Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Exploring Pakistan’s Nuclear Thresholds – Analysis

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    It took Pakistan over 15 years to get 100 nukes. No matter what your guess is, there is simply no way to double that in 2. Not without at least doubling of factories.

    I agree with you that it can not double its total in two years. But the calculations carried out by different experts say different things. Be that as it may, the actual number of weapons Pakistan has will only be confirmed when Pakistan makes it public. Till then all these calculations are at best - intelligent guesses. I believe this firmly.

    That contingency's confidence is high. If you note that there is talk about American SF teams securing Pakistani nukes in case of a Pakistani Taliban take over. That contingency is openly discussed. The nuclear strike contingency is not. But be that as it may, American confidence in locating Pakistani nukes is extremely high.

    Lets agree to disagree on this

    It's a threat when its usage becomes irresponsible. The Taliban takeover scenario is one that is heavily discussed and while dismissed by Pakistan, it is entertained in Washington.

    Both have their reasons to state what they state. I would be very very concerned indeed if Taliban could do it. I am sure Pakistani authorities would also be very very mindful of such a scenario

    I have challenged these conclusions and more specifically Hans Kristensen in the past. He added 20 more nukes to Pakistan's arsenal from 2009 to 2010 with the flimsiest of explanations. That being said, he is referenced by the Indian Military as being accurate to Pakistan ... and by extension, India. The Nuclear Notebook is the reference material for arms control observers and while not always accurate (China has been referenced with 100s more nukes than she actually had), their research is extensive. If you wish to challenge, then challenge the materials they've produced.

    I am not going to challenge any body. But I know this that at best these are intelligent guesses.

    I was a war fighter and some tenets of warfare remains the same no matter which side of the world you live in. When speaking of nuclear weapons, there is a danger of use them or lose them. Conventional systems are now accurate enough to take out nuclear delivery vehicles.

    Again a contentious statement. The boost phase defense, intermediate and terminal defenses need different technologies. For example, Iranian Shahab 3's booster takes about 70-75 seconds between fire and extinguish, and in these 70-75 seconds the launch is to be identified, the missile has to be acquired after it is launched and the interceptor has to be fired to destroy it before the booster motor gets extinguished in 70-75. Not impossible but not easy either. There are counter measures that are being concurrently worked on and this is an ongoing game.

    However, if you miss the consequences are horrendous. That is why the logic defies such confidence.


    The is the Chinese 1st strike threat that I spoke of earlier that China can posed to India without one single nuke. China has now 2000 SSMs dedicated to a conventional strike mission. Most of them are aimed at Taiwan but 5 500lb bombs landing on a non-slio rocket whether that rocket carries a nuke or not will stop that rocket from ever carrying a nuke.

    See, Chinese are also working on a ballistic missile which will strike a naval aircraft carrier. Yes it will not be nuclear. In case of Pakistan, I think that they will first build enough for their nuclear strike and then go for conventional ones. This is what I am saying.

    You will note that I deliberately left out the Chinese. You've read Sundarji. You should read up on Chinese Field Marshall Rie, China's nuclear weapons strategist. While there is no open writing on Pakistani nuclear postures, it behaves like both China and India's postures.

    May be. That is what you believe. But at the end of the day, it'll be to suit its own strategy rather than basing it on some one else's strategy.

    I can also get a corps across provided that I can lay a real bridge and I need at least 48 hours to build one good enough to take that kind of pounding, especially 70+ tons vehicles both trucks carrying supplies and those blasted tanks.
    For 70 ton vehicles - may be. In Pakistan - India environment, the strike elements which would cross first would not be 70 ton vehicles and 48+ hours is too long a time. It may be required to cross all the elements of a Corps, but the fighting echelons that cross over the obstacle and secure area across and the build up of remaining offensive forces has to happen within the same night. Indians also practice this and so do the Pakistanis. The bridges are laid by engineers which can take heavy tanks and other heavy vehicles - and all this is done within the same night.
    Last edited by Tinu; 13 Jul 11,, 19:11.

    Comment


    • #32
      I agree with you that it can not double its total in two years. But the calculations carried out by different experts say different things. Be that as it may, the actual number of weapons Pakistan has will only be confirmed when Pakistan makes it public. Till then all these calculations are at best - intelligent guesses. I believe this firmly.
      We're basing contingencies on these assessments. The confidence in their accuracy is extremely high ... or it may be the Pakistanis have less than we believe. Confidence is extremely low that they have more.

