Let us think the unthinkable. If India decides to go for a decisive war with Pakistan, what an be realistic outcomes.

[The Deterrent]

Most of those can be killed with conventional weapons more effectively. For example, a bunch of MKIs dropping 40+ SAAWs in a decapitation strike on an airbase.

Yeah but Pakistan does not have a bunch of MKIs with truck-loads of munitions, does it? That's exactly why Pakistan intends to to "substitute", where necessary.

All nuclear powers have tactical nukes. But it doesn't mean it's going to be especially useful, especially against the targets I'm specifically talking about.

Along-with usefulness, it also has a lot to do with having the response option. For example, if Pakistan uses TNW on the battlefield, and in response India SAAWs an airbase... its not exactly the same kind of a response.

Exactly why that list you created in your previous post is pointless.

For us, mobilisation is our red line. For you, you can make up all sorts of reasons to create an escalation ladder, but that's pointless.

It is pointless as long as you don't blink. The whole idea of deterrence circles around declaring your redlines and saying "Don't do it! Or I will...". But in the heat of the moment, either one party stands down or it goes all the way to the end. Put simply, its a staring contest.

Isn't it obvious? All terror attacks in India comes from Pakistan, so the onus is on us to escalate. The ball has more or less always been in India's court.

Or you can more specifically say that the conventional war ball is in India's court and the nuclear war ball is in Pakistan's court. Interestingly the IA wants the nuclear war ball to also move to India, with the removal of NFU (perhaps specifcally only for Pakistan).

No disagreement here.

Actually, it's all our fault. Nothing to do with Pakistan. Both in '02 and '08, the army was completely unprepared. No artillery, no air defence... Even the infantry was unprepared. The way I see it, Pak's strategy rests on hoping and praying that India doesn't escalate.

The main goal of the armed forces is to achieve overkill against Pakistan before any significant move is made. Whether that has been achieved or not only they know. But you have already seen how aggressive the IA has become over the last few years.

Like this one--
Will take action to reclaim PoK if ordered, says Army Chief General Naravane

No disagreement here either. Indian military and the SFC is trying its best to be able to put all options on the table.

You are simply talking in general instead of considering the specifics related to Pakistan and the possible treatment of Pakistanis in a post-war world where Pakistan as a single country has likely ceased to exist.

Why did the Iraqis run away instead of fighting the Americans, ask yourself that.

Iraqis did for the same reason PA surrendered in '71. There was simply no other option available. But since the '90s, Pakistani deep state has the option to take the region down with it if it came to that. Now I'm no Nostradamus who can predict whether they will definitely do, but as I said before, the capability, SOPs, intentions and therefore the options are there.

So far they have displayed escalation dominance in all the recent stand-offs.

If the PA actually cared about Pakistan itself, then they would have given up their administrative, religious and economic hold over Pakistan a long time ago, allowing Pakistan to become a rich country, and gain the effective means of stopping India conventionally.

Pakistani deep state cares about strategic instability with the resources that it has available today, thats all. If I elaborate it will spin off into another discussion so I'll stop here. Perhaps in some other thread.

Forget nukes, you should be worrying about whether the PA itself will actually fight the IA on the field. Nothing's stopping the top brass from running away to the ME, China and Europe within the small window before the IAF achieves air supremacy.

When people like you make these statements its not even funny anymore. It was exactly the same mindset that led India to Balakot, thinking that what are the Pakistanis gonna do, start a war? The same mindset that wants to "take" Pakistani Kashmir, and send forces to Afghanistan. Its the same thinking that made Pakistan commit such blunders in the past. I, for one, am very glad that rational minds are at the spearhead of the deep state today (although we could all benefit from a world where they weren't in charge and everything was hunky-dory).

Indian military brass needs to stop making the wrong assumptions about Pakistan.

I meant Pakistan is never going to use nukes on India, even if Pakistan is nearing annihilation in a conventional war.

Sir, as I said, I'm no Nostradamus. Perhaps you are, in which case I could use some info on what kind of assets should I invest in, in this decade.

If they are taking this risk, they are taking a massive risk. The enemy who has a declared policy of massive retaliation, the enemy who is working towards a shield against a limited strategic attack and more over an enemy who has NO Tactical nuclear weapons will find itself inclined to do a full scale nuclear attack there by crippling any chance of a counter attack by Pakistan. Essentially this stance of Pakistan hands over India a perfect excuse to nuke Pakistan out of existence. Its a risk which should not be taken.

