Indian Nuclear Testing

[Officer of Engineers]

Sir, In other words, it is not the Pakistani mindset, but the Chinese mindset which has to be checked.

Tronic, I am not disagreeing with you but frankly at this moment, I am way in over my head. What you wrote made sense but then so did Cactus, and others and frankly, if I were to ditch Gen Sundarji's tenets, which I am barely understanding but completely facinated, then it does make perfect sense but I don't want to ditch Sundarji mainly NFU was his baby.

[Cactus]

Sir, Why would pak be reduced to attacking India's distant allies? There are more juicy military targets in the kashmir valley & unlike the provocations in the plains of India any escalation in the valley probably won't incur Indian retaliation.

The "why" is simple - India would have made the cost of attacking it so unpredictably high that the responsible and rational powers in Pakistan (and behind it) would have to curb the irrational and irresponsible powers from launching such attacks. The "how", as OoE pointed out, is the difficult question. A number of avenues are being explored and debated these days. Time will tell which one(s) India actually adopts, and how much impact it will have.

By the way today in Kashmir there are central government employees from all over India, their and some military personnel's families, important pro-India political, religious and economic leaders, and of course thousands of regular Kashmiris. Depending on the scale, intensity and timing of attacks on any/all of these, Pakistanis can easily provoke an escalation. In fact the state government is said to be in talks to make a provisions such that corporations may invest, own and develop businesses in Kashmir - which will bring in some more people from rest of India to provide expertise in setting up and running those businesses.

[diplomaticview]

Orange is so conservative

As said before, Pakistani mindset can only be changed not by nuclear forces, but by the will to use conventional might... but then again, looking at the current situation, that might not be the greatest idea. Waiting it out is the best bet, because the Pakistanis, in the process of trying to make India bleed, are themselves crumbling apart. The last thing to do now is to retaliate against a Pak attack and have the country come together again for the "evil Eastern threat". It is much better for India to let the infighting continue in Pakistan and keep it on the verge, but to make sure it does not collapse! Because at the end of the day, Pakistani army is only an extension of Chinese plans for South Asia and thus, should be treated as a Chinese extension, or a proxy. It is the Chinese mindset which influences the Pakistani mindset. The Chinese may not have come to the war zone in aid of the Pakistanis, but they are still the one biggest confidence booster that Pakistan has. So the best bet, bog down the Pakistanis in Pakistan! And continue with the wider East-West spreading out of the armed forces. Other than that, India needs to find proxies within Pakistan and infiltrate the country straight at the roots, the people! Support the pro-India parties in Pakistan, and they are quite a few!

Worst thing is when people lost their human feelings,

Nobody can change the mentality of People of Pakistan as still Indian mentality is not changeable, but only way to best is to solve common problems by principles and world agreements which is not present in Indian mentality. China’s presence or strategically location is necessary to stabilize sub continent. India fears from China on empty reasons. China is a power of region and friendship with Pakistan is could be more effective to normalise situation in region and India have to accept this truth as possible. But world must give chance Pakistan to control situation in Afghanistan because except Pakistan & Iran nobody can control Afghanistan,
where the matter about collapse of Pakistan than i want to mention this fact that at this time 180 separatists organizations are activated and seeking for freedom in India, so first advise for India is to look for its own country stability than Pakistan.

Where is the matter of Kashmir than it also knowned that according to the agreement of 1947 Kashmir is the part of Pakistan not India. So India has not strong reason to occupy Kashmir rather than a week & diametrical word "ATTOT ANG" which has no literal meanings but a sign of conservatism. Logically not supported by any world dictionary or language. Meanwhile Juna garh and the area of Gujrat is also by fact is part of Pakistan. So in my point of view only solution for Kashmir is to evacuate Indian army and hand over to Pakistan than I think all problems will be solved.

Humanity is dead:.... because in UNO security council take side of India because of the death of 200 peoples in India last year
but no common resolution or nobody take interest in the murder of 99000 people massively killed by Indian army in Kashmir from the 1948.

Is this bloodshed is according to the UNO OR SECURITY COUNCIL MENDATES??
And still going on!

India is disturbing Pakistan by constructing dames on major rivers of Pakistan and further more India seeking good relations & loving letters from Pakistan?????? is it possible? Problems which are faced by India, are self made. I am not saying that Pakistan is clear country and so many problems are existed from the side of Pakistan but who is the initiator.

Pakistan is an independent country like India and has totally rights to get progress and make itself strong by defence, economy etc as India.

If one person want to live with peace then it only could be possible not to disturb others.

[Yusuf]

I think you need to change your county's flag diplomat.
And this is not a Kashmir thread.

[Officer of Engineers]

Federation of American Scientists :: Status of World Nuclear Forces

Indian members, I am going to ask you to get mad first, get it out of your system. Before you post, I want you to hit something, anything to get the emotional response out of you. Then, I want you to read the article a 2nd time to start digesting what it is actually saying.

First of all, FAS has been known to be wrong. They've drastically over-estimated the Chinese arsenal for a decade or more and still might have it wrong today.

However, this being said, now what do these numbers say?

To me, at least, Indian strategic planners are not in a panic mode. They're concerned but not in a panic. They currently comfortable with their arsenal but see a need to check Pakistan's expansion should it continue.

From the Pakistani side, these are small warheads - 5 to 10kts which means that they're relying on quantity rather than quality. The yields are incapable for a 1st strike option against Indian hardened sites (concrete costs less than $10 a foot. A cruise missile costs $2mil without nuke. do the math).

However, without a doubt, what jumps out are the numbers. Pakistan will not accept an inferior position vis-a-vi India. How long can they keep up is an open question since India has the uranium reserves for a 2000 warhead arsenal ... if mining and reprocessing is brought to full capacity.

This being said, Indian nuclear development seems to be pro-active while the Pakistan reaction seems to be re-active. Pakistan is not going to get SLBMs but they're trying to one up India by deploying more land based systems.

I have more thoughts on this but need to clear through a lot of issues first, such as exactly, what are Pakistani nuclear planners actually envisioning.

[antimony]

That is just it. The Kargil War proved the Pakistnis are rational, if risk-preferred, thinkers.

Col,

Can you expand? I recall an account by a PAF officer involved in the whole operation who blamed the debacle on poor planning on the Pakistani side right from ther beginning

[Officer of Engineers]

More indepth NUCLEAR NOTEBOOK materials

Indian nuclear forces, 2008
Pakistani nuclear forces, 2009

[Officer of Engineers]

Col,

Can you expand? I recall an account by a PAF officer involved in the whole operation who blamed the debacle on poor planning on the Pakistani side right from ther beginning

When they knew the lost the war, they cut their losses (including leaving an entire regiment out to die) instead of escalating to a conflict they knew they cannot win, at least within the Kargil theatre. They'll bluff and huff and threaten nukes but in the end, they yielded.

[antimony]

When they knew the lost the war, they cut their losses (including leaving an entire regiment out to die) instead of escalating to a conflict they knew they cannot win, at least within the Kargil theatre. They'll bluff and huff and threaten nukes but in the end, they yielded.

Wasn't that because Clinton threatened with dire consequences if they did not yield and money if they did? Ultimately the decision was taken by Nawaz Sharif, an eminiently rational person (as corrupt politicians tend to be). He also lost his throne shortly.

[Officer of Engineers]

Yes but did you noticed that there was no escalation from Pakistan side despite the movement of an entire Indian corps. Once that corps moved, the war was over. Then, it was a matter of getting out with the most.

[n21]

I have more thoughts on this but need to clear through a lot of issues first, such as exactly, what are Pakistani nuclear planners actually envisioning.

Sir,
I wonder how many of them are meant for the Saudi's?

The Saudi's recently gave a "warm" welcome to Mushraff, a message that they are PA's side.

Why such warmth? Is Pakistan & Saudi preparing for a nuclear Iran? I don't know.

Things are very complicated indeed.

[Officer of Engineers]

Sir,
I wonder how many of them are meant for the Saudi's?

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THROWING ANOTHER MONKEY WRENCH INTO MY GEARS!

As if this is not tough enough to think through!

Extremely valid and at least on my part, an unthought of point though. Why should Pak nukes be solely for India? After all, most Pakistanis took an Israeli air strike package heading to attack Pakistani nuke sites to be true.

However, I will repeat

As if this is not tough enough to think through!

[pChan]

Federation of American Scientists :: Status of World Nuclear Forces

However, this being said, now what do these numbers say?

Pak sees nukes as the cornerstone of its security. If it comes to war have enough nukes to inflict a devastating/unacceptable strike on India.

I have more thoughts on this but need to clear through a lot of issues first, such as exactly, what are Pakistani nuclear planners actually envisioning.

Maybe they envision a more active role for tactical warheads in the battlefield. Indian cold-start type incursions into its territory could be met with these tactical nukes. (I am merely speculating as I haven't studied nuclear battlefield doctrine). Nukes certainly achieves deterrence but can it get me anything more without apocalypse? Their planners would be looking at that angle.

What is clear is these numbers are in consonant with their aggressive military posture.

[Officer of Engineers]

To be fair, I have to point out that Pakistan has denied an expanded nuclear arsenal

BBC NEWS | South Asia | Pakistan denies nuclear expansion

[calass]

Federation of American Scientists :: Status of World Nuclear Forces

Indian members, I am going to ask you to get mad first, get it out of your system. Before you post, I want you to hit something, anything to get the emotional response out of you. Then, I want you to read the article a 2nd time to start digesting what it is actually saying.

First of all, FAS has been known to be wrong. They've drastically over-estimated the Chinese arsenal for a decade or more and still might have it wrong today.

However, this being said, now what do these numbers say?

To me, at least, Indian strategic planners are not in a panic mode. They're concerned but not in a panic. They currently comfortable with their arsenal but see a need to check Pakistan's expansion should it continue.

From the Pakistani side, these are small warheads - 5 to 10kts which means that they're relying on quantity rather than quality. The yields are incapable for a 1st strike option against Indian hardened sites (concrete costs less than $10 a foot. A cruise missile costs $2mil without nuke. do the math).

However, without a doubt, what jumps out are the numbers. Pakistan will not accept an inferior position vis-a-vi India. How long can they keep up is an open question since India has the uranium reserves for a 2000 warhead arsenal ... if mining and reprocessing is brought to full capacity.

This being said, Indian nuclear development seems to be pro-active while the Pakistan reaction seems to be re-active. Pakistan is not going to get SLBMs but they're trying to one up India by deploying more land based systems.

I have more thoughts on this but need to clear through a lot of issues first, such as exactly, what are Pakistani nuclear planners actually envisioning.

Why would this be a surprise...this is an expected reaction.

For decades the Pakistanis kept a balance with the Indians in terms of conventional forces.At various points due to American aid,they have also had superior equipment though not in the numbers India managed to field. This balance has changed completely today.India is modernizing the military rapidly due to a growing economy,the Pakistanis know they cannot match either quality or quantity with the Indian conventional forces from now on especially with the changed US-India relationship.So what do they do...start producing the one thing they can do without spending a lot of money...the nukes.

OOE I think the Indians are the ones being reactive here on the nuclear field,the Pakistanis are ones being active as this is the only military field they can be active today.