      Lets agree to disagree on this
      It's a matter of public record that the US Government has discussed securing Pakistani nukes.

      I am not going to challenge any body. But I know this that at best these are intelligent guesses.
      Then, you're just taking the word of one person over another without examining the evidence. The Nuclear Notebook has referenced their sources. At least take a look at their research materials before deciding who is better than whom.

      Again a contentious statement. The boost phase defense, intermediate and terminal defenses need different technologies. For example, Iranian Shahab 3's booster takes about 70-75 seconds between fire and extinguish, and in these 70-75 seconds the launch is to be identified, the missile has to be acquired after it is launched and the interceptor has to be fired to destroy it before the booster motor gets extinguished in 70-75. Not impossible but not easy either. There are counter measures that are being concurrently worked on and this is an ongoing game.

      However, if you miss the consequences are horrendous. That is why the logic defies such confidence.
      I am not talking about ABM systems. I mean to say that conventional systems are now accurate enough to hit the rockets and planes where they sit without the need of a nuke.

      See, Chinese are also working on a ballistic missile which will strike a naval aircraft carrier. Yes it will not be nuclear. In case of Pakistan, I think that they will first build enough for their nuclear strike and then go for conventional ones. This is what I am saying.
      Since the Pakistanis do not mate nukes to their delivery systems until need arises, there is an extremely large risk that their delivery vehicles will be destroyed before the nukes could be mated.

      May be. That is what you believe. But at the end of the day, it'll be to suit its own strategy rather than basing it on some one else's strategy.
      At the end of the day, not one of Pakistan's nukes is on a warfooting.

      For 70 ton vehicles - may be. In Pakistan - India environment, the strike elements which would cross first would not be 70 ton vehicles and 48+ hours is too long a time. It may be required to cross all the elements of a Corps, but the fighting echelons that cross over the obstacle and secure area across and the build up of remaining offensive forces has to happen within the same night. Indians also practice this and so do the Pakistanis. The bridges are laid by engineers which can take heavy tanks and other heavy vehicles - and all this is done within the same night.
      Lead elements are going nowhere fast if fuel, ammo, water, food, and men are sitting behind that canal waiting for a bridge that won't collapse because the tanks have shaken them to pieces.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
        We're basing contingencies on these assessments. The confidence in their accuracy is extremely high ... or it may be the Pakistanis have less than we believe. Confidence is extremely low that they have more.

        Good enough. You need numbers for such contingencies and obviously you would chose those assessments on which confidence is high.

        It's a matter of public record that the US Government has discussed securing Pakistani nukes.

        If such mission is undertaken when Taliban have captured Pakistan, good luck to you guys. However, if this mission is undertaken in anticipation that Taliban may take over and Pakistani forces are in control, this would be an act of war and would be crossing of declared Pakistani nuclear threshold. The response in such case would be nuclear strikes against whosoever undertakes such mission.

        Then, you're just taking the word of one person over another without examining the evidence. The Nuclear Notebook has referenced their sources. At least take a look at their research materials before deciding who is better than whom.

        Agreed, I will do that.

        I am not talking about ABM systems. I mean to say that conventional systems are now accurate enough to hit the rockets and planes where they sit without the need of a nuke.

        Agreed

        Since the Pakistanis do not mate nukes to their delivery systems until need arises, there is an extremely large risk that their delivery vehicles will be destroyed before the nukes could be mated.

        Agreed, such a risk does exist. But then this is a strategy which the Indians also follow and so do the Pakistanis. This also is a confidence building measure between India and Pakistan and also provides a good measure of security against any unauthorized launch attempt by elements in India as well as Pakistan or or accidental launch.

        At the end of the day, not one of Pakistan's nukes is on a warfooting.

        Yes this is strategy which is followed - as explained above.

        Lead elements are going nowhere fast if fuel, ammo, water, food, and men are sitting behind that canal waiting for a bridge that won't collapse because the tanks have shaken them to pieces.

        Ammo and needed logistics is carried on fighting vehicles followed by local logistical vehicles. As the fighting echelons advance the logistical vehicles replenish food, ammo and water etc.


        The Indians have some types of Russian bridges while Pakistani Army Engineers have American bridges. I have witnessed an armoured division (fighting echelons with allied logistical support) crossing an obstacle on such American bridges in one night after the assaulting echelons have captured the area across the obstacle. The bridges were maintained by Pakistan Army Engineers and they withstood such a crossing - shaken to pieces or not - I don't know but these were still operative the next day and the day after.
        Last edited by Tinu; 13 Jul 11,, 20:59.

