Cornered Pakistan may strike India to salvage lost pride

[Dark Sorrow]

Pride! fews days after OBL & 17 people killed in Drone attacks. Waiting for the catastrophe.

Bro, Thats a Good one.

 

[Tshering22]

many of you guys think an Indo-pak war will be a communal riot in armour?

Looking at the sentiments displayed all over India like in Kolkata where special prayers were held for OBL, I can see that this is going to be obvious.

 

[Tshering22]

My answer would be "We don't need to prove our capabilities to a failed states".

A genuine answer if you ask me. I have been time and again hammering this and I will do it again; focus on China. Pakistan is nothing more than a terrorist hub. Its military has no capability to strike India ever for at least next 40 years in the current situation if it makes it intact as a country into the next decade which is doubtful.

The real threat, the real danger and the real trouble is going to be China through and through. While Pakistan is the deluded, violent, self-destructive and unstable fool of the region, China is the clever, silent, ruthless and cunning wolf of the region. It plans its attacks carefully. Weapons are not just guns and planes but also economy and strategy. China's following of the phrase:

"風　Swift as the wind

林　Quiet as the forest

火　Conquer like the fire

山　Steady as the mountain"

is a reality. Its planning, infrastructure and battle readiness is better than ever compared to our brave but unequipped soldiers. It has a centralized battle-focused government rather than an indecisive multi-centered corrupt government like ours.

I am not over-blowing this but Pakistan stopped being a threat post-2000. But still our clowns (so-called great geniuses of UPSC exams) still think of Pakistan only.

 

[neo29]

Please your people with striking India, and anger the world. Good going Pakistan.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Very Possible:

News 1:
Pakistan launch a surprise attack on LOC across India, Pakistani Army Destroyed many Indian Observation posts in early hours...


News 2:
Pakistani Army is in full retreat across LOC, Invasion force is destroyed as Indian Army launched a massive counter attack..


News 3:
Pakistani Army is arming Nukes in retaliation giving comments " Pakistan will defend its sovereignty from evil Indians at any-cost "..



THE END

 

[Solomon2]

I think the premise that Pakistan may strike India in response to the discovery and killing of OBL on its territory to be entirely reasonable, for two reasons: One, the Pakistani leadership would consider it a welcome distraction and thus save their jobs. Two, a suicidal mass terror attack across the border would be a way to destroy evidence as to Pakistan's evil ways. ("See, all the people who hid Osama and/or planned 26/11 are dead now!")

Therefore, imo, if an attack does come, every effort should be made to take these terrorists ALIVE so they can spill what they know.

 

[Tshering22]

I think the premise that Pakistan may strike India in response to the discovery and killing of OBL on its territory to be entirely reasonable, for two reasons: One, the Pakistani leadership would consider it a welcome distraction and thus save their jobs. Two, a suicidal mass terror attack across the border would be a way to destroy evidence as to Pakistan's evil ways. ("See, all the people who hid Osama and/or planned 26/11 are dead now!")

Therefore, imo, if an attack does come, every effort should be made to take these terrorists ALIVE so they can spill what they know.

Your logic does make sense when seen from this POV. But there is a stark difference between Pakistan and other countries. Pakistan is in the worst of all financial situations, held together only by IMF, WB, USAID and Chinese soft loans. Its provinces have lost control, no law is there on the street, currency has gone down the drains, no power, no industries, no jobs, no money, no incentive and no stability.

Under normal circumstances, you'd find a country going through a recession or a normal bad period, which most countries do in world politics. But Pakistan's aggression into India will mean a complete shut off for all these above sources of aid and money. It means even if Chinese keep the money up, Pakistan has little or nothing to buy fuel. Last time when it attacked us via terrorists, our Navy blocked their port off and that left them with only 4 days of fuel for war. And that Pakistan was much stronger than what this Pakistan is.

Zardari has reduced that nation to ruins; he's done more damage to them than we Indians did in all 5 wars combined. Long life for Zardari...

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Very Possible:

News 1:
Pakistan launch a surprise attack on LOC across India, Pakistani Army Destroyed many Indian Observation posts in early hours...

Do you think they would repeat Kargil particularly when most of the top generals who where involved in Kargil are still around.?

News 2:
Pakistani Army is in full retreat across LOC, Invasion force is destroyed as Indian Army launched a massive counter attack..

You know it as well as i do, we dont have much offensive capability now, apart from our Su-30s there are no potent weapons that can dominate their F-16s and our air force gap is fast shrinking. I think we are sitting ducks here. That would be the truth.

News 3:
Pakistani Army is arming Nukes in retaliation giving comments " Pakistan will defend its sovereignty from evil Indians at any-cost "..

