the assets from beint employed. Its basic deterrence theory. Any reward an aggressor will get from attacking Pakistan will not be worth the guaranteed retaliation.

 

[cleverrider]

All I got was a headache trying to understand your comprehension.

Your are A hindu/belong to Hindustan - ruled by others for 1000s of years. Neither can you comprehend or should have an opinion. You would make a better slave as nothing beats experience, especially when its up against call centre level intellect.

 

[ito]

I think Pakistan has very little chance to win. Even economic santions by US means Pakistan will be crippled. Already Pakistan has two hostile neighbors. Why make an enemy out of US?

 

[duhastmish]

What will us gain out of Pakistan. They have no oil no money. It's just not worth the trouble.

India is better off with Pakistan presence which act like absorbent of terror. India will stay away.

 

[Gregor Clegane]

Pakistani Air and Naval forces will be totally destroyed in first 72 hours.

Pakistani Air and Naval forces will be totally destroyed in first 72 hours.

 

[Fenasi Kerim]

You guys are delusional lol

You won't be able to lift a plane off the ground without the US knowing, say goodbye to majority of your air and naval assets, infrastructure, power grids, turn your radars on and say good bye to them to, you name it, US would dominate there air in the first couple days of the war. Same applies for most countries.

Any further sustained conflict will an economical collapse in Pakistan. Iran, China, Russia etc wouldn't cross US if they go full mad, not for Pakistan.

India would take advantage and go for a land grab, likely be under US protection while doing so.

Any use of nuclear weapons which likely will not happen, enjoy mutual destruction between Pakistan and India, both of which are not strategically placed well enough not to get nuked.

And for the idiots who think Iran and Saudi Arabia will come to your aid, pure gold.

Only chance Pakistan would have is go insurgency and hide their assets in the mountains or cities. Any conventional confrontation would be a military disaster for them.

 

[Eagle_storm]

if you dont mind i just about to share an opinion according to islamic view it is just my opinion as i am in contact with different islamic scholars in this regard

there is no destruction of the last group fight
clue is the following hadiths




You’ll join hands with Christian group and war with another . You’ll gain victoryAt that time, you will be present in a plain of great mountains with plenty of trees. In the meantime, the Christians will raise the crucifix and refer the victory to it. At this, a Muslim will become angry, and will pull the crucifix down, at which, the Christians will unite breaking all treaties with the Muslims.The Christians will demand their wanted people, to which the Muslims will answer:"By Allah! They are our brothers. We will never hand them over. This will start the war. One-third Muslims will run away. Their ‘Tawbah’ (Repentance) will never be accepted.. One-third will be killed.They will be the best 'Shaheed' (martyrs) near Allah The remaining one-third will gain victory(6708,6709 Ibn Hibban)



hadith no 2

At the time, when the Muslim Ummah will have abundance of wealth, gold and silver, the Muslims will be extremely belittled, weak and helpless. The enemy nations will invite each other to pounce upon them as hungry people invite one another for food. The Sahabah (R.A) asked with utter worry, "O Prophet of Allah! Would we be very few in number?" Prophet Muhammad (S) replied: "No! You’d be as great in quantity as the foam of the sea is, seen wherever the eye can reach. But you’ll be overtaken by ‘wahn’." The Sahabah (R.A) asked, "O Prophet of Allah! What is ‘wahn’?" He (S) replied: "Love of this world and fear of death!" You’ll join hands with a Christian group and war with another. You’ll gain victory. At that time, you will be present in a plain of great mountains with plenty of trees. In the meantime, the Christians will raise the crucifix and refer the victory to it. At this, a Muslim will become angry, and will pull the crucifix down, at which, the Christians will unite breaking all treaties with the Muslims.The Christians will demand their wanted people, to which the Muslims will answer:"By Allah! They are our brothers. We will never hand them over." This will start the war. One-third Muslims will run away. Their ‘Tawbah’ (Repentance) will never be accepted. One-third will be killed. They will be the best 'Shaheed' (martyrs) near Allah. The remaining one-third will gain victory, until, under the leadership of Imam Mehdi, they will fight against Kufr (non-believers).. (Ibn Majah)



One-third Muslims will run away. who were these?
refering to some arab?

You’ll join hands with Christian group and war with another.
refering to ussr in afghanistan


At that time, you will be present in a plain of great mountains with plenty of trees. In the meantime,
refer to?