Problem Pakistan and India face is that after a nuclear strike that kills few hundred soldiers, India will be forced to attack. This attack can only come in form of a strategic nuclear attack. ie India has NO other way but to escalate. Once India escalate, Pakistan WILL escalate. So, only option left with India is to go full scale. An unlikely option will be to NOT retaliate at all, something that is not going to happen because such a leadership will be shot dead by its own people. The fact that India refuses to deploy tactical nuclear weapons ensures that any use of TNW by Pakistan will ensure an escalation. And if it is escalation, India will be forced to go big in the first place due fear of a massive retaliation from Pakistan.

Perhaps you didn't read my post carefully, I'd suggest giving it another read. Not only Pakistan doesn't believes it, ex-Indian SFC also doesn't believes it. And India has developed and deployed TNWs, to be able to respond proportionally. Perhaps you'd trust the word of @Falcon more than mine.

 

[screambowl]

Because the Pakistani deep-state believes that the Indian doctrine of "massive retaliation" is flawed (as observed by the people whose voice matters in India as well, e.g. Nagal, Menon). And that when the time comes, the Indian NCA would find it extremely hard to justify a massive strike (which could kill millions) in response to a strike that killed hundreds at best, and that too uniformed personnel on Pakistani soil (for example)

Problem Pakistan and India face is that after a nuclear strike that kills few hundred soldiers, India will be forced to attack. This attack can only come in form of a strategic nuclear attack. ie India has NO other way but to escalate. Once India escalate, Pakistan WILL escalate. So, only option left with India is to go full scale.

You seems to be correct, and so the Pakistani assessment, because to save one pilot India had to stop the retaliatory air strike because he was son of an air marshal. Pakistanis seems to have taken this into account and surely have formulated new conventional strike policy. So talking about nuclear exchange their assessment got the stamp.

Pakistan now firmly believes that for this reason, India has unofficially abandoned the massive-strike doctrine. Which is true because during the last couple of years, India has developed and deployed TNWs of its own. The likely reason of not announcing this capability is that it would invite the same criticism on India that Pakistan often gets.

Isn't the new TNWs also for Chinese to make their second strike capability coming beyond 2000km from sea where IBG are present , like Andamans or Gwadar?

HOWEVER... NO ONE can predict what will definitely happen. The escalation could spiral out of control right after the first exchange. Its all about who decides to be rational or irrational in the heat of the moment. A good movie to watch on this kind of a topic is "The Sum of All Fears" (although it does not involve proper nuclear exchanges).

To my understanding a good manoevure would be to let them use TNW on their cities and retaliate with massive TNW strike. And call for de-escalation. It's just that we need to avoid taking any hit. They might shift to shaheens and which Indian BMD can tackle some how.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Pakistanis will be reading all this. And getting the ideas haha!

 

[randomradio]

Yeah but Pakistan does not have a bunch of MKIs with truck-loads of munitions, does it? That's exactly why Pakistan intends to to "substitute", where necessary.

You don't have truckload of nukes either. Take any airfield. The distance between 2 hangars if 150-200m. At best, 1 nuke can take out 4 or 5 hardened hangars out of a possible 20 or 30 or more such hangars. You need the ability to hit all hangars, which can either be done with a lot of nukes or obviously with enough conventional weapons. And Pakistan doesn't have a lot of nukes.

Along-with usefulness, it also has a lot to do with having the response option. For example, if Pakistan uses TNW on the battlefield, and in response India SAAWs an airbase... its not exactly the same kind of a response.

India's primary response to any type of nuclear attack will be massive. So this is a meaningless point to bring up.

If you are assuming India will use TNWs in retaliation to Pak using TNWs, I don't think that's how it's going to work.

It is pointless as long as you don't blink. The whole idea of deterrence circles around declaring your redlines and saying "Don't do it! Or I will...". But in the heat of the moment, either one party stands down or it goes all the way to the end. Put simply, its a staring contest.

Dunno what you mean in the context. A decision has to made rather quickly considering we now have SSBNs, so launches can happen within a short window.