THE END

Since both the statements above are cant happen atleast for the moment so i dont think this is a possibility either, even if it happens our nukes are suspect. I am not sure if they would detonate because they have not been tested like the **** nukes which are Chinese made.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Do you think they would repeat Kargil particularly when most of the top generals who where involved in Kargil are still around.?

You know it as well as i do, we dont have much offensive capability now, apart from our Su-30s there are no potent weapons that can dominate their F-16s and our air force gap is fast shrinking. I think we are sitting ducks here. That would be the truth.

Since both the statements above are cant happen atleast for the moment so i dont think this is a possibility either, even if it happens our nukes are suspect. I am not sure if they would detonate because they have not been tested like the **** nukes which are Chinese made.

They already did once after kargil, though it was on a small scale..

Sorry mate, Since when we don't have offensive capability ?, What are the uses of strike cores in IA ?, What is counter attack ?

Our nukes are mainly as Icons of Shield from China then Pakisthan, We now most of their location of strategic missiles even those which are carried by Rails, And we do know they don't have enough protection to protect them from our Fighter and Precision weapons..

All Pakistan got is a BIG mouth and lots of PR..

 

[Solomon2]

...Pakistan's aggression into India will mean a complete shut off for all these above sources of aid and money. It means even if Chinese keep the money up, Pakistan has little or nothing to buy fuel -

Oh, I agree entirely. But remember 1965: Pakistan had everything to lost but the leadership embraced the conflict anyway: if they won they could gain prestige, if they lost they could blame someone else. Either course of action was a surer way to maintain one's power and privileges than the path of peace. 26/11 is an even better example: the prospect of conflict with India stalled any institutional reform, especially of the ISI.

Zardari has reduced that nation to ruins; he's done more damage to them than we Indians did in all 5 wars combined. Long life for Zardari...

I doubt Zardari has that kind of power: from my point of view it is a military junta poised on the edge of reform if only elected politicians would gather courage and seize the opportunity to re-establish a proper democracy.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

A genuine answer if you ask me. I have been time and again hammering this and I will do it again; focus on China. Pakistan is nothing more than a terrorist hub. Its military has no capability to strike India ever for at least next 40 years in the current situation if it makes it intact as a country into the next decade which is doubtful.

The real threat, the real danger and the real trouble is going to be China through and through. While Pakistan is the deluded, violent, self-destructive and unstable fool of the region, China is the clever, silent, ruthless and cunning wolf of the region. It plans its attacks carefully. Weapons are not just guns and planes but also economy and strategy. China's following of the phrase:

"風　Swift as the wind

林　Quiet as the forest

火　Conquer like the fire

山　Steady as the mountain"

is a reality. Its planning, infrastructure and battle readiness is better than ever compared to our brave but unequipped soldiers. It has a centralized battle-focused government rather than an indecisive multi-centered corrupt government like ours.

I am not over-blowing this but Pakistan stopped being a threat post-2000. But still our clowns (so-called great geniuses of UPSC exams) still think of Pakistan only.

Can't agree with you on this more mate.
I would say you nailed the point.

 

[nitesh]

My answer would be "We don't need to prove our capabilities to a failed states".

As a military men you will never say that , you always respect your enemy, how rabid it might be

 

[codysmacks]

So, what will happen if such a thing did happen and it goes out of control?? Will it triger a nuclear war or the Third World war? or an UN intervention?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

So, what will happen if such a thing did happen and it goes out of control?? Will it triger a nuclear war or the Third World war? or an UN intervention?

If such thing happens, India will Strike back with Precision, taking out such facilities are first priority than the personals..

Other than this UN will Condemned attacks and rest of the World will watch the show..

 

[Singh]

If such thing happens, India will Strike back with Precision, taking out such facilities are first priority than the personals..

Other than this UN will Condemned attacks and rest of the World will watch the show..

What about Cold Start ?

Frankly, India right now has no response may be except a full scale military war which will quickly escalate and result in a stalemate.
This is not exactly a bad thing but its not very inspiring.

 

[Virendra]

I don't know if cold start is formulated that well, at least not openly. There have been many denials in media.
But I like the concept because it suits our requirements, given the constraints that we have.
If India has to take the first shot in a military offensive, cold start not only gives a quick thrust inside Pakistan but also ensures that we go inside only as much as required to milk the enemies gasping out at negotiation tables.
We'll have a lot of international presure once the offensive is taken and even more of it as our thrust/area captured increases or so does the duration of our hold onto it.
To be frank the full on approach is not viable as well, as we're not super powers like US to endure full scale wars over the entire territory of Pakistan for a longer duration.
Best would be a give in swift punishing strike and move out quickly once the loonies learn their lessons. We are a developing nation and a lot is at stake when a conventional war breaks out. When it can hurt the economy of a country like US, we have to watch out as well.
However this whole assumption that neighbours might fight now is a farce. The rulers in Pakistan might irritate us with their typical proxy war tricks to have a war of words and thus divert attention from the mess there, but nothing more than that.

