No ‘Cold Start’ doctrine, India tells US

[zraver]

Z, you're describing the effects of a multi-megaton blast. Neither India nor Pakistan even reached over a 100kt blast. Hell, neither reached over a 30kt blast.

No sir, I am talking about multiple Hiroshima sized weapons spread across several points and the social disruption that would follow. Assuming that Pakistan's doctors of Armageddon have planned for the greatest possible effects across the widest possible area the likely targets are government, fuel, high population density areas astride transportation hubs, some sort of emp and the biggest ports. The goal being to effect a virtual siege via nuclear weapon affects (immediate and post blast).

For example, after massive crop failures this year, India is especially vulnerable and will be through 2011. Even with a good harvest with 1.3 billion people, India's low productivity agriculture would have a hard time adjusting to the needs of the country following a major war where much of the government is simple gone.

[zraver]

The MKI was purchased before 1998 nuclear tests. It was purchased in 1996.

I was thinking the nuke tests were first, even so India's tests were hardly 'peaceful"

As for W. Churchill, I am sure he would have said something about "appeasement."

He made the jaw-jaw comment in 1954 when the standoff between the US/USSR made anything Hitler could have done pale in comparison.

[Blademaster]

I was thinking the nuke tests were first, even so India's tests were hardly 'peaceful"

You need to follow up on the events that led up to the nuke tests. Pakistan and China weren't exactly innocent or peaceful.

He made the jaw-jaw comment in 1954 when the standoff between the US/USSR made anything Hitler could have done pale in comparison.

And did USSR send in agents to blow up people in USA or foment insurgencies in USA? USSR knew if it did that, US would go right to war. So there is a difference between US/USSR and India/Pakistan.

[zraver]

You need to follow up on the events that led up to the nuke tests. Pakistan and China weren't exactly innocent or peaceful.

All sides are quilty are of militant posture.

And did USSR send in agents to blow up people in USA or foment insurgencies in USA? USSR knew if it did that, US would go right to war. So there is a difference between US/USSR and India/Pakistan.

The US certainly thought the Soviet were doing so.

I notice you are avoiding the mental excercise, why is that?

[Blademaster]

The US certainly thought the Soviet were doing so.

I have searched and googled for any instances that USSR instigated any attacks in US directly and have yet to come up with anything. The only thing remotely coming close to are the attacks against US bases in Central America and in the Middle East and it was very dubious to find out whether USSR was behind those events or not.

I notice you are avoiding the mental excercise, why is that?

Care to clarify such remarks?

[zraver]

I have searched and googled for any instances that USSR instigated any attacks in US directly and have yet to come up with anything. The only thing remotely coming close to are the attacks against US bases in Central America and in the Middle East and it was very dubious to find out whether USSR was behind those events or not.

Google 1950's Red Scare, real or not, America thoiught it was under seige.

Care to clarify such remarks?

Several posts back I asked you to engage in a mental excercise imagining India post-nucelar war. IIRC 1 day, 30 days, 1 year and 3 years after the war.

[Blademaster]

Google 1950's Red Scare, real or not, America thoiught it was under seige.

But there were no documented proof of attacs in US. The Red Scare was just hysteria fomented by McCarthy and the fact that the Communists took over China and US was fighting the Korean War.

Several posts back I asked you to engage in a mental excercise imagining India post-nucelar war. IIRC 1 day, 30 days, 1 year and 3 years after the war.

Oh ok, I will get on it. I am just watching football now.

[zraver]

But there were no documented proof of attacs in US. The Red Scare was just hysteria fomented by McCarthy and the fact that the Communists took over China and US was fighting the Korean War.

There were no attacks inside US, but several air craft were shot down, a ship was seized and the Red Scare was in full gear. At the same time the CIA was doing things that gave the other side evidence that the US was not peace loving at all but an imperial power. India and pakistan are in a simialr spot today, a type of regional cold war with occasional hot flashes. Both sides have done things that are detrimental to real peace.




Oh ok, I will get on it. I am just watching football now.[/QUOTE]

[Sumku]

Both sides have done things that are detrimental to real peace.