Indian military and the SFC is trying its best to be able to put all options on the table.

All-out war is the last option. The previous decade we were simply not prepared for it. This decade could be different.

Iraqis did for the same reason PA surrendered in '71. There was simply no other option available. But since the '90s, Pakistani deep state has the option to take the region down with it if it came to that. Now I'm no Nostradamus who can predict whether they will definitely do, but as I said before, the capability, SOPs, intentions and therefore the options are there.

That's the point. The small number of nukes cannot bring the region down with it either. So all PA can do with nukes is put a small dent in India, and the result is the top brass will be globally hunted and any damage caused will be fixed within 10 years or so. The richer India becomes, the more resilient will India become in a nuclear confrontation.

So far they have displayed escalation dominance in all the recent stand-offs.

Who are you referring to? PA? Sadly for them, no. We have created no-man's land in many places along the LoC. In a lot of areas, the PA has not seen the LoC in a year.

Pakistani deep state cares about strategic instability with the resources that it has available today, thats all. If I elaborate it will spin off into another discussion so I'll stop here. Perhaps in some other thread.

The only point I'm making is PA is not in the game of defeating India in a war, whether conventional or nuclear.

My personal opinion is, the current PA exists only to buy time until certain people can leave Pakistan during all-out war. And if PA goes nuclear at this time, even these certain people will be hunted down, that's why PA won't use nukes at all.

When people like you make these statements its not even funny anymore. It was exactly the same mindset that led India to Balakot, thinking that what are the Pakistanis gonna do, start a war? The same mindset that wants to "take" Pakistani Kashmir, and send forces to Afghanistan. Its the same thinking that made Pakistan commit such blunders in the past. I, for one, am very glad that rational minds are at the spearhead of the deep state today (although we could all benefit from a world where they weren't in charge and everything was hunky-dory).

Pak's reaction to Balakot was expected and overestimated. Rather you can say that Pakistan's reaction was either to be nothing or more than what happened. And there were people very much counting on Pakistan to do much more than just the post-Balakot skirmish. According to Rawat, our escalation point went up to war.

Army was ready for conventional war with Pakistan after Balakot: Sources

Rather, it was Pakistan that did not expect India to retaliate the way we did after Pulwama.

Indian military brass needs to stop making the wrong assumptions about Pakistan.

Have you considered you are the one making wrong assumptions?

India is not bluffing after all.

One would assume India will want to deal with Pakistan long before China actually becomes a major military threat to India, possibly post 2035.

Sir, as I said, I'm no Nostradamus. Perhaps you are, in which case I could use some info on what kind of assets should I invest in, in this decade.

Make only short term investments in Pakistan. Mid term and long term... that's a huge risk. Do you want to risk a permanent demonetisation of Pakistan's currency?

 

[screambowl]

Rather, it was Pakistan that did not expect India to retaliate the way we did after Pulwama.

Pulwama happened on 14th Feb , India did Balakot on 26th Feb. Pakistanis retaliated within 24 hours. I am of an opinion that they were already on high alert and getting the intel inputs of possible Indian strike in Sindh or Punjab but not somewhere in Kashmir that too on a terror camp.

 

[Milspec]

For some reason, there is a widespread belief within both the serving and veteran community of the Indian military, that Pakistan will never dare to use nuclear weapons...and that nuclear weapons are only used for deterrence, not to fight actual wars. I have little clue as to where this belief stems from, but I would say that beliefs of similar nature within the Pakistani military led them to commit the blunder of '99.

The Belief stems from the most simple observation. Pakistani Military has never been on the losing side in a conflict. Every time it has had an altercation with whichever state, it's a stranglehold on the administration of Pakistan just has grown stronger. No matter what happens on the battlefield, Pakistani Military always wins in Islamabad.
The day it uses Nuclear Weapons it will lose, and a loss of such magnitude will be unacceptable to Pakistan Military.

And that is reinforced with what you dub as Blunder of 99, which consolidated power for a Military general for the next decade instead of court-martial. This is not new or unique we saw the same with General Tikka Khan, General Rao Farman Ali, FM Ayub, etc.

 

[Saaho]

And India has developed and deployed TNWs, to be able to respond proportionally.

Where is the evidence of that? Actually, the evidence is quite contrary to that.

