Indian response to a Pakistani nuclear strike

[no smoking]

Even those who seek help have self-respect. After 65 we were irrevocably on our way to Nuke weapons. That is why 67 was the last time Indian PM asked for the Umbrella.

Are you sure? Your nuclear project even started before Chinese. I hardly believe that was a result of 1965 war.

NPT was and is, as it is, an unfair and useless treaty. It was designed to keep some countries out. Some of those agreed to remain out. We did not care.

You can't have both. The pre-condition for any nuclear umbrella from USA or USSR was signing NPT.

I never doubted Indian ability to go right upto 100%. I don't know how I ended up giving that impression. Sorry if it is so. I do however hold that like the Chinese, the Indian strategic thought is very measured and will remain exactly as measured.

If your opinion about India strategic thought is correct (which I agree), that means the delay of 24 years is not your scientists' fault but the deliberate strategic calculation, which tells us that Indian strategists didn't see an urgent demand of Indian own nuclear weapons in a period during which Chinese nuclear force was growing significantly.
In other words, India didn't take Chinese nuclear threat seriously at all.

 

[Yumdoot]

Are you sure? Your nuclear project even started before Chinese. I hardly believe that was a result of 1965 war.

Yes.

In fact the PM in 1965 had traveled to Tashkent after having inaugurated a Plutonium reprocessing facility. Even before that there were people from India interested in these things. Though it is true that our people were more interested in the science of it instead of the weapons.

You can't have both. The pre-condition for any nuclear umbrella from USA or USSR was signing NPT.

All the nuke umbrellas offered to any country in the world were before the NPT. And our people did not see NPT as sufficient. Nor did they themselves wanted to burn all bridges.

If your opinion about India strategic thought is correct (which I agree), that means the delay of 24 years is not your scientists' fault but the deliberate strategic calculation, which tells us that Indian strategists didn't see an urgent demand of Indian own nuclear weapons in a period during which Chinese nuclear force was growing significantly.
In other words, India didn't take Chinese nuclear threat seriously at all.

You are right 24 years delay has nothing to do with the scientists but you are wrongly using this fact to conclude that scientists were not working away on nearly all aspects of nuclear weaponization or nuclear industry.

You are wrong about India not considering the Chinese nukes a threat. In fact you and your relations with Pakis were a big factor in us going nuclear, overtly. Our people had come to the conclusion that Pakis had the bomb because of you and that means we needed to come out openly. At the same time force Pakis to come out. It was understood that there would be different results for both cases. In our case our negotiating position would improve while in case of Pakistan the negotiating position would weaken. The world sees Pakistan as a threat. Not so with us.

 

[no smoking]

Yes.

In fact the PM in 1965 had traveled to Tashkent after having inaugurated a Plutonium reprocessing facility. Even before that there were people from India interested in these things. Though it is true that our people were more interested in the science of it instead of the weapons.

No, your people had the nuclear weapons in the mind from the beginning.

All the nuke umbrellas offered to any country in the world were before the NPT. And our people did not see NPT as sufficient. Nor did they themselves wanted to burn all bridges.

No, NPT was not the problem. Your people didn't not see a nuclear umbrella as sufficient. You wanted your own nuclear force.

You are right 24 years delay has nothing to do with the scientists but you are wrongly using this fact to conclude that scientists were not working away on nearly all aspects of nuclear weaponization or nuclear industry.

No, I am suggesting that it was your own government holding all the necessary resources and funds which would have enabled your scientists to push forward their R&D at full speed.

You are wrong about India not considering the Chinese nukes a threat. In fact you and your relations with Pakis were a big factor in us going nuclear, overtly.

Well, Chinese rejected to offer military guarantee for Pakistan and Chinese was the first one to declare NFU.

Our people had come to the conclusion that Pakis had the bomb because of you and that means we needed to come out openly.

Oh, please, you had the bomb long before Pakistan and it was India that rejected the non-nuclear treaty offered by Pakistan. In other words, India will go to nuclear with or without Pakistan nuclear project.

At the same time force Pakis to come out. It was understood that there would be different results for both cases. In our case our negotiating position would improve while in case of Pakistan the negotiating position would weaken. The world sees Pakistan as a threat. Not so with us.

Great! By this policy, the nuclear missile aiming at India jumped from ZERO to 100. And there is another 1000 waiting in the line.
At the meantime, Pakistan doesn't need to worry about another 71 war any more. India would think twice before any conventional military punishment on Pakistan.
Good work.

