We have Nuclear Weapons to Ward off India's War Threat: Pakistan

[Bindovi]

I have found no decent Pakistani analyst who believes this. They think that Pakistan will not be able to win a conventional war with India.

Yet, India will also, let's be clear about it, not be able to hold any Pakistani territory for long. Winning and holding a territory are entirely different things. Pakistan today is a land mass, that has easy internal mobility, and huge population, which for better or worse, have anti-India opinions through and through. A war will only cement them, and people will indeed come to fight, and their will be long protracted war and insurgency which India can't hold.

As for Nuclear threat, that is what a conventionally weak army has to always do to hold ground.



Language please.



I agree with Apple Sauce in the sense, that if an invading and advancing Indian army were to receive tactical Pakistani nukes on Pakistani territory, that wouldn't call for a strategic nuclear response from India.

That will call...and will be...because you are using that on indian army...like you , may be your NSA does think your way. That is not what we think...

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

That will call...and will be...because you are using that on indian army...like you , may be your NSA does think your way. That is not what we think...

I don't think that would call for a nuclear response.

The Americans and Russian have had a long held understanding that tactical nuclear strikes will be used to halt an invading army. The whole purpose of US tactical nuclear weapons situated in Germany is to halt an advancing Russian army.

The whole issue is that a country will indeed do everything it can to protect itself. That would mean a nuclear strike if that is the only option left.

It doesn't matter what the Indian nuclear doctrine is. But if a Pakistani nuclear strike on advancing Indian troops within Pakistani territory will be used as a reason for Indian strategic strike, this means that MAD is assured. Because you can't ask a dying country, to die in dignity.

i didnt use any curse nor racists words in my posts

Report any person you find with an objectionable attitude, instead of replying in kind.

 

[Bindovi]

I don't think that would call for a nuclear response.

The Americans and Russian have had a long held understanding that tactical nuclear strikes will be used to halt an invading army. The whole purpose of US tactical nuclear weapons situated in Germany is to halt an advancing Russian army.

The whole issue is that a country will indeed do everything it can to protect itself. That would mean a nuclear strike if that is the only option left.

It doesn't matter what the Indian nuclear doctrine is. But if a Pakistani nuclear strike on advancing Indian troops within Pakistani territory will be used as a reason for Indian strategic strike, this means that MAD is assured. Because you can't ask a dying country, to die in dignity.



Report any person you find with an objectionable attitude, instead of replying in kind.

What you are talking is logic and I fully agree with you. But retaliating using nuclear wepons is a different story regardless of where you are...that is India's position. My be pakistan is not thinking about that option.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

What you are talking is logic and I fully agree with you. But retaliating using nuclear wepons is a different story regardless of where you are...that is India's position. My be pakistan is not thinking about that option.

Of course, it is. But we are talking here about hypothetical scenarios, which are very desperate from the perspective of a Pakistani leaders, and generals.

Nuclear weapons and their existence, and potential use is for the sole case of desperation.

Irrespective of tactical or strategic nuclear bomb is a nuclear bomb...when it's used on Indian soil or Indian troops....response will full outright nuclear reply with everything we've got!!
Lol you should exist to remove our plate...
You won't survive our first wave....look at the map and see how puny your country...Lol


Lol...deluded Pakistani...no surprise there!
Tactical sure....Tactical nuclear weapons designed to blow on there own soil....Lol probably the only country in the world that does it for defence....that shows your belief in your armed forces...Lol
Does so much good to their morale...stupid Pakistani planners...

You are inexplicably wrong.

There are many countries that have similar doctrine. Russia has a very similar doctrine if it were to be invaded ever. With current Chinese strength, and China's historic claims over Russian Far East, Nukes are the only thing that are keeping Outer Manchuria, from becoming a Chinese land.

Similarly, US places tactical nukes in Germany and a couple of Central European countries which also have the same purpose of halting a supposed Russian advance.

And I guarantee you there won't be a full strategic strike, because there are only two options available:

1. You destroy Pakistani nuclear second strike ability, which will have the disadvantage of huge nuclear winds, and radioactivity near India towards India, and the surroundings.
   Plus, you will essentially convert any surviving Pakistani into a terrorist coming to attack you with whatever they have got.
2. You are not able to destroy Pakistani second strike capability, which is worse.

 

[egodoc222]

of course every nuclear power has its nuclear policies, i never said any different. nor did i ever said that india wouldn't respond to a pakistan nuclear attack.

what i said was if i wasn't clear before, by making it clear that a large scale attack on pakistan will lead to it using nuclear arms in defense of itself, it will make indian planners more reluctant to launch an attack in the first place. for instance, cold start calls for large and quick land grabs, and it must be done below the pakistani nuclear threshold(so india isnt going after for instance, the nuclear C&C), then negotiating for peace with the upper hand because it physically occupies a lot of pakistani land. this is a non starter now that it's likely that such a large and quick force would be countered by tactical nukes. so basically the ball is in india's court of whether it want nuclear annihilation for both countries. now obviously india would act in defence of itself. if pakistan starts a war, india isn't going to just stand by and let pakistan do all the shooting. however where this does come into play is for instance, another 2008-like attack, or some other spark that is overall fairly minor compared to a full scale war.

and im not sure where anyone said anything about stopping missiles, because neither country could prevent the incoming from the other side. and what i meant by nuclear superiority is that neither side has it, so its death for both if it gets going.

additionally, credibility comes into play here too. a glaring example is obama and his red line, with promptly got crossed and he did nothing. so you gotta ask yourself, if pakistan uses a nuclear device, on its own territory, and no indian civilians were harmed, then would india really start to shoot off its strategic nukes? i personally don't think it would.