Read this :

Pruthvik Shankar asked: Does India have tactical nuclear weapons? | Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses

A. Vinod Kumar replies: If the question was meant to ask whether India has the delivery capability for tactical nuclear weapons, the answer would be in the affirmative. The name of the missile system is Prahaar, which is supposedly being developed to carry conventional as well as nuclear warheads for battlefield or tactical use. The range of this system is believed to be 150-300 km. While various reports indicate Prahaar's development since 2011, former Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) chief, Dr. V.K. Saraswat, had confirmed its ongoing development in a presentation delivered at IDSA in February 2017. He, however, refused to confirm whether it will be a tactical nuclear delivery capability like, or as a response to, Pakistan's Nasr system. It seems the Indian security establishment is not currently considering any projection of a tactical nuclear capability. This could be owing to the fact that India had refused to endorse the space for a 'tactical nuclear war-fighting theatre', and had instead postured for a massive response to any nuclear use against its forces or territory.

 

[Saaho]

ex-Indian SFC also doesn't believes it.

Which ex-SFC? BS Nagal?

His position is actually different :

India's nuclear doctrine: The fog lifts

He fears that political leadership may not show resolve but he favours FULL implementation of massive retaliation. In absence of any tactical nuclear weapons, political leadership will be left with no other option and that a good thing. BTW, this was his position in 2014 and before. India was ruled by morons who would have not chosen to commit. If the war happens right now, India will commit fully because political leadership has no political crisis at hand to mitigate.

Second, Nagal argues that India's commitment to 'massive' retaliation (between 1999 and 2003, India had promised the milder 'punitive' retaliation) is problematic. Nagal says India's 'response to a few or one (Pakistani) tactical nuclear weapons should not be disproportionate which could result in an all-out nuclear war', and 'escalation control should be practiced in conventional and nuclear war on moral and humanitarian considerations. The strategy is not rational, (and) our political leadership may not show resolve during crisis or at the time of decision'.

This idea has been cropping up again and again in Indian debates: would India destroy Lahore if Pakistan merely destroyed one of India's tank columns? Disproportionate threats are hardly credible ones. Ultimately, however, like the former diplomat Shyam Saran did last year, Nagal doubles down on massive retaliation. He argues that it 'is the declared policy, and must be implemented. The nation has placed faith in political leadership and the leadership is expected to fulfil their responsibility. In case we vacillate on the issue or raise doubts about our commitment to the policy, we will send wrong signals to our adversary(s)'.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Where is the evidence of that? Actually, the evidence is quite contrary to that.

Read this :

Pruthvik Shankar asked: Does India have tactical nuclear weapons? | Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses

Actually, we almost certainly have minaturized nukes with sub-KT yield. However they are not meant for tactical strikes/counterstrikes and thus should be considered as part of strategic weapons.

SFC has always had a requirement for smaller weapons that can be deployed for precision strike in smaller, more accurate and more agile platforms, on targets which cannot not be serviced by BMs for a variety of reasons. A number of international and domestically sourced weapon platforms have been requisitioned by SFC as possible delivery vehicles for these minaturized nukes, with nearly all of them having payload less than 500Kg.

 

[vstol Jockey]

Where is the evidence of that? Actually, the evidence is quite contrary to that.

do you remember that we tested two sub kiloton devices in 1998. We all were told that it was to generate data for lab simulations. AND we all left it at that.

 

[Saaho]

do you remember that we tested two sub kiloton devices in 1998. We all were told that it was to generate data for lab simulations. AND we all left it at that.

And that was good. Development of TNW weakens our deterrence. It allows Pakistan space of a limited nuclear war which will allow them to invite foreign mediation.

 

[screambowl]

India's primary response to any type of nuclear attack will be massive. So this is a meaningless point to bring up.

If you are assuming India will use TNWs in retaliation to Pak using TNWs, I don't think that's how it's going to work.

The point was something else which me and @The Deterrent were already discussing. That is to manipulate Pakistanis to strike in a particular manner as of India's choice. Although it's very superficial and theoretical. If Indian soldiers are inside Pakistani territory they will conduct strike on them? They will conduct strike on Delhi.

