Indian response to a Pakistani nuclear strike

[no smoking]

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".

Don't you agree that "significant reason" is the massive consequence of a "potential nuclear war"?

Yes, there is no death of "war". But every nuclear power shows great self-control in the confrontation with another nuclear power.

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.

Then, can you please tell why India hasn't done another 71 war while you guys have been accuse Pakistan for the terrorism activities within India?

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

That is BS.
When you pull your neighbour into an arm race, you are definitely not aiming to keep her stable.

 

[no smoking]

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

So, India responded in 1971.
But since then, based on India claim, Pakistan has been sabotage India all the time, where is the your response?

When 911 happened, Americans started a war;
When Vietnam started shooting on the border, Chinese started a war;
When Georgia started killing her pro-Russia citizens, Russians started a war;

What makes India so calm? Pakistan's pathetic conventional force? or Pakistan's nuclear force?

 

[no smoking]

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.

Well, maybe it is news to some Indians here: Pakistan government is 100% controlling every single part of her country.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...kistan-is-on-the-verge-of-new-civil-war-.html

http://www.dawn.com/news/1112032

 

[garg_bharat]

Don't you agree that "significant reason" is the massive consequence of a "potential nuclear war"?

Yes, there is no death of "war". But every nuclear power shows great self-control in the confrontation with another nuclear power.

If Pakistan has no nuclear weapons, the chances of war actually reduce. The nuclear umbrella is a cover for terrorism.

Why India has not gone to war?

Yours is a meaningless question, as the answer is so obvious. The driving force in the subcontinent is not China but USA. I would say USA has kept the peace.

Now the ability of USA to keep the peace is threatened due to an overactive China.

 

[garg_bharat]

But since then, based on India claim, Pakistan has been sabotage India all the time, where is the your response?

When 911 happened, Americans started a war;
When Vietnam started shooting on the border, Chinese started a war;
When Georgia started killing her pro-Russia citizens, Russians started a war;

Americans started war with who? Iraqi and Afghani - both who did not fly the planes.
China started a war with Vietnam - we know very little about it and I would not comment.
Russia starting a war is also different. Russia can as it maintains a nuclear force that matches USA.

India was never in great power game. Some comments on a message board is not equal to official policy.
India being a democracy does not have "a government sanctioned line" on major issues. Different voices come from different sections of politics and society.

Indian society is fundamentally different from Chinese society. Any Chinese will fail to understand India due to cultural differences.

India is continually taking steps to counter the sabotage. These steps have been below the level of a war so far; which is a result of diplomacy. China is very weak in diplomacy. Chinese are very crude showy people.

 

[sasum]

A very good straight talking write-up published in First Post
http://m.firstpost.com/world/ten-be...to-successfully-counter-pakistan-2751566.html

 

[garg_bharat]

A very good straight talking write-up published in First Post
http://m.firstpost.com/world/ten-be...to-successfully-counter-pakistan-2751566.html

Nothing new in the post. This has been discussed ad nauseum before.

Both India and Pakistan have been poor countries. The options have been rather limited.

It is always a question of how you want to use your resources.

A war with Pakistan is useful if it results in a solution to the problem. The solution in this case is ONLY elimination of Pakistani State. India does not have military resources to accomplish that.

Also all commentators forget that Congress party approved the partition of India. It is very difficult politically for Congress to go against it. Once you accept the legitimacy of Pakistan; a war to destroy it is very difficult to sell.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Well, maybe it is news to some Indians here: Pakistan government is 100% controlling every single part of her country.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...kistan-is-on-the-verge-of-new-civil-war-.html

http://www.dawn.com/news/1112032

One source is Arabian, other one is pakistani.

 

[garg_bharat]

One source is Arabian, other one is pakistani.

You cannot convince a person who lives in lala land.
The Chinese under Xi are in a massive power grab. The ambition clouds the vision, as they say.

For all Indians - be very mindful of Chinese moves.
And only "conventional" power can stop China from encroaching on India. The nuke proponents are wrong.

We need massive increase in artillery and modern tanks, fighter aircrafts, sub hunting ships, mine counter-measures ships.

 

[sasum]

Don't you agree that "significant reason" is the massive consequence of a "potential nuclear war"?

Yes, there is no death of "war". But every nuclear power shows great self-control in the confrontation with another nuclear power.



Then, can you please tell why India hasn't done another 71 war while you guys have been accuse Pakistan for the terrorism activities within India?



That is BS.
When you pull your neighbour into an arm race, you are definitely not aiming to keep her stable.

Actually most people are ignorant about the consequences of radioactive fall-out. It can stretch to many generations amongst species. In Japan there are deformed people in present times whose grand fathers/ mothers were victims of severe Gamma radiation during WW II. In Chernobyl even now flowers are blossoming in a crooked way. Here in Delhi horrific photos are kept in USIS, unfortunately they don't allow scan/ copy.