Operation Cyclone was the code name for the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) program to arm and finance the Jihadi warriors, mujahideen, in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989, prior to and during the military intervention by the USSR in support of its client, the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. The program leaned heavily towards supporting militant Islamic groups that were favored by the regime of Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq in neighboring Pakistan, rather than other, less ideological Afghan resistance groups that had also been fighting the Marxist-oriented Democratic Republic of Afghanistan regime since before the Soviet intervention.[1]Operation Cyclone was one of the longest and most expensive covert CIA operations ever undertaken;[2] funding began with $20–$30 million per year in 1980 and rose to $630 million per year in 1987.[1] Funding continued after 1989 as the mujahideen battled the forces of Mohammad Najibullah's PDPA during the civil war in Afghanistan (1989–1992).[3]



Contents
[1Background

• 2Program
  • 2.1Funding

• 3Aftermath

• 4Criticism

• 5Conspiracy theories

• 6See also

• 7References

Background[edit]
Communists under the leadership of Nur Muhammad Taraki seized power in Afghanistan on April 27, 1978.[4] The new regime—which was divided between Taraki's extremist Khalq faction and the more moderate Parcham—signed a treaty of friendship with the Soviet Union in December of that year.[4][5] Taraki's efforts to improve secular education and redistribute land were accompanied by mass executions (including of many conservative religious leaders) and political oppression unprecedented in Afghan history, igniting a revolt by mujahideen rebels.[4] Following a general uprising in April 1979, Taraki was deposed by Khalq rival Hafizullah Amin in September.[4][5] Amin was considered a "brutal psychopath" by foreign observers; the Soviets were particularly alarmed by the brutality of the late Khalq regime, and suspected Amin of being an agent of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), although that was not the case.[4][5][6] By December, Amin's government had lost control of much of the country, prompting the Soviet Union to invade Afghanistan, execute Amin, and install Parcham leader Babrak Karmal as president.[4][5]

In the mid-1970s, Pakistani intelligence officials began privately lobbying the U.S. and its allies to send material assistance to the Islamist insurgents. Pakistani President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq's ties with the U.S. had been strained during Jimmy Carter's presidency due to Pakistan's nuclear program and the execution of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in April 1979, but Carter told National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski and Secretary of State Cyrus Vance as early as January 1979 that it was vital to "repair our relationships with Pakistan" in light of the unrest in Iran.[7] According to former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) official Robert Gates, "the Carter administration turned to CIA ... to counter Soviet and Cuban aggression in the Third World, particularly beginning in mid-1979." In March 1979, "CIA sent several covert action options relating to Afghanistan to the SCC [Special Coordination Committee]" of the United States National Security Council. At a March 30 meeting, U.S. Department of Defense representative Walter B. Slocombe"asked if there was value in keeping the Afghan insurgency going, 'sucking the Soviets into a Vietnamese quagmire?'"[8] When asked to clarify this remark, Slocombe explained: "Well, the whole idea was that if the Soviets decided to strike at this tar baby [Afghanistan] we had every interest in making sure that they got stuck."[9] Yet an April 5 memo from National Intelligence Officer Arnold Horelick warned: "Covert action would raise the costs to the Soviets and inflame Moslem opinion against them in many countries. The risk was that a substantial U.S. covert aid program could raise the stakes and induce the Soviets to intervene more directly and vigorously than otherwise intended."[8] In May 1979, U.S. officials secretly began meeting with rebel leaders through Pakistani government contacts. A former Pakistani military official claimed that he personally introduced a CIA official to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar that month (Freedom of Information Act requests for records describing these meetings have been denied).[10] After additional meetings on April 6 and July 3, Carter signed a "presidential 'finding'" that "authorized the CIA to spend just over $500,000" on non-lethal aid to the mujahideen, which "seemed at the time a small beginning."[7][8][11]

Brzezinski later claimed that "We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would."[12][13][14] According to Brzezinski, he became convinced by mid-1979 that the Soviets were going to invade Afghanistan regardless of U.S. policy due to the Carter administration's failure to respond aggressively to Soviet activity in Africa, but—despite the risk of unintended consequences—support for the mujahideen could be an effective way to prevent Soviet aggression beyond Afghanistan (particularly in Brzezinski's native Poland).[9] The full significance of the U.S. sending aid to the mujahideen prior to the invasion is debated among scholars. Some assert that it directly, and even deliberately, provoked the Soviets to send in troops.[15][16][17][18][19] Bruce Riedel, however, believes that the U.S. aid was intended primarily to improve U.S. relations with Pakistan, while Steve Coll asserts: "Contemporary memos—particularly those written in the first days after the Soviet invasion—make clear that while Brzezinski was determined to confront the Soviets in Afghanistan through covert action, he was also very worried the Soviets would prevail. ... Given this evidence and the enormous political and security costs that the invasion imposed on the Carter administration, any claim that Brzezinski lured the Soviets into Afghanistan warrants deep skepticism."[7][11] Carter himself has stated that encouraging a Soviet invasion was "not my intention."[20] Gates recounted: "No one in the Carter Administration wanted the Soviets to invade Afghanistan and no one, as I can recall at least, ever advocated attempting to induce them to invade ... Only after the Soviet invasion did some advocate making the Soviets 'bleed' in their own Vietnam."[9]

