Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pakistan likely to use Nuclear weapons on India "a few days" into war: US ambassador

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    IMO, Pakistan would do better overall in loosing a war with India than it would with starting a nuclear war - which could result in Pakistan's annihilation and wider nuclear exchanges, rather than an admittedly unacceptable occupation. I sincerely hope and pray neither event comes to pass, and I don't believe occupation would be an acceptable alternative either (only the lesser of two terrible, intolerable evils). Note: this is only my personal opinion and there are many other possible scenarios besides the two I have mentioned.
    sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

    Comment


    • #32
      I don't understand where the questions and discussions centering around occupation come from. We broke Pakistan into two, yet let the liberated keep their newly renamed country. When in HISTORY have Indian armed forces ever coveted foreign lands (and here I refer to our 5000 year history - during which the farthest we went was the SE Asian island colonies of the Cholas I think)?

      Granted that what is Pakistan today does not exactly fit into the definition of a foreign land, but their people sure do. Even if we want our land back, what are we going to do with the millions of them that are still remaining after we finish with them? Occupation is not going to happen. We will retake what we believe is ours. Even if it means taking some of theirs as bargaining chips. But we do not want them back into our fold. We would be mad to even contemplate something to that effect.

      De-fanging them for posterity serves us just fine. Letting nature then take its course on what was a flawed concept from its very inception.
      Last edited by vsdoc; 10 Jun 11,, 11:47.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by vsdoc View Post
        I don't understand where the questions and discussions centering around occupation come from. We broke Pakistan into two, yet let the liberated keep their newly renamed country. When in HISTORY have Indian armed forces ever coveted foreign lands (and here I refer to our 5000 year history - during which the farthest we went was the SE Asian island colonies of the Cholas I think)?

        Granted that what is Pakistan today does not exactly fit into the definition of a foreign land, but their people sure do. Even if we want our land back, what are we going to do with the millions of them that are still remaining after we finish with them? Occupation is not going to happen. We will retake what we believe is ours. Even if it means taking some of theirs as bargaining chips. But we do not want them back into our fold. We would be mad to even contemplate something to that effect.

        De-fanging them for posterity serves us just fine. Letting nature then take its course on what was a flawed concept from its very inception.

        The discussion is centered around the what we speculate to be the necessary circumstances in a war between India and Pakistan to justify the use of nuclear weapons. The discussion involves talk of Indian occupation of Pakistan because several of us believe that the prerequisite for first use from Pakistan would be for large swaths of Pakistani land to have been taken by India. I think it's fairly understood the chances of such a nuclear war are remote.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by ace16807 View Post
          The discussion is centered around the what we speculate to be the necessary circumstances in a war between India and Pakistan to justify the use of nuclear weapons. The discussion involves talk of Indian occupation of Pakistan because several of us believe that the prerequisite for first use from Pakistan would be for large swaths of Pakistani land to have been taken by India. I think it's fairly understood the chances of such a nuclear war are remote.
          "Taken" is pretty subjective and by its very nature has temporal connotations. To do damage one would have to take and hold. For how long, and whether it would involve a loss of sovereignty for Pakistan or call into question its very existence in present shape or form, that is a whole different ballgame. If India ceases to be a threat to Pakistan, then Pakistan has no natural predators in the area. And no justification for having nukes anymore. A la South Africa early on. A Pakistan on the brink, with nukes to boot, is not good for anyone, least of all the common Pakistanis who continue dying from self-inflicted wounds. It all comes full circle to the only workable solution there is on the table today. The US must move in, and declare pakistan a protectorate, ensuring security and stability for at least the couple of decades they would need to limp back on to their own feet.
          Last edited by vsdoc; 10 Jun 11,, 14:13.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by vsdoc View Post
            The US must move in, and declare pakistan a protectorate, ensuring security and stability for at least the couple of decades they would need to limp back on to their own feet.
            Why should the US move in? US does not have any interests in getting involved in Pakistan at all.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by vsdoc View Post
              "Taken" is pretty subjective and by its very nature has temporal connotations. To do damage one would have to take and hold. For how long, and whether it would involve a loss of sovereignty for Pakistan or call into question its very existence in present shape or form, that is a whole different ballgame.
              Why are we talking about damage? We're talking about having IA divisions marching through Pakistani territory and the Pakistani military considering first use in response in hopes of turning those divisions around. That's fairly clear cut.


              If India ceases to be a threat to Pakistan, then Pakistan has no natural predators in the area. And no justification for having nukes anymore. A la South Africa early on.
              How will India cease to be a threat to Pakistan? By killing off any semblence of Pakistani military force and nuclear capability? The way you stated that implies that India more or less loses the war, which I don't see happening. Care to clarify?


              A Pakistan on the brink, with nukes to boot, is not good for anyone, least of all the common Pakistanis who continue dying from self-inflicted wounds.
              What self-inflicted wounds... You mean poverty?