 

[3deffect]

Actually most people are ignorant about the consequences of radioactive fall-out. It can stretch to many generations amongst species. In Japan there are deformed people in present times whose grand fathers/ mothers were victims of severe Gamma radiation during WW II. In Chernobyl even now flowers are blossoming in a crooked way. Here in Delhi horrific photos are kept in USIS, unfortunately they don't allow scan/ copy.

after launch nuclear there is lot Sanctions by US..if pak or china do that they both sabotage ..china may be suspended from UN.. (may be this happen all) but Nuclear war is not future...

 

[Kshatriya87]

Pak Nuclear Scientists And Their Anti-India Ideology

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/how-india-obsession-drives-paks-nuclear-programme-1403404



Pak Nuclear Scientists And Their Anti-India Ideology
All India | NDTV | Updated: May 10, 2016 08:46 IST

1COMMENTS

Husain Haqqani's latest book, India vs Pakistan, is exclusively available on the Juggernaut app

Husain Haqqani is director for South and Central Asia at the Hudson Institute in Washington DC. He served as Pakistan's ambassador to the US from 2008 to 2011.

Pakistan has become the world's only nuclear weapon power (excluding possibly North Korea) that abjures committing to a 'no first use' policy about weapons of mass destruction. Pakistan is also the only country in the world that publicly says that its nukes exist solely for defence against a specific country - India.

As recently as March 2016, Pakistan's foreign affairs adviser, Sartaj Aziz, said that 'India, not terrorism, is the biggest threat to the region' and asked India to reduce its nuclear stockpile so that Pakistan can consider reciprocation. The claim of India being the biggest threat seemed hollow, given that 40,000 Pakistanis have reportedly been killed or injured at the hands of terrorists. Pakistan's economy, its international relations and the ability of its citizens to travel abroad with ease have all suffered because of it. Still Sartaj Aziz insisted that India imperiled Pakistan more than terrorism. He reflects Pakistan's fixation with India, which US President George W. Bush once described as an 'obsession'.

Aziz said that Pakistan's nuclear arsenal was a major deterrent against India, and 'If they increase the stockpile, we cannot reduce ours.' This stance - that one country's nuclear posture is tied solely to that of another - differs from that of all other major nuclear-armed powers. When the United States first developed nuclear weapons, and the Soviet Union, Britain, France and China followed suit, they did so on the grounds of pursuing a global security role. The US dropped atomic bombs on Japan to end the Second World War long before it was concerned about the Soviet Union.

India's nuclear programme also originated not out of a regional rivalry, but from the argument that nonproliferation should be global. Either no one should have weapons of mass destruction or everyone has the right to have them. Pakistan's nuclear programme, on the other hand, is about contention with India. Pakistan developed, and continues to develop, nuclear bombs as a direct response to India, nothing more and nothing else.

Initially, India was a strong advocate of global elimination of nuclear weapons. Under Nehru, nuclear energy for civilian purposes was declared desirable but nuclear weapons were not. Still, India did not give up on a nuclear weapons option, to make the point about the equal right of all nations to do what the superpowers did. Defeat in the Sino-Indian war of 1962 and the Chinese nuclear test of 1964 led to a drastic change in India's direction. India refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), as did Pakistan, and work started on India's nuclear weapons. In 1974 India conducted its first nuclear tests. Unlike India, Pakistan did not relate its refusal to adhere to the NPT to the prospect of global nuclear apartheid. Pakistan's position was, and remains to this day, that its nuclear posture will be based on responding to 'the Indian threat'. For years, Pakistani officials declared that Pakistan would join the nuclear restraint regimes the day India does the same.

Moreover, contrary to a widely held belief, Pakistan did not start working on building nuclear weapons only after India's 1974 tests. Bhutto reportedly assembled nuclear scientists at Multan in January 1972, not even one month after Pakistan's humiliating military defeat in Bangladesh, and called upon them to chart a quick path to nuclear weapons status. 'We will eat grass,' Bhutto famously remarked about Pakistan having an atomic bomb, 'but we will get one of our own. We have no other choice.' Pursuit of the bomb, then, was about restoring Pakistan's wounded pride and preventing military humiliation like the one at Dhaka, and not just about keeping up with a nuclear India.

Feroz Hassan Khan, who served in the Pakistan army's nuclear Strategic Plans Division, has written the definitive book on how and why Pakistan made the bomb. The book is aptly titled Eating Grass: The Making of the Pakistani Bomb. 'Pakistani senior officials tapped into the genius of young scientists and engineers and molded them into a motivated cadre of weaponeers,' he wrote proudly, adding that nuclear developments were interwoven with 'the broad narrative of Pakistani nationalism'. Thus, Pakistan's nukes have 'evolved into the most significant symbol of national determination and a central element of Pakistan's identity'. They reflect 'Pakistan's enduring rivalry and strategic competition with India'.

Unlike scientists in most countries, who avoid politics, several Pakistani nuclear scientists became active proponents of Islamist and anti-Indian state ideology. The most prominent among them was Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, a metallurgist who advanced Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme by bringing with him (some would say stealing) designs and specifications from the Dutch uranium enrichment plant where he worked in the early 1970s. A.Q. Khan, as he became known, also headed the procurement network that enabled Pakistan to covertly acquire equipment for its nuclear facilities from all over the world. After helping build Pakistan's bomb, A.Q. Khan went on to sell the designs and material for nukes to Libya, Iran and North Korea, claiming in a 2004 televised confession that he did so only for personal financial gain and not as Pakistani state policy. That somewhat implausible claim helped protect Pakistan from international sanctions for nuclear proliferation to regimes considered dangerous by most of the world.