Regards,
Virendra

 

[Kunal Biswas]

But I like the concept because it suits our requirements, given the constraints that we have.

If India has to take the first shot in a military offensive,

cold start not only gives a quick thrust inside Pakistan but also ensures that we go inside only as much as required to milk the enemies gasping out at negotiation tables.

To be frank the full on approach is not viable as well, as we're not super powers like US to endure full scale wars over the entire territory of Pakistan for a longer duration.

Best would be a give in swift punishing strike and move out quickly once the loonies learn their lessons. We are a developing nation and a lot is at stake when a conventional war breaks out. When it can hurt the economy of a country like US, we have to watch out as well.

What about Cold Start ?

Frankly, India right now has no response may be except a full scale military war which will quickly escalate and result in a stalemate.
This is not exactly a bad thing but its not very inspiring.

Very Possible, But in state of Nuclear attack its not very wise to move in with a large force..

As i said before IAF and Army will be 100% dedected in destroing Enemy Nuclear, Communication, Command, Computer, Control Infrastructure and others..

While Navy will Insure a Strong Blockade at Arabian Sea..

Once Cleared we may Push little from North and Central Pakistan ( Same Objectives in 71 & 65 war ), None wanted to go deep inside Pakistan coz nothing is there for us..

 

[Patriot]

Pakistan's 'First Use' in Perspective

Ali Ahmed



Before and after Osama's killing, the spotlight fell momentarily on Pakistan's nuclear intentions. Prior to his death, the headlines dwelt on Pakistani tests of Hatf VIII and Hatf IX. Demonstrating plausible first use capability, these were intended to deter a conventional attack by India. After Osama's death, in a verbal salvo, Pakistan's foreign secretary warned of 'catastrophic' consequences in case any state (read India) chose to emulate the US. His reference was perhaps to escalation, with Pakistani nuclear first use as a grim possibility. What exactly are the chances of this?

That 'first use' is inherent in Pakistan's nuclear doctrine is less indicative of what the doctrine contains and more the general consensus with regard to its nature. Pakistan has not declared its nuclear doctrine as India has done. The fact that it does not subscribe to NFU does not by default imply a first use doctrine. Therefore, it cannot categorically be said that Pakistan's operational nuclear doctrine is one of nuclear first use.

Having acknowledged this, it has to be said that all indicators point to Pakistani 'first use'. Firstly, Pakistan wishes not only to deter a nuclear attack but also a conventional attack by compensating for its conventional disadvantages through nuclear means. Second, it has not subscribed to NFU and as per Wikileaks revelations, General Kayani was not in sync with his president's inclination towards NFU. Third, there are several statements from important personages on the Pakistani intention to escalate in case of conventional conflict. Fourth, since it is the military that has control over the nuclear button, the nuclear arsenal may be more attuned to developments in conventional warfare than would otherwise be the case. Lastly, Pakistan's nuclear deterrent is operated under military control through service specific strategic commands. This indicates a greater readiness to follow through.

Pakistan is also ambiguous about the nature of its first use. One option is along the time dimension. For some, first use could be a Samson option - as a 'last resort'. This may command greater legality in terms of extreme resort in self-defence. Alternatively, as the development of the 'Nasr' suggests, it may be taken early on when the conflict in a 'low threshold mode'.

The second ambiguity is over the type of nuclear strike. The first type is a 'higher order' strike, attempting to disarm and degrade India's strike back capability. This is more likely a last resort. The targets could be a mix of counter military, counter force and counter city. The second type is more likely a 'middle order' use option in which multiple nuclear strikes are used to blunt India's conventional offensive capabilities, such as when India's strike corps are delivering a grievous blow. These could be on counter military targets, and include targets within India - such as supporting air fields. The third is 'lower order' first use, as part of nuclear signalling such as demonstration strikes or low opprobrium quotient strike(s). These could include a strike or two -in the oft-discussed scenario of a strike on an advancing Indian armoured column - in Pakistani territory in a defensive mode. In graduated first use scenarios, this is how nuclear weapons may be introduced into the conflict.