Carter expressed surprise at the invasion. According to Riedel, the consensus of the U.S. intelligence community during 1978 and 1979—reiterated as late as September 29, 1979—was that "Moscow would not intervene in force even if it appeared likely that the Khalq government was about to collapse." Indeed, Carter's diary entries from November 1979 until the Soviet invasion in late December contain only two short references to Afghanistan, and are instead preoccupied with the ongoing hostage crisis in Iran.[7] In the West, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was considered a threat to global security and the oil supplies of the Persian Gulf.[5] Moreover, the failure to accurately predict Soviet intentions caused American officials to reappraise the Soviet threat to both Iran and Pakistan, although it is now known that those fears were overblown. For example, U.S. intelligence closely followed Soviet exercises for an invasion of Iran throughout 1980, while an earlier warning from Brzezinski that "if the Soviets came to dominate Afghanistan, they could promote a separate Baluchistan ... [thus] dismembering Pakistan and Iran" took on new urgency.[6][7]

In the aftermath of the invasion, Carter was determined to respond vigorously. In a televised speech, he announced sanctions on the Soviet Union, promised renewed aid to Pakistan, and committed the U.S. to the Persian Gulf's defense.[7][8] Carter also called for a boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow, which raised a bitter controversy.[21] British prime minister Margaret Thatcher enthusiastically backed Carter's tough stance, although British intelligence believed "the CIA was being too alarmist about the Soviet threat to Pakistan."[7] The thrust of U.S. policy for the duration of the war was determined by Carter in early 1980: Carter initiated a program to arm the mujahideen through Pakistan's ISI and secured a pledge from Saudi Arabia to match U.S. funding for this purpose. U.S. support for the mujahideen accelerated under Carter's successor, Ronald Reagan, at a final cost to U.S. taxpayers of some $3 billion. The Soviets were unable to quell the insurgency and withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, precipitating the dissolution of the Soviet Union itself.[7] However, the decision to route U.S. aid through Pakistan led to massive fraud, as weapons sent to Karachi were frequently sold on the local market rather than delivered to the Afghan rebels; Karachi soon "became one of the most violent cities in the world." Pakistan also controlled which rebels received assistance: Of the seven mujahideen groups supported by Zia's government, four espoused Islamic fundamentalist beliefs—and these fundamentalists received most of the funding.[5]

point3.The Christians will demand their wanted people, for which the muslim will refuse.
refering to mullah umar and other as well according to my opinion add haqani also





point.4
The remaining one-third will gain victory, until, under the leadership of Imam Mehdi, they will fight against Kufr

isnt that clearly refering to afghan taliban 16 years gone still they are strong and fighting..
they are the real heroes they again and again defeat every invaders but the christian are not ready to accept this victory but they will have forcefully accept this truth when imam mehdi A.S appeared.


if i had made my view against hadith then only ALLAh can bless me
in this regard i contacted my teachers and many other sheikh ul hadith
they supported me.


conclusion:the fight in afghanistan will never end until imam mehdi A.S appear
secondly Pakistan should not be worry
Allah is taking the most significant work from Pakistan in my view.
this will continue.

as ALLAH states in quran we will put you in hard time as we put the other before you.

 

[Fenasi Kerim]

Wtf do you think anyone will even read that you copy and paste troll.

 

[Mrc]

Let's break down scenarios

1- limited air strikes... resulting in heavy exchange of cruise missiles .... both take losses ... pak more than US... ceasefire... nothing is achieved ... US loses Afghanistan as supply line permanently closed

2- full invasion... from where??

3 - beach landings ... US tries to occupy gwadar... pak uses nasr... India and Israel become nuclear grave yard... so does Pakistan... American fleets take nuclear hits .... nothing achieved millions of casualties ... Afghanistan still lost for ever...US never fights a war for next 500 years

4- Pakistan tests an ICBM .... US backs off... no casualties Afghanistan lost *mist favourable scenario

5- economuc sanctions... mitigated via cpec... Afghanistan is lost

7- US does nothing... pak does nothing ... Afghanistan is eventually lost... every one lives happily ever after....


I don't see any good options to use strength here

Happy if any one can enlighten me

 

[Hyperion]

Simple....

If US attacks and sends an occupying force, and the Armed Forces of Pakistan don't do anything really really crazy.... there will be no country named Pakistan in days - not months as it has ethnic fault-lines that will be capitalized upon by our own leaders to the highest bidder......

Therefore just one option left to the policy makers...... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

Target all your neighbors and make every inch of your borders nuclear fallout zones...

1. Go for India.
2. Go for Iran.
3. Go for Israel.
4. Go for Saudia.
5. Go for all of UAE.
6. As a bonus target London / Paris as a hail marry.
7. Push anyone who is alive from the Armed Forces into Afghanistan as insurgents.

Basically don't let it become a zero sum game for the great US of A. That's it. Lay down the strategy and make sure that these actions are taken no matter what at exactly the first moment US fires the first bullet. DON'T THINK.

No problem, we will all be dead, however, there will be no peace on the planet for the next 300 years.

 

[Ajaxpaul]

Your are A hindu/belong to Hindustan - ruled by others for 1000s of years. Neither can you comprehend or should have an opinion. You would make a better slave as nothing beats experience, especially when its up against call centre level intellect.

You exposed your intellect when you classified me a hindu...Lol. says much about pakistani intellect. Keep bullshitting, nobody cares...lol