              It all comes full circle to the only workable solution there is on the table today. The US must move in, and declare pakistan a protectorate, ensuring security and stability for at least the couple of decades they would need to limp back on to their own feet.
              I'm sorry. What? You're asking for the US to occupy another borderline failed state? One with a population that is severely annoyed with US military incursions into their territory? If I didn't know better, I would guess that you'd like to see the US dragged down by multiple bloody occupations.

              Comment


              • #37
                My point about occupation is not a recomendation that that is good for India - it clearly isn't. It is a comment on how bad it would be for both sides if a nuclear exchange took place. The obvious solution in my mind is to avoid a nuclear exchange at all costs. First use of nuclear weapons is not a solution at all - it is national suicide in the case of Pakistan. A Chinese occupation of Pakistan is another possible (and undesirable) outcome of Pakistan using nukes. A US occupation (or an Indian one) would be another path to disaster, IMO. Choosing between a bunch of certain failures is not a good approach to any situation. These are all bad ideas - that is what I was saying.
                sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
                If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

                Comment


                • #38
                  The Pakistanis won't dare use their nukes, until they decide all is lost. For the PA, all is lost if it loses most of its war fighting capabilities. And for the Civilian Govt, all is lost if IA is knocking on the doors of Islamabad. The question is who is going to decide that all is lost.

                  I don't think anyone in PA seriously believes that India's got some plan to subjugate and rule them. They know very well that India would not like to add another 180 million muslims to its population or even rule them. They know very well that there is no existential threat from India.

                  Testing their nukes on their own soil to deter India may not be enough, if India decides to go all out and punish PA without escalating it any further.
                  Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie!'...till you can find a rock. ;)

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                    Not going to happen. India sucks at propaganda warfare.
                    OOE Sir, Just a quick question, at what point would they have to advise the Chinese of their use if at all? Thanks.
                    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      When Beijing comes calling asking why are they putting some nukes together.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
                        That is one aspect of warfare that I don't mind India not playing well. Winning the propaganda warfare doesn't really do that much good, only for domestic consumption. India has no need to win hearts and minds of the Pakistani people.
                        You forget the ancient adage that morale is worth 3 times the physical aspect.Propaganda and psychological warfare are just fancy new names for enhancing ones morale while destroying the other's.
                        Those who know don't speak
                        He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                          You forget the ancient adage that morale is worth 3 times the physical aspect.Propaganda and psychological warfare are just fancy new names for enhancing ones morale while destroying the other's.
                          No what it does in this case, it increases the stupidity of the people and makes it easier for us to kill them. Darwinism forces at work.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                            When Beijing comes calling asking why are they putting some nukes together.
                            Thanks. Would the Chinese know that quickly?
                            Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
                              Why should the US move in? US does not have any interests in getting involved in Pakistan at all.
                              The US should have moved into Pakistan 10 years ago when they invaded Afghanistan. Even tomorrow were the US to withdraw completely from the region as all indications developing today point to, the American people slowly are realizing that the past 10 years was wasted chasing shadows, and that they have withdrawn with the job not even half done. The serpent withdrew and went to ground in safe off-limit sanctuary, and the fear is always going to be around in the years to come, of its spawn crossing the oceans once more one day. Its the nature of the serpent to strike the hand that feeds it. Fear of retribution is a non-issue amongst the neural synapses of its primordial reptilian brain.
                              Last edited by vsdoc; 11 Jun 11,, 07:49.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by ace16807 View Post
                                Why are we talking about damage? We're talking about having IA divisions marching through Pakistani territory and the Pakistani military considering first use in response in hopes of turning those divisions around. That's fairly clear cut.
                                I am talking about objectives - punitive damage vs take-and-hold occupation of territory. And my point is that India has no interest in the latter, except maybe in the very short tactical term. The crater bit we (the Colonel and I) already had a discussion on in an earlier thread - I forget which.

                                How will India cease to be a threat to Pakistan? By killing off any semblence of Pakistani military force and nuclear capability? The way you stated that implies that India more or less loses the war, which I don't see happening. Care to clarify?
                                India has never been an existential threat to Pakistan, nor it is argued has she ever had the muscle to be one. We have never initiated war with Pakistan, oftentimes even in the face of constant fingering from their side. In spite of that Pakistan went nuclear. The world should de-nuke Pakistan, just as it forced South Africa to step back.

                                What self-inflicted wounds... You mean poverty?
                                No, I mean their strategic assets against us and the Afghans now turning against them. We do not shed a tear more than what they deserve for such - which is none. Nada. Zilch.

                                I'm sorry. What? You're asking for the US to occupy another borderline failed state? One with a population that is severely annoyed with US military incursions into their territory? If I didn't know better, I would guess that you'd like to see the US dragged down by multiple bloody occupations.
                                I am not asking the US to do anything. The US came into the region 10 years ago with a goal in mind. They are now about to leave. And the goal is nowhere close to being achieved. Cause they were in the wrong place at the right time.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X