 

[Yumdoot]

No, your people had the nuclear weapons in the mind from the beginning.

Off course they did. But our people were influenced by the West and there are cases of they taking up R&D routes that could not have lead to the WMD, under that influence. So ours was essentially an R&D establishment that actually knew quite well that they would get the bomb someday somewhere down the R&D line.

This route is different from the Chinese route that was directed towards the bomb capability in the initial stages. Chinese were successful in their ways, in that, today they have both the R&D base and the Bomb.

See civilian and military sides of the nuclear R&D are not mutually exclusive routes. But off course better focus on any one side will yield better results on that side.

No, NPT was not the problem. Your people didn't not see a nuclear umbrella as sufficient. You wanted your own nuclear force.

Off course our people wanted it at some point. Even beggars have self respect. You can only truly protect yourself, basis your own strength. Umbrellas, allignments, strategic-self-interest are all a drag after the first 10 years and the countries live much-much longer lives.

All I am saying is that NPT was meant to keep people from gaining even that much self respect, by dividing them supposedly for ever into haves and have-nots. This is something no Indian would be willing to accept.

No, I am suggesting that it was your own government holding all the necessary resources and funds which would have enabled your scientists to push forward their R&D at full speed.

Yes off course our govt was holding all the funds and they did give all the funds our researchers asked for. Only thing that was not being allowed was the hot-testing. And I do not hear very many of our researchers complaining about hot-testing.

Well, Chinese rejected to offer military guarantee for Pakistan and Chinese was the first one to declare NFU.

Chinese rejected the overt guarantee only because they did not want to go down with Pakis. Chinese recognized that there is a distinct possibility of that.

Chinese took the other route. They instead gave a bomb along with material and methods and tested it for the Pakis.

This would be like the Indians deciding to give material and methods to some country in the neighbourhood of China that behaves like pre-WW-2 Japan.

Oh, please, you had the bomb long before Pakistan and it was India that rejected the non-nuclear treaty offered by Pakistan. In other words, India will go to nuclear with or without Pakistan nuclear project.

Yes we had the bomb before Pakistan. And Pakis keep proposing several things. You cannot expect us to take seriously a country that does not care for its own people. What goodwill such a country bear for our people?

Great! By this policy, the nuclear missile aiming at India jumped from ZERO to 100. And there is another 1000 waiting in the line.

Only an inattentive person would believe that nuke missiles are not targeting him because his country has signed the NPT as a have not. Even for the countries that are not currently targeted the situation will change in future. What would these people do then?

At the meantime, Pakistan doesn't need to worry about another 71 war any more. India would think twice before any conventional military punishment on Pakistan.
Good work.

You are seriously under-estimating Indian human resource. You could be making the mistake of judging the Indians based on what you hear a few of us say on internet forums. That is not representative enough of what we Indians truly are.

 

[Kharavela]

If you guys understand the whole point, what's the aim of India? To finish the paki threat itself. Even after nuking them, regardless of what we say, they won't be wiped off the face of the earth as we don't have that many warheads.

We create 4 different states. Balochistan, Sindh, Pakhtun and Pakjab with Gilgit Baltistan back in our sovereignty.

Baloch, Sindh and Pakhtun land will be independent and PakJab at our mercy.

We completely disarm them and humiliate them that they forget the word "ghairat" forever.

Sir, around a year back in a different thread, I read a nice suggestion as follows:
1) Dismember Bakistan & make Balochistan a sovereign state.
2) Occupy Sindh, Pak-Punjab, Gilgit-Baltistan without the jihadi populace. Drive the jihadis to NWFP. Rename NWFP as "Chhotu-Pakistan".
3) End war with the condition that "Chhotu-Pakistan" can not raise its own Armed Forces.

 

[DFI_COAS]

Indian response to a Pakistani nuclear strike

14 round of Parliament discussion!

 

[sorcerer]

Pakistan's Tactical Nuclear Weapons and India's Response

Consequent to possession of nuclear weapons and particularly on conclusion of six nuclear tests by Pakistan in May 1988; five based on Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) detonations using boosted fission technology and the sixth plutonium based devise using fusion technology, Pakistan’s seems to be exuberating based on her new found confidence, and her tone and tenor vis-à-vis India had seen a dramatic shift bordering jingoism. An alleged remark reported to have been made by President Zia-ul-Haq in 1 ..

Read more at:
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/pakistans-tactical-nuclear-weapons-and-indias-response/

 

[garg_bharat]

Pakistan doesn't need to worry about another 71 war any more.