Would love to have your thought on this with regards to What has been done by India which is detrimental to real peace

[zraver]

Would love to have your thought on this with regards to What has been done by India which is detrimental to real peace

Nucelar tests, they almost demanded a tit for tat from Pakistan.

buying the SU-30MKI and S-300 SAM which gave India a very real ability to comtemplate a first strike and total air dominance. No-First use polices are a strong as the paper they are written on and no stronger.

Refusing to even talk about Kashmir, there might never be a solution, but no one knows if no one talks. What talks there have been, have not been enteted into honestly.

Thats all fine, a nation is free to do what ever it can get away with. But if your not acting in good faith, don't claim victim hood, be honest about things.

[Sumku]

Nucelar tests, they almost demanded a tit for tat from Pakistan.

Oh please, atleast for Dog's sake, lets not start this all over again.
India's Nuke Test was not meant for Pakistan, it was meant for China. 1974 was just 3 years after '71. We had absolute parity over them then but not China.
That Pakistan made it up and thought that it was meant against them, India cannot do anything.
Also, 98' tests were done 24 years after 74' and good 8 years after the 26th May, 1990 Lop Nor tests.

Also Pakistan was given an option by US to not test post 1998 in lieu being covered by US Nuke Umbrella, Pakistan had an option not to test.

Also talks about tit-for-tat tests are meaning less. Are you assuming that just days after India tested in '98 Pakistan completed the whole Nuke Research and Development Cycle. Are you stating that in just days after Indian tests, Pakistan started research on Nuke design, perfected the research, developed a design and was able to test it as well. Think about it.

26th May, 1990 Lop Nor tests would tell you these were not tit-for tat tests but was a pre-1998 made device that was exploded.

buying the SU-30MKI and S-300 SAM which gave India a very real ability to comtemplate a first strike and total air dominance.

SU's were ordered for much before 1998. 1995-96 to be precise and years after Pak already had F-16's in their arsenal. By 1994 or something when decision was taken to acquire SU's, IAF had not credible answer to PAF's F-16. SU's were ordered to counter Pak-China threat. That PAF was not able to get more advanced planes matching SU's performance it upto them.

I hear a lot of people stating that RAFALE is a plane comparable to SU's and PAF is free to acquire them along with Block 60 F-16s[if their economy permits]. Pakistan already enjoys MNNA with US something which India does not have, so whats stopping PAF. That they want to go for JF-17 and not Block60 F-16's is not India's headache.

Also before India procured SU's which Country enjoyed Air Domination along with its friend in India's North?

No-First use polices are a strong as the paper they are written on and no stronger.

Kargil and 26/11 would prove your assertions very very very wrong.

Refusing to even talk about Kashmir, there might never be a solution, but no one knows if no one talks. What talks there have been, have not been enteted into honestly.

And you will decide that India has not been serious in talks about Kashmir.

Frankly speaking after the Bus to Lahore, Vajpayee's Visit to Pakistan, Kargil, Attack on Indian Parliament, IC 814 Hijacking and 26/11 there is nothing left to discuss on Kashmir.

a nation is free to do what ever it can get away with. But if your not acting in good faith, don't claim victim hood, be honest about things.

Again who is judging who's Honesty ?
And if that is the case then post wiki leaks, no nation on earth can claim to be honest.No point taking moral high ground just to substantiate your POV's.

[zraver]

Oh please, atleast for Dog's sake, lets not start this all over again.
India's Nuke Test was not meant for Pakistan, it was meant for China. 1974 was just 3 years after '71. We had absolute parity over them then but not China.
That Pakistan made it up and thought that it was meant against them, India cannot do anything.
Also, 98' tests were done 24 years after 74' and good 8 years after the 26th May, 1990 Lop Nor tests.

Also Pakistan was given an option by US to not test post 1998 in lieu being covered by US Nuke Umbrella, Pakistan had an option not to test.

India did not need to test, or could have approached the situation differently. What Pakistan could have, or should have done is all coming after the Indian tests.

Also talks about tit-for-tat tests are meaning less. Are you assuming that just days after India tested in '98 Pakistan completed the whole Nuke Research and Development Cycle. Are you stating that in just days after Indian tests, Pakistan started research on Nuke design, perfected the research, developed a design and was able to test it as well. Think about it.