Pakistan has demonstrated its tactical nuclear capability through the miniaturisation, low yield, short range and shoot and scoot capability of 'Nasr'. This helps project a low threshold in the early use mode. This means it can attempt either demonstration strikes or employ these in greater numbers to derail India's strike formations. This is not so much by physically stopping the pincers, as much as by slowing them down by the strategic, operational and logistics effects of transiting to the nuclear realm.

These weapons have not been delegated to operational formations. Instead, they are controlled by service specific strategic commands, indicating centralisation. This means that any of the options discussed above is available to Pakistan for execution, and it is not necessarily restricted to a default war fighting first use option.

Pakistan can be expected to reinforce its deterrent through an information campaign, surrounding a low threshold projection. This compensates for any weakness or lack of credibility relating to its deterrent, since the deterrent also covers the conventional level. Its projection of irrationality is in keeping with the 'rationality of irrationality' thesis - a part of nuclear deterrence theory. The idea is to keep India guessing and hopefully deterred.

To attribute a first use doctrine to Pakistan is to admit that India's nuclear weapons do not deter adequately. This may not be true since Pakistan too is subject to the psychological effects of deterrence. Deterrence is heightened since first use implies a break in the nuclear taboo. There would also be no guarantee of success and the only certainty would be of costs - known and known unknowns as well as unimagined and unimaginable.

'First use' would be dependent on appreciation of gains and costs. Gains from projection of a first use are self-evident. Firstly, the existence of a 'threshold' forecloses any expansive options that India's conventional might may enable. Secondly, it refines the stability/instability paradox in injecting instability at the nuclear level. It indicates a rejection of India's deterrence as it is currently defined, as a one-step escalatory ladder. This will force India to reconsider its nuclear response strategy, if not its declaratory doctrine. It stabilises the conventional level in reinforcing Indian prudence, thereby opening up the sub-conventional level for proxy war. The paradox can therefore be extended to read instability/stability/instability.

The gain from executing first use is in attempting to escape paying a price that India may set out to exact by catalysing the international community's intervention. It would also bring home to India grave dangers that it may have discounted in going in for a military showdown. But the costs are much starker.

India's promise of assured retaliation cannot be ignored, in the light of India's growing second strike capability. Even if India's declared intent of visiting 'massive' retribution is seemingly lacking in credibility, assured retaliation may yet inflict 'unacceptable damage'. Secondly, there are risks in a first use intent inviting a pre-emptive strike. India is going down the BMD route. It has a multiple satellite launch capability, which over time can translate into an MIRV capability.

The upshot of this discussion is: firstly that first use is useful only for projection. Secondly, strategic sense favours an operational nuclear doctrine that tends towards NFU. Equally, strategic sense, from Pakistan's point of view, is in keeping this secret. It can therefore be inferred, that the greater the projection the less likely the intention.

Projection of first use is safe for Pakistan since it rightly counts on India's strategic maturity. India has no intention of being deflected from its economic trajectory. Pakistan's nuclear nonchalance therefore owes much to its largely accurate appreciation of its nuclear posturing going untested.

This is one assumption India will not challenge by departing from military prudence. Its recent distancing from Cold Start is not so much on account of the efficacy of Pakistani deterrence, but its own grand strategic economic imperative. Sensibly, even as India wishes to match step with Pakistan, it has no intention of accompanying Pakistan on its way downhill.

 

[Virendra]

Although no one is going to ask me but my priority would be to take back PoK atleast uptil denying the links to China and touching back our borders to Afghanistan (a very small chunk that is).
Rest even I'm not able to find any reasons for going further, may be some advance in Rann of Kach @ Gujrat. That is another high activity area.

Regards,
Virendra

 

[Singh]

Very Possible, But in state of Nuclear attack its not very wise to move in with a large force..

As i said before IAF and Army will be 100% dedected in destroing Enemy Nuclear, Communication, Command, Computer, Control Infrastructure and others..

While Navy will Insure a Strong Blockade at Arabian Sea..

Once Cleared we may Push little from North and Central Pakistan ( Same Objectives in 71 & 65 war ), None wanted to go deep inside Pakistan coz nothing is there for us..

So you are implying a Cold Start type doctrine ? But as I said it is a WIP...

@KB

Pak plans to detonate a tactical nuke on its own soil. If we employ cold start then we will be having lots of soldiers in Pak, corollary Pak will detonate a tactical nuke where there are Indian soldiers.

IAF's duty would be to carry out strike missions, gain air superiority, provide CAS, air defence and be on high alert on China border. Right now we just don't have that many plans

Assuming we go in for a limited battle of 3-4 days, a naval blockade will achieve nothing

Agreed the deeper we go into Pakistan the worse off we will be.