The Problem with Pakistan is not nukes but its refugees in war

[hit&run]

They will keep making nukes. Don't know the logic behind it. It probably stems from the fact that they are unreliable and want numbers to make sure some go off. The other reason is the fear of US takeover. So keep making more and more that cannot be secured by the US.


I don't think Pak has given up on anything. US may well sanction Pak. It will only increase its belligerence.

They are making for China.

 

[Vishwarupa]

They are making for China.

Nah...they are making it to finish Israel & US

 

[A chauhan]

They are making for China.

They are making Islamic bombs to be used against any Non-Islamic state for blackmailing purposes, deterrence means "Blackmailing" in Pakistani context.

 

[Blackwater]

well weather its war or peace refuge is always there in Pakistan

either its afgan refugee or sailab wale refugee

 

[Decklander]

We will create another sailab like last one this year in Pakistan. pls note my words and remember them when it happens around Aug/Sep this year.

 

[Yusuf]

read the link again
the present cold start is replica of Sundarjì doctrine with few modifications

And sundarji doctrine came post 1987 and not 1947 like you said.
Cold start is opposite of SundarjI doctrine which called for massive thrust and breaking up of Pak. Cold start calls for shallow ingress. But yes, we can switch between the two doctrines any time.

 

[sesha_maruthi27]

They will keep making nukes. Don't know the logic behind it. It probably stems from the fact that they are unreliable and want numbers to make sure some go off. The other reason is the fear of US takeover. So keep making more and more that cannot be secured by the US.


I don't think Pak has given up on anything. US may well sanction Pak. It will only increase its belligerence.

Like the 100 walas we buy for DIWALI, even though it says that there are 100, there are only 90 of them and in that 90 hardly 50 explode and others are just duds. Think this is the case here with our neighbors......

 

[Tolaha]

what is your definition of being scared?

My definition
zia warned India in 1987 of not even dare to cross an inch into Pakistan and since than Indian soldier remain 500m even under there territory across loc

my suspected definition of your word scared

*keep on crossing loc each month.do offensive battles like kargil while if your concern about Indian csd your scared than

remember that the day Pakistani has taken any threat serious from Some of Indian origin Pakistan automatically will cease to exist

So are you claiming that all those Pakistani Army reports of cease fire violations, cross border firings and killings by the Indian Army are just BS?

just recently a false news which you had taken seriously claims that if the delivery system was ready(we had no shaheen series solid fuel missile back than) Pakistan would have used nukes than

and the later is propaganda

So says Musharaff! Incompetency is a criteria for generals to lead Pakistan!

2001–2002 India–Pakistan standoff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Because of planned csd India lost 1800 soldiers in India while pak just 34

The whole world knew that the young and brave abandoned in the snowy heights of Kargil were Pakistani soldiers. But not your country nor your army. A army that forsakes its own dead soldiers as Mujahideen and you expect the numbers coming from such an organisation to be believable? Pakistanis may not have any option but to believe in BS, but we do have!

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

i like sundarji doctrine better than cold start since it will break the gutteer of a nation called pakistan.may be if sundarji is alive he could get a noble prize in peace like obama got just by talking.

 

[Bhadra]

i do understand this very well
but Pakistan nuclear doctrine sum it All and is different

remember that Pakistan nuclear doctrine does include Minimum Credible Deterrence


our nukes are not just for BS deterrence purpose

Because i am fed up of the Indian delusions of superior armed forces and bla bla

while common sense should be used atleast Some time

please read my definition of being scared.remember the zia warning and India has taken it so seriously

in the end your or any other nuclear state nukes might be for show off purpose but we are spending 2.5BILLIONS not just for bs deterrence purpose.if it is than i would be happy if Pakistani nukes csd taken out

There is nothing new and responsible about Pak Nuclear doctrine..

Firstly it does not exist..

Secondly, it is nthing but Terrorism - Nuclear terrorism and balckmail. Not much different from that of North Korea.

This will also be wished internationally like Musharaf is being given a good bath nowadays...

 

[Bhadra]

@farhan

Pakistani nuclear Doctrine _ Prolifirate, sell and be rich

 

[t_co]

To hear people speak so casually of nuclear warfare (as if it something that could be 'won') is frightening.