Nuclear weapons have not stopped any war so far. Your statement is fundamentally illogical.

If you think nuclear weapons have given Pakistan a license to create sabotage in India, think again.

The result will be bad for both Pakistan and China. The communist party is near its death. I take your boast in stride.

Your country's criminality is remarkable. This is all I can say.

 

[sayareakd]

If Pakistan has death wish, it will use tactical nuke against our tanks formation and we will wipe out Pakistan and its what ever strike option from world map. India has made it clear in its nuclear doctrine that any attack on Indian forces any where (including in enemy land, nuclear, biological or chemical weapons) will be consider as attack on India and responded will be massive retaliatory attack.

 

[raja696]

India's stated nuclear doctrine is that it's "deterrent" is a no first use and for inflicting unacceptable damage in retaliatory strikes.

I have a different take on how India should respond to a Pakistani first strike.

India does not have to respond with nuclear weapons to a Pakistani nuke strike.

Pakistans doctrine calls for use of nuclear weapons when
1) it looses a major chunk of its territory.
2) it looses a major chunk of its armed forces
3) there is severe economic and political hardship caused by ways of blockade.

Consider an all out war between India and Pakistan. Considering the above, it's most likely to use nuclear weapons when Indian armed forces capture cities like Lahore, destroy a major portion of the Pakistani fighting force.

In this scenario, pakistan has lost already lost the war and our troops are already in control of a lot of Pakistani territory. We cannot nuke our own forces.

In the scenario that Paksitan goes in for a first strike without any provocation or way below its threshold, India should still not retaliate with nuclear weapons.

India should come out with political and military goals for the next war which is likely to happen in the future.

Political goals.

India has to dismember Pakistan. We know of Sindh, Baloch, Pakhtun and Balwaristan movements.

If Pakistan has already gone nuclear and say destroyed Delhi and mumbai, it gives Indian forces free license to use disproportionate fire power to subdue, kill any opposition that comes in its way and together with local sympathetic forces, help them break away from the current republic of Pakistan as it stands. It should install regimes inimical to it and act as guarantor of future security. This means cities like Karachi, Hyderabad, Quetta cannot be nuked as it has people ready to break away from Pakistan and Indian forces will eventually be there. Again any opposition can be brutally suppressed as we have already suffered population losses due to Paki strike.

Military Objective.

Complete destruction of Paksitans war fighting capabilities. We capture/destroy their air assets and naval assets. With the break up of Sindh and Balocbistan, these assets can be provided to the new states under Indian protection.

There is the china factor in all this India clearly has to use the nuclear first strike threat against china for any interference and since we have already suffered a nuclear strike, it will not be prudent for china to interfere as it will have more to lose than India.

India retaliating in a "glass making" contest in a tit for tat attack will not help long term goals. We can kill those against us with guns and with all the brutality without bothering about human rights as we have already suffered population losses.

An Indian response to Paki nuke attack really does not have to be nuclear.

Sir earning a moral sympathy to strike after bearing a nuke (i believe it takes too much for a country to restrain itself).

What i understood from ur concept is that if India does not retaliate with nukes and instead India goes for conventional war that would save remaining states from nuclear bombardment as well as we can achieve goals with conventional force.

++I assume that u believe pakistan will be morally guilty hence they will restrain further from using remaining nukes....

( we are kuffurs for them lol why do you think that....)

There immediate action will be to spear head us to divide like Bangladesh .

If we dont use immediately nukes, worldpowers will involve and lost that opportunity to wipe pakis of the map. Instead we will be stuck at ceasfire where ever we are stuck.

No world power will pressure pakis or go to war with mad dog...

So they will try to convince us to stop.

And whoever the pm is at that time will be worst jewharlal nehru in Indian history.

Only answer is speed up overt and covert war. Use the paki trusted proxy with dirty bomb on china. We can watch the movie... sorry

 

[porky_kicker]

India's stated nuclear doctrine is that it's "deterrent" is a no first use and for inflicting unacceptable damage in retaliatory strikes.

I have a different take on how India should respond to a Pakistani first strike.

India does not have to respond with nuclear weapons to a Pakistani nuke strike.

Pakistans doctrine calls for use of nuclear weapons when
1) it looses a major chunk of its territory.
2) it looses a major chunk of its armed forces
3) there is severe economic and political hardship caused by ways of blockade.

