Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 891011121314151617
Results 241 to 245 of 245

Thread: Exploring Pakistan’s Nuclear Thresholds – Analysis

  1. #241
    Military Professional Deltacamelately's Avatar
    Join Date
    29 Sep 07
    Posts
    1,669
    Quote Originally Posted by Cactus View Post
    Disclaimer: I am naturally prejudiced to believe that the Paks will strike first, and try to strike hard and strike deep into India (a la OP Chengiz Khan in '71, with nukes); so such demo-strikes or the RAND-proposed defensive strikes on Pak soil make no sense to me. India's only margin-of-error is the difference between what the Paks want to do versus what they can actually do plus what India can do to frustrate them (OP CK was modeled after OP Focus, outcome was very different).
    Cactus,

    In the last three days odd, I went through this entire thread and as I enjoyed reading some very interesting perspectives, both from the professionals as well as the others, I was also amused by Mr. Tinus's views. The very assertion that along with the PA, the InA also has operational units tasked and in possesion of tactical nukes makes a very amusing reading. I am not sure what are his sources, but our intel have yet to suggest such. The logic is still not there to suggest that the PA's ORBAT is in place for deep/shallow nuclear strike inside the Indian mainland. They would most probably try conventional salvos, but nukes? In any case, the numbers aren't there yet and I do not believe that they can manage to deploy thousands of CSS-7 type short range misiles against us.
    And on the sixth day, God created the Field Artillery...

  2. #242
    Regular Bhaarat's Avatar
    Join Date
    31 Aug 10
    Location
    New Delhi
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Tronic View Post
    Cactus, am aware of that, but someone has to give them that option and see how they proceed with it. Economic strangulation, or total destruction? The fact that they were playing around with a demo strike means they are not too enthusiastic about total destruction either. So, I would say go for the economic strangulation and dare the Pakistanis to press the nuke option. India can call out their bluff on that one.
    In a way the bluff was called during Kargil conflict but one could argue that they might not have had delivery systems ready and components assembled by then.
    So another limited conflict (not that I want one) would be sufficient to call the bluff or atleast reduce the threat's credibility. IMO the neighbors real thresh hold would be known then.

    Regards,
    Virendra
    Only the brave shall inherit the Earth.

  3. #243
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    And China has known about those squadrons since 62, not hard to scramble up an overmatch. Because lets face it, China has claims on AP and part of Kashmir. China also needs to make sure the last pakistani doesn't bleed- at least not to death. A dead horse is a dead horse not a future tool. A victorious or moderately chastized Pakistan is good for China's strategic picture- a humilated Pakistan is not.
    My apologies coming back to this late point but the lessons of Sino-VN relationship comes to play here. China does not want a victorious Pakistan. In fact, she wants Pakistan to bleed. A victorious Pakistan would discover just how much more they have in common with the Xinjiang rebels than they do with the Han ruled Beijing.

    Vietnam's distaste for China's actions kept Vietnamese hostilities at bay when Hanoi still needed Chinese rise against American bombing. Once the American bombing stopped, Vietnamese military attention turned against the Chinese and her allies.

  4. #244
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Bhaarat View Post
    In a way the bluff was called during Kargil conflict but one could argue that they might not have had delivery systems ready and components assembled by then.
    So another limited conflict (not that I want one) would be sufficient to call the bluff or atleast reduce the threat's credibility. IMO the neighbors real thresh hold would be known then.

    Regards,
    Virendra
    You only get to bluff once. If you have followed the thread, the deduction has been made that Pakistan holds a deterrence arsenal, not a warfighting one.

  5. #245
    Banned Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Aug 09
    Location
    Te Rotorua-nui-a-Kahumatamomoe
    Posts
    565
    I hope its relevent to this thread.

    The Ally From Hell

    But nuclear experts issue a cautionary note: it is not clear that American intelligence can identify the locations of all of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, particularly after the Abbottabad raid. “Anyone who tells you that they know where all of Pakistan’s nukes are is lying to you,” General James Jones, President Obama’s first national-security adviser, has said, according to a source who heard him say it. (When asked by the authors of this article about his statement, General Jones issued a “no comment.”) Another American former official with nuclear expertise says, “We don’t even know, on any given day, exactly how many weapons they have. We can get within plus or minus 10, but that’s about it.”

    Pakistan’s military chiefs are aware that America’s military has developed plans for an emergency nuclear-disablement operation in their country, and they have periodically threatened to ally themselves with China, as a way to undercut U.S. power in South Asia. In a recent statement quite obviously meant for American ears, Pakistan’s prime minister, Yousuf Raza Gilani, described the Pakistani-Chinese relationship as “higher than the mountains, deeper than the oceans, stronger than steel, and sweeter than honey.” But China, too, is worried about Pakistan’s stability, and has recently alleged that Pakistan has harbored Uighur separatists operating in western China. According to American sources, China has, in secret talks with the U.S., reached an understanding that, should America decide to send forces into Pakistan to secure its nuclear weapons, China would raise no objections. (An Obama-administration spokesperson had no comment.)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30 Jun 11,, 09:55
  2. ISI, Pakistan's 'rogue' military intelligence agency: Analysis
    By pravin in forum Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation New Dawn
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 23 Aug 08,, 17:09

Tags for this Thread

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •