Well I would like to answer this in parts. First of all, it's a highly, highly unlikely scenario we are talking about in this entire thread
I'm also not an
"expert" in this case. But make no mistake, both India and Pakistan are equally afraid and hesitant to use and trigger a Nuclear exchange. It's not like Pakistan is someone more brave as few guy's always try to convince others (a rather feel good, feel supreme statement).
It actually depends on who really call the shots on either side. In either case, India doesn't have a Tactical Nuke to respond in kind, and an conventional response of any such attack won't be enough. So no one can actually say.
Sorry, I guess this is just your inherent insecurity against a much bigger army and full scale war that is making you guy's say this. I mean, India became a Nuclear power decades before (1974 to be precise) Pakistan even thought about your Nuclear program.
How many times did you saw India attack a much weaker Pakistan (after the defeat of 1971) since then ??? Actually a credible conflict happened immediately after Pakistan became a declared Nuclear state in 1998, not the other way around.
Bluff or not, sadly the response of any such use will be brutal and disproportionate for sure, since India don't possess and weapon system in same category. We only have big boys.
Don't worry, it will never happen no matter whatever happen. Both our nations are equally afraid to trigger one themselves, it's only that only we accept that reality I guess.
Everyone over here INCLUDING
you are TROLL's buddy. Accept the reality and move on.
Yes since the bluff of deterrence is at play, this scenario is highly highly and even more than highly unlikely scenario. I mean full war scenario.
Civilians be they are Indians or Pakistanis, are always in the mood of “yeah we are more brave, we are more powerful etc. Thanks God they are not the head of states.
Few are sane on both side and understood well the consequences of such conflicts and pray that that will never happen.
There is no question about insecurity of the smaller against the bigger. Weaponisation of each country was, is and will be a response for a future (or current) perceived threats.
But yes you are right, both countries Authorities are afraid of it, it’s a so huge responsibility. And I think it is the case for all nuclear powers. So bluff or not bluff, that’s working as expected. It was, is and will be always the expected outcome of nuclear deterrence.
Have a look at the real superpowers. Theirs attacks are unchallenged. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya etc in the past century. Have a broader look also in the History who attacked who, when and why.
71 was a kind of eye opener, so that’s why Pakistan’s nuclear program was welcomed. And thanks Allah we got it. Sad but was needed.
Yes Kargil happened, Balakot happened for whatever reasons despite both countries being declared nuclear states.
But don’t forget the thresholds concept. If there wasn’t this concept then we both would had already fired nukes at each other since decades and you and me won’t be here discussing.
Those 2 events didn’t threaten the existence of both countries. So thresholds weren’t crossed.
The perception of Pakistan is that in the case of India, there was still a “freedom” of action before reaching and crossing Pakistan thresholds.
Probably that’s due to yes India having a bigger army or being 7 time more bigger. And the Supa Powa mindset. But it’s not about insecurity.
After all all states have to assess the currents and futures threats and to plan accordingly to mitigate them. It’s one of their jobs. And that’s where tactical nukes enter in the game.
it’s not insecurity but planning against perceived threats.
It doesn’t erase the risks completely of operations like those who occurred on the 26th and 27th February. But that won’t be more than that : strikes on trees. And few planes shot down on both side eventually. I hope that ending will be like the one if Abhinandan, I mean safe ejections and send back after having a cup of tea.
But everything could happen on mistaken decisions and events could go out of control. The risk exists still today as it was yesterday and will tomorrow.
Hope that sanity prevails on both side and all problems solved sooner than later politically.
In that optic yes war is not coming. But risk of small, but bigger than those last events and still lower than the thresholds, misadventure is not eliminated.
So as you said mine are more brave than yours leads to this kind of threads. But who could says he have certitudes about futures ?
Of course I could be wrong in my analysis as I said I’m not expert and due to my lack of full knowledge on the events being them political, military or historical.
... i guess you did;t read about tamil tigers, that how after 1983 india setup their camps in Tamil Nadu trained them and send them back to sirilanka and later same rabbles kill rajve gandhi, they were the pioneer introducing suicide attacks after japs in world war2.... and you are lecturing others for Jihads 