Consider an all out war between India and Pakistan. Considering the above, it's most likely to use nuclear weapons when Indian armed forces capture cities like Lahore, destroy a major portion of the Pakistani fighting force.

In this scenario, pakistan has lost already lost the war and our troops are already in control of a lot of Pakistani territory. We cannot nuke our own forces.

In the scenario that Paksitan goes in for a first strike without any provocation or way below its threshold, India should still not retaliate with nuclear weapons.

India should come out with political and military goals for the next war which is likely to happen in the future.

Political goals.

India has to dismember Pakistan. We know of Sindh, Baloch, Pakhtun and Balwaristan movements.

If Pakistan has already gone nuclear and say destroyed Delhi and mumbai, it gives Indian forces free license to use disproportionate fire power to subdue, kill any opposition that comes in its way and together with local sympathetic forces, help them break away from the current republic of Pakistan as it stands. It should install regimes inimical to it and act as guarantor of future security. This means cities like Karachi, Hyderabad, Quetta cannot be nuked as it has people ready to break away from Pakistan and Indian forces will eventually be there. Again any opposition can be brutally suppressed as we have already suffered population losses due to Paki strike.

Military Objective.

Complete destruction of Paksitans war fighting capabilities. We capture/destroy their air assets and naval assets. With the break up of Sindh and Balocbistan, these assets can be provided to the new states under Indian protection.

There is the china factor in all this India clearly has to use the nuclear first strike threat against china for any interference and since we have already suffered a nuclear strike, it will not be prudent for china to interfere as it will have more to lose than India.

India retaliating in a "glass making" contest in a tit for tat attack will not help long term goals. We can kill those against us with guns and with all the brutality without bothering about human rights as we have already suffered population losses.

An Indian response to Paki nuke attack really does not have to be nuclear.

respectfully i disagree

Consider an all out war between India and Pakistan. Considering the above, it's most likely to use nuclear weapons when Indian armed forces capture cities like Lahore, destroy a major portion of the Pakistani fighting force.

as strong as powerful Indian army might be i don't think it will be easy capturing cities like Lahore etc.actually it would be foolhardy to even think of it.

why ?

given the highly effective modern day asymmetrical war-fighting techniques , a conventional military thrust into a major urban area will be suicidal which i don't think the Indian army would attempt to do in the first place.
it would end up in a Stalingrad like situation something which would be advantageous to porky military a to would slow down Indian army thrust and tie down its resources.
local civilians hidden inside buildings and armed with ATGMs, RPGs, mines, IEDs etc would make mince meat of our ingress-sing Armour and troops quite easily within the cities urban zone , forget the regular porky troops.

how long would it take to sanitize a major city with all the inhabitants hostile weeks, months, years ?
what military purpose it would serve in the longer run and at what cost?

me thinks the Indian army will simply cut off and mine the entry and exit routes leading into a city and deploy a few long distance firepower to keep porky elements contained and subdued until the overall final military objectives regarding porkistan are met, all this while the main force would proceed to its next military objective.

also it is highly possible Indian military columns would not engage civilian population in large urban centers. This to keep a moral pressure on porkistan to keep fighting a conventional war despite having non-conventional capability ( a sort of fake incentive maybe ), simply said Indian army would out flank heavily guarded cities like Lahore, Sialkot , Islamabad etc.

also the main objective of Indian army will be to destroy the military command and control infrastructure as quickly as possible in a blitzkrieg type operation.

In this scenario, pakistan has lost already lost the war and our troops are already in control of a lot of Pakistani territory. We cannot nuke our own forces.

the scenario is highly unlikely
if you look at the map of porkistan you will realize many of its cities , military bases are close to within 100-150 km of Indian border, especially the Ravi-Chenab corridor Reti- Rahim yar Khan-Kashmir corridor through which our military units might roll down towards their objective.

unfortunately the linear geography and shallow depth of porkistan allows them to concentrate and maneuver their troops at their place of choosing with relative ease . and not to forget porky army has its own operational doctrine of offensive defense

recent news/photos revealed that Rahwali Cantonment near Gujranwala in porkistan has TNW armed nasr missile TELs , this cantonment is barely 70 km from international boundary , the moment Indian army threatens this base chances are it will get hit by TNWs, and unfortunately this will happen when Indian army is still not in possession of even 5-10 % of porky landmass as i said before porky bases and cities are relately close to international border which means the moment Indian army threatens one them them it will get hit my TNW.
at times of war command and control of porky nuclear assets will be in the hands of relatively junior officers who are lets say MAD in their hatred towards India , it is their driving force.