you clearly dont.



you first nuke the indian army on pakistani soil to stop them dead in their tracks then if india "nuke you as a part of retaliation" then its full on nuclear war and both dies.

its simple really, pakistan knows that the indian armed forces are larger and would find it difficult to stop a full on assault on short notice. nuclear arms equalizes the equation. the reason its only used on their own soil is to prevent a generally nuclear war. afterall this the scenario, no indian cities or any civilians would be harmed, could india justified ending both countries in that case?



puny? lol you sure you're talking to the right person? both my countries- my currently home and my ancestral home is 3/4 largest nations on earth, one is the reigning superpower, the other is the rising superpower, both have a seat pretty much all world gatherings. and you call my country puny? lol. sure, indian super-powa! right?



making a nuclear policy known is normal, just as russia has said it will allow it self the option of nuclear arms in conventional combat when faced with an existential threat with powerful conventional capabilities ie: nato. just as the US refuses to limit itself to a no first use policy. so go learn some more before you spew more nonsense like "Pakistan is the only country who is openly talking about nuking".

Dumbo I'm talking about Pakistan not China...comprehension problems ? Eh?

 

[applesauce]

Dumbo I'm talking about Pakistan not China...comprehension problems ? Eh?

you quoted me originally and ask me to check where my puny country is on a map. just so happens my "puny" country is far larger than your little india ever will be. i wouldn't have responded to you otherwise. so who has comprehension problems again?

in fact let me show everyone exactly what you said to me

"You won't survive our first wave....look at the map and see how puny your country...Lol"

i looked at a map, question is, did you?

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

you quoted me originally and ask me to check where my puny country is on a map. just so happens my "puny" country is far larger than your little india ever will be. i wouldn't have responded to you otherwise. so who has comprehension problems again?

in fact let me show everyone exactly what you said to me

"You won't survive our first wave....look at the map and see how puny your country...Lol"

i looked at a map, question is, did you?

No need to use such offensive language. If you look at his whole text, before and after, it is clear that he was talking to Pakistanis. An Indian would never call China, "puny."

 

[applesauce]

No need to use such offensive language. If you look at his whole text, before and after, it is clear that he was talking to Pakistanis. An Indian would never call China, "puny."

again read his original post. he specifically quote me, not a pakistani member, and said I wouldn't survival the attack, and for me to find my puny country not pakistan on a map. if he quoted the wrong person all he had to do was say so. but nope. moreover i didn't use any offensive language, i merely quoted him on the "puny" part.

 

[egodoc222]

Of course, it is. But we are talking here about hypothetical scenarios, which are very desperate from the perspective of a Pakistani leaders, and generals.

Nuclear weapons and their existence, and potential use is for the sole case of desperation.




You are inexplicably wrong.

There are many countries that have similar doctrine. Russia has a very similar doctrine if it were to be invaded ever. With current Chinese strength, and China's historic claims over Russian Far East, Nukes are the only thing that are keeping Outer Manchuria, from becoming a Chinese land.

Similarly, US places tactical nukes in Germany and a couple of Central European countries which also have the same purpose of halting a supposed Russian advance.

And I guarantee you there won't be a full strategic strike, because there are only two options available:

1. You destroy Pakistani nuclear second strike ability, which will have the disadvantage of huge nuclear winds, and radioactivity near India towards India, and the surroundings.
   Plus, you will essentially convert any surviving Pakistani into a terrorist coming to attack you with whatever they have got.
2. You are not able to destroy Pakistani second strike capability, which is worse.

Nuclear winds lol?
Once you use a nuclear weapon against us small or big we are not going to tolerate....radioactivity would be our least concern!!

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Nuclear winds lol?
Once you use a nuclear weapon against us small or big we are not going to tolerate....radioactivity would be our least concern!!

This is what your thought is.

If an armed force is near being totally humiliated and annihilated, and has a possession of nukes, it will use them. And especially if it is within its own territory. That is what is called under the realm of acceptable action.

If you wanna nuke them. That would be India's choice. After all, the no-first use policy itself is India's choice. You can also have a proactive first use policy right? But, there is no way to ensure complete destruction of nukes, and the second strike will be more than debilitating.

 

[egodoc222]

This is what your thought is.

If an armed force is near being totally humiliated and annihilated, and has a possession of nukes, it will use them. And especially if it is within its own territory. That is what is called under the realm of acceptable action.

If you wanna nuke them. That would be India's choice. After all, the no-first use policy itself is India's choice. You can also have a proactive first use policy right? But, there is no way to ensure complete destruction of nukes, and the second strike will be more than debilitating.

Attack on Indian soil or Indian troops...with n bomb is considered as first attack...and there will be a overwhelming response...enemy will be turned to dust!!

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Attack on Indian soil or Indian troops...with n bomb is considered as first attack...and there will be a overwhelming response...enemy will be turned to dust!!

Doesn't matter what YOU consider as first attack.

It would definitely be the first nuclear use. But most nations in a similar position would do the same.

As I have said, there has been international understanding among major powers, that the use of tactical nukes on invading armies is fair game.

Russia has the policy, for any potential invading force.

US has similar policy, with its tactical nukes placed in Germany.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Nuclear winds lol?
Once you use a nuclear weapon against us small or big we are not going to tolerate....radioactivity would be our least concern!!

I made a nuclear wind once.

 

[HariPrasad]

And that shall give us a chance to retaliate and finish off all nuclear and military establishments of Pakistan along with the nuclear weapons of Pakistan.

Pakistan will use low yeild after india decied to invade or got land not before that

 

[egodoc222]

I made a nuclear wind once.

Lol?! When?