Even if India did kill 50 million Pakistanis (and ended Pakistan as a state), what would India gain? 30 million dead, its 15 largest cities in flames and rubble, its GDP cut by a third, and massive famines killing another 100 million (see Helfand 2012)? India would instantly go from its current trajectory of growth to sub-Saharan conditions. Social and political views would harden to the point of fascism. Communal violence would erupt, killing even more people.

 

[Yusuf]

To hear people speak so casually of nuclear warfare (as if it something that could be 'won') is frightening.

Even if India did kill 50 million Pakistanis (and ended Pakistan as a state), what would India gain? 30 million dead, its 15 largest cities in flames and rubble, its GDP cut by a third, and massive famines killing another 100 million (see Helfand 2012)? India would instantly go from its current trajectory of growth to sub-Saharan conditions. Social and political views would harden to the point of fascism. Communal violence would erupt, killing even more people.

All talks of nuke war is by Pak only. If India as much as farts in its direction they talk about nukes. We have no intention to use our nukes. We understand deterrence. Pak thinks nuke bombs are like hand grenades which can be lobbed at will.

 

[Yusuf]

i like sundarji doctrine better than cold start since it will break the gutteer of a nation called pakistan.may be if sundarji is alive he could get a noble prize in peace like obama got just by talking.

Cold start can break up Pak taking advantage of te internal strife in Pak.

 

[t_co]

All talks of nuke war is by Pak only. If India as much as farts in its direction they talk about nukes. We have no intention to use our nukes. We understand deterrence. Pak thinks nuke bombs are like hand grenades which can be lobbed at will.

If that is the case, then India needs to figure out a way to work Pakistan off that cliff. Sure, from a moral perspective, it might be the onus of Pakistan to climb down the ladder by itself, but from a realist perspective, India is the neighbor with more at stake, and so, no matter how unfortunate it might be, India will have to start the positive cycle, so to speak.

Cold start can break up Pak taking advantage of te internal strife in Pak.

...sigh. So basically--if CSD fails, tons of blood is shed. If it succeeds, it might lead to nuclear war OR it would break up Pakistan, risking nukes landing into the hands of Taliban extremists (and which would probably blow it up in Mumbai harbor). This is the magical comprehensive strategy that is supposed to increase Indian national security? Does anyone not see the madness in such a plan?

The point of national security is not to kill the citizens of your opponents, but preserve the lives of your own. Getting a big stick works at doing this insofar as the other team is rational. If it's not, then you need to drop that and adopt a different approach, but the posters here seem to think that only getting a bigger stick will solve the problem. It won't.

 

[Yusuf]

If that is the case, then India needs to figure out a way to work Pakistan off that cliff. Sure, from a moral perspective, it might be the onus of Pakistan to climb down the ladder by itself, but from a realist perspective, India is the neighbor with more at stake, and so, no matter how unfortunate it might be, India will have to start the positive cycle, so to speak.



...sigh. So basically--if CSD fails, tons of blood is shed. If it succeeds, it might lead to nuclear war OR it would break up Pakistan, risking nukes landing into the hands of Taliban extremists (and which would probably blow it up in Mumbai harbor). This is the magical comprehensive strategy that is supposed to increase Indian national security? Does anyone not see the madness in such a plan?

The point of national security is not to kill the citizens of your opponents, but preserve the lives of your own. Getting a big stick works at doing this insofar as the other team is rational. If it's not, then you need to drop that and adopt a different approach, but the posters here seem to think that only getting a bigger stick will solve the problem. It won't.

Your first para basically asks us to deal with irrational people and basically surrender to their blackmail. They want to continue with terror in India without facing the consequences. You guys will soon feel te heat as well in East Turkestan.


CSD will not fail. It's aim is not to break up Pak. It's aim is to get Pak to the negotiating table on our terms. The break up of Pak will be due to its internal problems and that will not lead to any nuke exchange.

 

[SADAKHUSH]

I can't wait to see you guys to form the Central government and than reality will set in which will test whether all of you can walk the talk or it is just chest thumping on your keyboards. Has any one of you from both sides of the border done any life changing work for our own country men or women? If not than talking about firing up the nuclear bombs at each other is a thing that you should not be talking. Let us clean up our acts before dreaming of nuclear war. Calm down all of you "Do Nothing" types only talk.