me thinks Indian army would strive for shallow territorial gains by invading at-most 50-70 km deep inside porkistan, while steering clear of the heavily guarded cities, bases etc
the porky military bases would be subjected to decapitating strikes from air in order to take out their offensive equipment's , but again 100% success is not guaranteed which unfortunately would lead to a enemy counter strike against us via TNWs.

so i fail to see how India will occupy large portions of porkistan without getting hit by TNWs , even one will cause considerable damage and bring second thoughts into the minds of the commanders and not so say anything about the impact on the moral of the army as a whole.

one single TNW strike will take out anywhere between 100- 200 tanks depending on their concentration , 5000-8000 troops depending on their concentration . are we ready to sacrifice them ?
and can our nuclear restrain prevent repetitive multiple TNW strikes from the porkis ?
i dont think so

international pressure will mount and if we don't do a retaliatory strike by then we will end up with 1000 times more body bags of dead Indian soldiers than the porkies.

India has to dismember Pakistan. We know of Sindh, Baloch, Pakhtun and Balwaristan movements.

If Pakistan has already gone nuclear and say destroyed Delhi and mumbai, it gives Indian forces free license to use disproportionate fire power to subdue, kill any opposition that comes in its way and together with local sympathetic forces, help them break away from the current republic of Pakistan as it stands. It should install regimes inimical to it and act as guarantor of future security. This means cities like Karachi, Hyderabad, Quetta cannot be nuked as it has people ready to break away from Pakistan and Indian forces will eventually be there. Again any opposition can be brutally suppressed as we have already suffered population losses due to Paki strike.

lol
balkanization is never a good idea , religious ideology is the root cause of porkistan hatred towards us.
will balkanization stop that ?
history is full of examples

even after break up majority of them will find excuses to continue hurting us because their mental makeup will remain same ,their twisted concept of religious interpretations will not go out even in 100 years .

Indians residing in other parts of the country will do good to be reminded of something like the PEACEFUL demographic attacks from Bangladesh as witnessed in north east India after 1971 war till now . you have to live in north east to understand the serious implications of demographic attack.
after what we did for Bangladesh how many of them like India? 10% 20% 30% not more.


also the human lives lost to nuclear strikes on delhi and mumbai will be 10000 times more, than those killed by Indian forces using disproportionate conventional fire power , it will take 6 months or 1 years or 2 years provided we dont run out of ammo or money to cause even a fraction of the damage .
also will the international community take that standing down?

you said Karachi, Hyderabad, Quetta cannot be nuked as its people are ready to break away from Pakistan.
how many of them 5% 10% 30% franly nobody will ever know

if u look at the demographic distribution of the various metro cities (used the word metro for a reason) people are living there from all over the place .


also if Sindh, Baloch, Pakhtun and Balwaristan etc are so friendly to us that because of them we are ready to destroy our cities.

THEN MY MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION IS WHO THE HECK ARE WE FIGHTING AGAINST?
(by this logic 50 percent of porkistan is friendly to us then)

remember prithvi raj and his 13 times stupidity
compare it to modern India and its 4 times stupidity
and i am counting.......................

the wise say HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF and maybe the porkies know this...........

my idea of dealing with porkistan is that the first time we are hit with TNWs , carpet nuke porkistan to take out 80% of their population and then balkanize all you want.
believe me whole humanity in the future will thank us for that


lol it will be a shame to get banned for this

 

[rock127]

Whether we Nuke back Pakis or not but few things HAVE to be done in any case Pakis nukes India:-

1. Taking back POK and connecting India to Russia by CIS nations through land.
   
2. Breaking Pakistan into few pieces for SURE ie. the punishment for using nuke against India.India can be connected to Middle East by Balochistan-Iran by road/train/pipelines.
   
3. Truncating the armed forces of Pakis including full annihilation of their Navy in sea.
4. Destroying the Military Infra of Pakis(specially Rawalpini+Punjab) thus no capability to fight a war ever.
5. At the same time giving more Military infra to Afganistan so they can take back land beyond that Durand Line and make Greater Afganistan.Afgans are sick and tired of Pakis since Pakis destroyed Afganistan,

I guess some foreign powers would have a strategic importance here and would assist/oppose India as well. I guess at least Russia would like to take sweet revenge(USSR Afgan war defeat) and return back some favor to Pakis.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Where were pak nukes when their asses were getting kicked in kargil?? With ass clown General Musharraf in command . He made a lot of nuclear threats after his ass kicking but couldn't do shit in kargil. One 4-10 warhead MIRV missle launched at Karachi or Islamabad will erase all of pak and China's nuclear dreams.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[no smoking]

Nuclear weapons have not stopped any war so far. Your statement is fundamentally illogical.