A.Q. Khan had an exaggerated sense of self and loved publicity. I met him in 1996 in my capacity as adviser to Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto at a time A.Q. Khan wanted Pakistan's highest civilian award, Nishan-e-Pakistan, which he was awarded that August. He told me that Pakistanis had not honoured him enough, given the fact that he had ensured Pakistan's survival forever. In any other country, A.Q. Khan felt, he would have been elevated to the presidency for life in addition to being considered the country's protecting angel. He lit up whenever someone referred to him as 'Mohsin-e-Pakistan' (Benefactor of Pakistan) and wondered why that title could not be conferred on him formally by Pakistan's parliament.

In his many interviews and sponsored biographies, A.Q. Khan told the story of how he reacted to Pakistan's defeat in the 1971 war, met Zulfi kar Ali Bhutto and offered to share technology he was working on in the Netherlands that would help Pakistan become a nuclear weapons power. Fear and hatred for India was his sole motivation though later he became vehemently anti-American, too, because of US opposition to Pakistan's nuclear ambitions.

 

[sayareakd]

So, India responded in 1971.
But since then, based on India claim, Pakistan has been sabotage India all the time, where is the your response?

When 911 happened, Americans started a war;
When Vietnam started shooting on the border, Chinese started a war;
When Georgia started killing her pro-Russia citizens, Russians started a war;

What makes India so calm? Pakistan's pathetic conventional force? or Pakistan's nuclear force?

Our sanity is whats keeping peace in the region or else, except for China no one is going to shed tear for Pakistan and no one is going to miss it.

 

[Kshatriya87]

When 911 happened, Americans started a war;

Afghanistan does not have Nukes.

When Vietnam started shooting on the border, Chinese started a war;

Vietnam does not have Nukes.

When Georgia started killing her pro-Russia citizens, Russians started a war;

Georgia does not have Nukes.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Afghanistan does not have Nukes.



Vietnam does not have Nukes.



Georgia does not have Nukes.

They do not have uncle Sams. pak has China.

 

[Yodha]

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.

Sir, do we have the necessary logistic support and information tech to detect a nuke attack and retaliate before the enemy detects that there will be a retaliation and goes for full scale nuke war after their first strike?

Sent from my XT1022 using Tapatalk

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Sir, do we have the necessary logistic support and information tech to detect a nuke attack and retaliate before the enemy detects that there will be a retaliation and goes for full scale nuke war after their first strike?

Sent from my XT1022 using Tapatalk

Yes, we have capability to detect missiles just after launch.
For stopping or retailiation, it depends over the how advanced is that attacking country.

 

[adrenalin]

Yes, we have capability to detect missiles just after launch.
For stopping or retailiation, it depends over the how advanced is that attacking country.

we can detect, yes. but time is needed to mate warhead and missile. have to absorb first strike. then go for kill.

but india has spy saittelight, so if it can be use to track paki nuke location and intelligence says that paki mating warhead wid missile, then we can go for conventional strike with brahmos and nirbhay and agni (non nuke warhead) and destroy those nukes before launch, but pakiland will become radioactve, lolol

texstyle, why ur id is like laungerie company name?

 

[sayareakd]

Sir, do we have the necessary logistic support and information tech to detect a nuke attack and retaliate before the enemy detects that there will be a retaliation and goes for full scale nuke war after their first strike?

Sent from my XT1022 using Tapatalk

Our weaponised nuclear tests took place in 1998, that time i was young, now in next two years it will be 20 years to our weaponised nuclear test, just imagine how much we have travel. Both in tech and infrastructure and support systems.

We had nuclear radation dectators, hand held and on helicopters in 1998, even tanks and bmp had NCB protection and even now they have.

About giving response earlier, we had ladder escalation system, after all three wings (BARC with core, DRDO with nuke triggers and SFC with delivery and rest of systems) comes together and matted it with delivery platform. Earlier system was suppose to give response in few days.

Now new system which earlier DRDO chief said we are working to respond in few hours or within hour. A5 Cannister version and K series with matted nukes point to this new system. Btw our new radars can look and track more then 600 kms radius or more to football size target.

Best part, few key cities got some sort of missile defence that has forced Pakistanis to change their nuke doctrine from minimum credible to all spectrum deteriance.

Means they will be bankrupt at faster rate.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

we can detect, yes. but time is needed to mate warhead and missile. have to absorb first strike. then go for kill.

but india has spy saittelight, so if it can be use to track paki nuke location and intelligence says that paki mating warhead wid missile, then we can go for conventional strike with brahmos and nirbhay and agni (non nuke warhead) and destroy those nukes before launch, but pakiland will become radioactve, lolol

texstyle, why ur id is like laungerie company name?

Okay.
But
R.I.P. English.