        Comment


        • #34
          "I dont think so. I think they would be ready to fight a nuclear war due to their limited conventional response capability"
          Not when they know they can only lose that too.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by snapper View Post
            "I dont think so. I think they would be ready to fight a nuclear war due to their limited conventional response capability"
            Not when they know they can only lose that too.
            Lose against Indians - not a chance in hell.

            Comment


            • #36
              In a nuclear war everyone loses
              Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

              Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
                In a nuclear war everyone loses
                Agreed. But in case of India, if Pakistan is pushed to the wall, it would be a full spectrum response and nothing short. And that there should not be any doubt in anybody's mind, least of all the Indians themselves.

                Comment


                • #38
                  @Tinu

                  I am reading closely your conversation with OoE and am thinking the following:

                  You haven't introduced yourself, but you engaged 2 former staff members (OoE and BR), so I must do the dirty job since zraver is MIA ;)

                  All your claims are uncited, which is not a good first impression over here.

                  Piece of advice: In order to survive here and be taken seriously introduce yourself, read the guide for survival (someone link pls), buy the Colonel a pack of Scotch and a DVD collection with last 10 Stanley Cups and last but not least cite your sources whenever possible.

                  Hope you'll have fun and enjoy your stay over here.
                  No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                  To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Tinu View Post
                    Lose against Indians - not a chance in hell.
                    Can you tell me when was the last time there was a vicory parade in Islamabad?
                    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                      @Tinu

                      I am reading closely your conversation with OoE and am thinking the following:

                      You haven't introduced yourself, but you engaged 2 former staff members (OoE and BR), so I must do the dirty job since zraver is MIA ;)

                      All your claims are uncited, which is not a good first impression over here.

                      Piece of advice: In order to survive here and be taken seriously introduce yourself, read the guide for survival (someone link pls), buy the Colonel a pack of Scotch and a DVD collection with last 10 Stanley Cups and last but not least cite your sources whenever possible.

                      Hope you'll have fun and enjoy your stay over here.
                      Roger. :)

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                        Can you tell me when was the last time there was a vicory parade in Islamabad?
                        Sir,
                        I have had very good intellectual discussion here which I thoroughly enjoyed. I also enjoyed the highly professional and highly educated responses that I got from members here and stand much better educated merely interacting. However Sir, if you don't want me to post here, just say the word and I'll be invisible forever. No offense meant. Thank you indeed.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          If such mission is undertaken when Taliban have captured Pakistan, good luck to you guys.
                          It's disturbing that you take this as a possibility.

                          However, if this mission is undertaken in anticipation that Taliban may take over and Pakistani forces are in control, this would be an act of war
                          No sh!t, Sherlock.

                          and would be crossing of declared Pakistani nuclear threshold.
                          As opposed to surrendering the nukes to the Taliban?

                          The response in such case would be nuclear strikes against whosoever undertakes such mission.
                          With what? I don't think you understand the scenario. The Americans would have decided to secure Pakistan's nukes because the danger of them falling into Taliban, and, therefore, Al Qaeda hands have became intolerable (China's hand would also be forced in this scenario). The primary objective is not securing Pakistan's nukes, that is for public consumption. The primary objective is to deny those nukes to the Taliban. That means whatever the Americans cannot secure, they will destroy. You have already admitted that conventional systems are accurate enough to do just that. And if we add in American nukes to the equation, they assign 3 nukes per target to ensure its destruction. And in case, they don't feel that they've got everyone, then they go after everything else that support the nukes and that means the National Command Authority. Do you want to imagine 6 nukes onto Islamabad? 3 to target the PM and 3 to target the COAS. And by some miracle, enough C3 and nuke and delivery vehicle survives, how the hell you going to hit the CONUS? Pakistan got nothing with that range.

                          Agreed, such a risk does exist. But then this is a strategy which the Indians also follow and so do the Pakistanis. This also is a confidence building measure between India and Pakistan and also provides a good measure of security against any unauthorized launch attempt by elements in India as well as Pakistan or or accidental launch.
                          Then it follows that the majority of your delivery vehicles have conventional mission priority over nuclear. You are not going to keep 200 missiles and 30 aircrafts idle when the Indian Army is knocking at the front gates, not while you still have a chance to keep them from coming through the front gates.