Name me one war fought between 2 nuclear powers.

If you think nuclear weapons have given Pakistan a license to create sabotage in India, think again.

According to Indians, Pakistan has been sabotaging India since 1971, why doesn't India make another 71 invasion?

The result will be bad for both Pakistan and China. The communist party is near its death. I take your boast in stride.
Your country's criminality is remarkable. This is all I can say.

Of course, that is all you can say.

 

[garg_bharat]

Name me one war fought between 2 nuclear powers.

There has to be a significant reason to fight a nuclear war. Such wars do not occur everyday. However there is no dearth of "war".

According to Indians, Pakistan has been sabotaging India since 1971, why doesn't India make another 71 invasion?

What BS. I can expect such statement from a Chinese only.
I read Pakistani English media daily. Do not pay attention to politics but the strategic analysts.

India has always bought the American line of keeping a stable Pakistan.

 

[rock127]

Name me one war fought between 2 nuclear powers.
According to Indians, Pakistan has been sabotaging India since 1971, why doesn't India make another 71 invasion?

Of course, that is all you can say.

According to YOU in 1971, India simply went inside Pakistan and started a war unilaterally just to teach pakistan a lesson. Is that what your Communist regime teaches you in China?

Anyway 80,000+ Pakis are dead in last 10 years and their kids gets slaughtered in hundreds.

Pakis are getting fruits of starting the terrorism since it's own house is on fire and now they are even cutting HAN Chinese like pigs with knives/machetes.Poor China admitted that Pakistan is behind those West China Islamic terrorism.I guess Han Chinese don't mind few thousands of Han Chinese cut open in streets by Pakis in view of larger interest.Remember unlike US you share border with that terrorist country and you would experience real terrorism on homesoil.

China blames terrorists trained in Pakistan for violence

China blames Pakistan-trained militants for attack

Xinjiang unrest: China blames unrest on Pakistan-trained terrorists

China says 28 foreign-led 'terrorists' killed after attack on mine

 

[Indx TechStyle]

According to Indians, Pakistan has been sabotaging India since 1971, why doesn't India make another 71 invasion?

P5.
P5 will surely create hurdles in our path. Specially, US and PRC.

 

[sayareakd]

According to Indians, Pakistan has been sabotaging India since 1971, why doesn't India make another 71 invasion?
.

In 1971 PAF first attack from Western Pakistan, only then war started.

 

[no smoking]

According to YOU in 1971, India simply went inside Pakistan and started a war unilaterally just to teach pakistan a lesson. Is that what your Communist regime teaches you in China?

Anyway 80,000+ Pakis are dead in last 10 years and their kids gets slaughtered in hundreds.

Pakis are getting fruits of starting the terrorism since it's own house is on fire and now they are even cutting HAN Chinese like pigs with knives/machetes.Poor China admitted that Pakistan is behind those West China Islamic terrorism.I guess Han Chinese don't mind few thousands of Han Chinese cut open in streets by Pakis in view of larger interest.Remember unlike US you share border with that terrorist country and you would experience real terrorism on homesoil.

China blames terrorists trained in Pakistan for violence

China blames Pakistan-trained militants for attack

Xinjiang unrest: China blames unrest on Pakistan-trained terrorists

China says 28 foreign-led 'terrorists' killed after attack on mine

Better read what the context is.
The link provided by you said:" Terrorists trained in Pakistan" not "Pakistan trained", there is a big difference here.

 

[rock127]

Better read what the context is.
The link provided by you said:" Terrorists trained in Pakistan" not "Pakistan trained", there is a big difference here.

Doesn't matter in any case since it PROVES that Pakistan has Terror training camps and it can NEVER happen having backing from ISI.The fact is that China suffers from Paki terror as well and HAN CHINESE are butchered like pigs by same Pakistan trained or trained in Pakistan.

Better come with some logical reply instead of a ridiculous logic.You seems to have issues in understanding English/Logic and you HAN Chinese claim to be having high IQ.

Understand simple LOGIC... what happens inside Pakistan is NOT the responsibility of Argentina or Brazil but Pakistan is FULLY responsible for it as most of the terror attacks are traced back to Pakistan the Terrorist nation.