They will use TNW for Indian soldiers inside their territory and for Delhi they have to choose a BM

For Delhi BMD are in place and in return India conducts similar strike not massive, as per the nuclear escalatory ladder. This gives India Chance to keep hold of the territory immediately after first TNW strike by Pakistan. And Delhi strike Islamabad with a BM.

This way India can avoid massive nuclear war. And still keep hold of Pakistani territory at other places.

 

[vstol Jockey]

And that was good. Development of TNW weakens our deterrence. It allows Pakistan space of a limited nuclear war which will allow them to invite foreign mediation.

small warheads are very good when you want to take out underground nuke facilities in a pre-emptive strike. Like the storage facilities of Pakistan. Indian NFU is very carefully worded. We do retain first strike option against nuke powered nations.

 

[_Anonymous_]

small warheads are very good when you want to take out underground nuke facilities in a pre-emptive strike. Like the storage facilities of Pakistan. Indian NFU is very carefully worded. We do retain first strike option against nuke powered nations.

The relationship between the English language & Pakistanis is mutually antagonistic, as you may have noted over a period of time.

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

Guys , LOC is Hot again

So if the conflict escalates
Let us see whose Predictions or Forecasts come true

 

[vstol Jockey]

Guys , LOC is Hot again

So if the conflict escalates
Let us see whose Predictions or Forecasts come true

please recollect my post from last year oct. I had posted that PA was baiting India to take over Neelum and Hajipir then. That would have created massive problems for our troops if we had taken the bait due to snowfall. Now snow is going to melt and this is the right time to take over Neelum valley and Hajipir as it will allow us to quickly consolidate and prepare the ground for Muzzafarabad.

 

[screambowl]

please recollect my post from last year oct. I had posted that PA was baiting India to take over Neelum and Hajipir then. That would have created massive problems for our troops if we had taken the bait due to snowfall. Now snow is going to melt and this is the right time to take over Neelum valley and Hajipir as it will allow us to quickly consolidate and prepare the ground for Muzzafarabad.

To my opinion. the LOC is hot because Trump is coming. Pakistanis want to raise the issue. Plus as you said snow is melting.

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

please recollect my post from last year oct. I had posted that PA was baiting India to take over Neelum and Hajipir then. That would have created massive problems for our troops if we had taken the bait due to snowfall. Now snow is going to melt and this is the right time to take over Neelum valley and Hajipir as it will allow us to quickly consolidate and prepare the ground for Muzzafarabad.

Just imagine the Earthquake when we
Announce that we have started taking back POK --- OR , Will it be the Enemy
Who will first disclose that they have lost
Territory and ask for Help from China and OIC

 

[Paro]

To my opinion. the LOC is hot because Trump is coming. Pakistanis want to raise the issue. Plus as you said snow is melting.

Im expecting a terror attack soon. Probably sometime next week.

 

[Saaho]

because to save one pilot India had to stop the retaliatory air strike because he was son of an air marshal.

India had already declared no further escalation on 26th. I guess Swargeeya Mrs Swaraaj said it that Indian operation is over. The mood was not to escalate and for a good reason. The entire operation was an intelligence led one. Even on 27th there as no objective left to achieve. The only part left was to retrieve our guy. Even if we had retaliated what would be the end result? The objective to show that India will strike deep inside Pakistan because of terrorist attacks in India was done. The entire Pakistan's nuclear story was falling apart -- as those weapons had not afforded Pakistan any immunity from Indian escalation. There was no plan to annex PoKashmir, then why retaliate when there was no major loss? The biggest loss was due to malfunction/incompetence of our own air defense system.

 

[screambowl]

Swargeeya Mrs Swaraaj said it that Indian operation is over

with all due respect, Late Srimati Sushma Swaraj had become a liability in case of Pakistan China and India diplomatic sphere when it came to military objectives.

The entire Pakistan's nuclear story was falling apart -- as those weapons had not afforded Pakistan any immunity from Indian escalation. There was no plan to annex PoKashmir, then why retaliate when there was no major loss? The biggest loss was due to malfunction/incompetence of our own air defense system.

Pulwama, balakot and then 27th had only one motive that was sabotage and counter sabotage Modi's image. They were ready for a small scale skirmish but Abhinandan and Elections stopped them. Pakistan had chosen the time very brilliantly, to avoid all out confrontation with India. Their plan backfired a bit of India's too backfired.