                          Ammo and needed logistics is carried on fighting vehicles followed by local logistical vehicles. As the fighting echelons advance the logistical vehicles replenish food, ammo and water etc.
                          What local logistical vehicles? The Indian Army would be in hostile territory. They have to secure their LOC as well bring up supplies.

                          The Indians have some types of Russian bridges while Pakistani Army Engineers have American bridges. I have witnessed an armoured division (fighting echelons with allied logistical support) crossing an obstacle on such American bridges in one night after the assaulting echelons have captured the area across the obstacle. The bridges were maintained by Pakistan Army Engineers and they withstood such a crossing - shaken to pieces or not - I don't know but these were still operative the next day and the day after.
                          You're still talking limited action and divisional level is not corps level. Unless you're talking the Golden Gate Bridge, such battlefield bridges are too flimsy and too small to support any meaningful deep corps thrust.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by bigross86 View Post
                            Colonel, what have you against tanks?! What did we ever do to you?
                            You leak diesel, poop oil like cow puck bingo, requiring us to clean up the mess before the tree huggers come yelling that we poison the water table.

                            And plus you guys sh!t wherever you like at times right in the field I'm trying to clear.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Tinu View Post
                              Sir,
                              I have had very good intellectual discussion here which I thoroughly enjoyed. I also enjoyed the highly professional and highly educated responses that I got from members here and stand much better educated merely interacting. However Sir, if you don't want me to post here, just say the word and I'll be invisible forever. No offense meant. Thank you indeed.
                              You nor anyone else don't need my approval to have conversation over here.
                              I was just asking when was the last time Pakistan was victorious. I know there were at least 4 wars they had with India, but don't remember a parade in Islamabad afterwards.
                              No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                              To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                                You nor anyone else don't need my approval to have conversation over here.
                                I was just asking when was the last time Pakistan was victorious. I know there were at least 4 wars they had with India, but don't remember a parade in Islamabad afterwards.
                                Victory is directly proportional to the achievement of aims and the objectives. One way to celebrate victory is by holding victory parades on V days etc - the other way may be is to learn from what happened, better the survival response and move on. Israelis have won many wars - I didn't see any victory parades in Tel Aviv.

                                Pakistan is a small country. Ours is a survival environment. When we don't allow the Indians to break us up and survive despite their overwhelming power, strength and offensive actions, this is victory for us. We defend ourselves against overwhelming odds, yet we pull up our chin, face the adversities, look the other guy in the eye and tell him F**** Ya.

                                This is exactly what we are telling the Taliban. AND THIS WHY THEY WON'T SUCCEED. Over 5000 of our soldiers have died so far and over 35000 civilians are dead. During our independence, Indians killed over 3 million of us, but we still gained our freedom. India defeated us in 1971 with the help of Bengalis living in Bangladesh - in any case it was over 1000 miles away from mainland Pakistan. We learned lessons and now we are a nuclear power, despite US sanctions. Our nuclear program is not a Muslim Bomb or a Taliban Bomb as many may like to project - It is only for ensuring Pakistan's security and freedom and let all others day dream.

                                We will never allow any one to take away our freedom. This may seem rhetorical but is a fact ingrained. We will enhance our nuclear capability, but it is India Centric and not against anyone else. We will not hesitate to use it if our freedom is threatened by the Indians who believe that 5000 years ago Pakistani territory belonged to their kings. period.

                                Indians always project that they are a peaceful status-quo power and have no hegemonic designs against any of their neighbors. History tell us something different. India is not a status-quo power. It is a regional hegemon. It invaded and captured Junagarh and Manavadar in 1947, invaded and captured Indian Occupied Kashmir in 1947, invaded and captured Hyderabad in 1948, invaded and captured Goa in 1961 which was an area belonging to Portugal, invaded East Pakistan in 1971, invaded and captured Sikkim as late as 1975, invaded and captured some portions of Siachen in 1988, created Sri Lankan terrorist group LTTE and later invaded Sri Lanka in 1988 till the President of Sri Lanka had to openly ask the Indians to leave, invaded Maldives in 1988 and has continually interfered in internal affairs of Nepal and Bhutan and has spread terrorism in all her neighboring states including Pakistan.

                                Therefore, our survival is our victory and we don't have victory parades to celebrate our freedom. We make sure that we remain free. :)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X