(keeping in view that we are not talking about a tactical commando raid but a full scale war).
From where will the US attack come? From Afghan soil(currently around 10-15K US troops there) so that we can easily block their supply routes? Perhaps you have forgotten what happened to the USSR which had the advantage of having it's own supply line across the Amu darya. Or will India be willing to provide it's land for a US-led war, at the risk of a nuclear exchange?
Pakistan has some cards up it's sleeves, we are not Afghanistan or Iraq or Syria, we are a nuclear nation and this is not 2001.
From sea.
I happen to be well-versed in the matters of history and IT, and I look at these matters objectively. You need to understand that US is relatively a different kind of adversary in comparison to USSR of the 1980s. If Pakistan attempts to make things difficult for US in Afghanistan, they can counter-threaten Pakistan directly from sea. USSR did not had this luxury back in the 1980s.
And everybody should understand that Pakistan was not alone in countering USSR in Afghanistan; CIA got involved and a huge amount of arms and resources were provided to the so-called
Mujahideen to challenge the Red Army in Afghanistan virtually non-stop. Those arms were good enough to defeat Soviet aircraft (fixed and rotary) in combat situations under able hands, and Red Army lost its superiority in the battlefield consequently. Without American intervention, USSR would have prevailed in Afghanistan.
Pakistan is a country of limited resources. Even members of ISI admit that Pakistani armed forces will run out of fuel in just half a month in a
full-scale mobilization. Yes, Pakistan has nukes but they are not mated to the ballistic missiles on 24/7 basis due to risks and cost-related considerations; they are kept in underground storage compounds on average. Pakistani deterrence is good enough for regional threats but US is a much more resourceful and elusive adversary.
You say that this is not 2001 but Salala incident and Operation Neptune Spear occurred in 2011, a time when Pakistan military capability was much better than in 2001 but relations were not good. And both of these incidents demonstrate enormous asymmetry in the military capability of the two countries. Not just enormous asymmetry but Operation Neptune Spear convey to us a reality that if US ever
preempt, game-over for Pakistan. In-fact, I get the impression that Operation Neptune Spear was a test for this theory:
http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/the-pentagons-secret-plans-to-secure-pakistans-nuclear-arsenal/
As strange as that may sound, if they have come up with such plans then they have an understanding of such possibilities.
I also tell you that US took Iraq and Afghanistan seriously only in the opening phases of conflict until regimes were toppled. After that, these conflicts became political and were unnecessarily prolonged to the benefit of arms-exporting industries and ensuring relevancy in the region in the long-term. However, these adventures are just like this; an intruder breaks into your home, rapes you, plunder your home and leaves after he is satiated. Now, even if you are able to offer some resistance during the course of your ordeal, does this make you the victor? This is the situation of Taliban in Afghanistan at present.
I agree that Pakistani nukes will make give any adversary a pause but US can deploy a large number of its ABM systems to intercept Pakistani ballistic missiles mid-flight
beforehand (and these systems actually work). And I tell you that we do not have an enormous inventory of ballistic and cruise missiles due to our limited resources. More importantly, you can expect US to have mapped entire Pakistani terrain for identification of strategic and suspected sites by now, via its extensive surveillance apparatus, and these regions will be
hit in order to degrade Pakistani offensive capability ASAP. I do not think that Operation Neptune Spear was possible without extensive knowledge of Pakistani defenses, terrain and how to counter them.
Detailed response here:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/pent...rt-afghan-taliban.534942/page-5#post-10111640
Now, please understand that we are discussing hypothetical scenarios in this thread. I am not saying that US is planning to eliminate Pakistan (God forbid). Let us hope that this war never happen and both countries are able to mend this ties for the betterment of all.
However, when a member here asks what will happen if US and Pakistan engage in a full-scale war, I will provide my input just like any other member. Problem is that some members are deluded to the core and deliberately spoil the mood with their trolling as apparent in this thread. These kind of members look at things from
narrative standpoint but not through
technical standpoint like I do.
Simple point is that while we are strengthening our defenses, US is doing the same. We are able to invest close to 10 billion USD towards this end while US is investing 700 billion USD towards the same end, and their R&D capabilities are a century ahead of ours at the moment.
They think on a much higher spectrum than us; they are thinking of ending MAD with Russia and colonizing planet Mars in the near future. And these objectives will come to pass at some point, the way things are heading.
This article will convey to you the disparity in the military capabilities of Russia and US for example from a strictly
technical standpoint:
https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/russia-s-involvement-in-syria-proves-that-its-far-behin-1794966734
Now, if that is the situation of Russia and then where Pakistan stand in the grand picture? Russia is safe due to its massive nuclear arsenal and delivery capabilities. However, Russia no longer has the economy and R&D to ensure parity with the US in defense-related matters in the long-term.
Forget North Korea sir. Cuba, a mere 60 miles from Florida stood against the US for so long, defeated an invasion and crushed a CIA sponsored insurgency. One just has to act like a man.
Some people here overestimate the US and underestimate Pakistan. We need to complete the nuclear triad as quickly as possible to deter any adventure of the US or it's allies, a nuclear sub with 6-12 nuc tipped missiles will keep any adventurer at bay.
@Desert Fox
Bro,
Yes, I am aware of that failure of
The Bay of Pigs invasion mission in Cuba in 1961 but CIA had mobilized
Cuban exiles for this mission and they failed to deliver.
Now, do you recall the period of Cuban Missile Crises in 1962 when USSR literally deployed "nuclear-armed ballistic missiles" in Cuba in order to secure Cuba from the threat of American intervention after
The Bay of Pigs episode?
"During the Cuban Missile Crisis, leaders of the U.S. and the Soviet Union engaged in a tense, 13-day political and military standoff in October 1962 over the installation of nuclear-armed Soviet missiles on Cuba, just 90 miles from U.S. shores. In a TV address on October 22, 1962, President John Kennedy (1917-63) notified Americans about the presence of the missiles, explained his decision to enact a naval blockade around Cuba and made it clear the U.S. was prepared to use military force if necessary to neutralize this perceived threat to national security. Following this news, many people feared the world was on the brink of nuclear war. However, disaster was avoided when the U.S. agreed to Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev’s (1894-1971) offer to remove the Cuban missiles in exchange for the U.S. promising not to invade Cuba. Kennedy also secretly agreed to remove U.S. missiles from Turkey."
FYI:
http://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/cuban-missile-crisis
Need I say more?
My advise is not to look at events selectively but try to understand them in bigger context.
If US has not taken out Cuba yet then this is a matter of political priorities and not due to lack of capability. When US meant business in 1962, Cuba was just a sitting duck.