26th May, 1990 Lop Nor tests would tell you these were not tit-for tat tests but was a pre-1998 made device that was exploded.

Pakistan obviously felt compelled to answer, probably due to domestic reasons.

SU's were ordered for much before 1998. 1995-96 to be precise and years after Pak already had F-16's in their arsenal. By 1994 or something when decision was taken to acquire SU's, IAF had not credible answer to PAF's F-16. SU's were ordered to counter Pak-China threat. That PAF was not able to get more advanced planes matching SU's performance it upto them.

Pakistan had early model F-16's already countered by India Mirage 2000 and Mig-29 fighters. All three fighters were roughly comparable, the SU-30MKI was a quantum leap forward.

I hear a lot of people stating that RAFALE is a plane comparable to SU's and PAF is free to acquire them along with Block 60 F-16s[if their economy permits]. Pakistan already enjoys MNNA with US something which India does not have, so whats stopping PAF. That they want to go for JF-17 and not Block60 F-16's is not India's headache.

It is India's headache, that is the nature of arms races.

Also before India procured SU's which Country enjoyed Air Domination along with its friend in India's North?

The PLAAF was until very recently a decidedly third class air force.

Kargil and 26/11 would prove your assertions very very very wrong.

No they don't, they might in fact prove the point.

And you will decide that India has not been serious in talks about Kashmir.

Frankly speaking after the Bus to Lahore, Vajpayee's Visit to Pakistan, Kargil, Attack on Indian Parliament, IC 814 Hijacking and 26/11 there is nothing left to discuss on Kashmir.

Read Pakistan's own complaints from the talks. It will give you some insight into what they were complaining about and why they feel India entered the talks in bad faith- see above.

Again who is judging who's Honesty ?
And if that is the case then post wiki leaks, no nation on earth can claim to be honest.No point taking moral high ground just to substantiate your POV's.

I never took the moral high ground, I am a realist. neither side of the Indo-pak problem has approached the problem honestly for various reasons. Both are driven in part by internal politics that preclude real efforts at peace. For example, Kashmir plays a critical role in India's water security. India obviously considers that a 'core" interest as the Chinese would say. Just as obviously, Pakistan has made the struggle to gain kashmir part of its national identity and likewise considers it a "core" interest.

It is not about right and wrong, moral high ground or low for that matter. Its about the very real risk of a nuclear war. The problem for both Pakistan and India is a whole generation of politicians and generals who did not manage to produce and real statesmen and political climates that probably preclude the emergence of statesmen. India has far too many domestic pressures pulling in every direction at once and Pakistan (and China) are a sometimes useful foil and rallying point. Pakistan is dominated by an Army whose whole focus is revenge and so decided to web terrorism as a tool of state. Pakistan also suffers from being a vassal state to four different powers- China, America, tribalism and Islam.

[antimony]

No-First use polices are a strong as the paper they are written on and no stronger.

That is an interesting statement. You are essentially saying that India's NFU is not considered valid by Pakistan. The corollary is that if India decides to withdraw its NFU policy, Pakistan need not make any adjustments to its nuclear stance or policy.

Refusing to even talk about Kashmir, there might never be a solution, but no one knows if no one talks. What talks there have been, have not been enteted into honestly.

Thats all fine, a nation is free to do what ever it can get away with. But if your not acting in good faith, don't claim victim hood, be honest about things.

We were a victim on 26/11, as much as your nation was on 9/11. And as far as Kashmir is concerned, it is ours, there is nothing to talk about it. You can differ, and that is fine. The only gripe I have is that we as a nation do not react even to more strongly. I do not believe Pakistan's actual nuclear threshold is what they have communicated.

[zraver]

That is an interesting statement. You are essentially saying that India's NFU is not considered valid by Pakistan. The corollary is that if India decides to withdraw its NFU policy, that is not going to have on Pakistan's stance

They would cry to high heaven, and so would the west but at the end of the day nothing changes. A nuke aimed at you is a nuked aimed at you.

We were a victim on 26/11, as much as your nation was on 9/11. And as far as Kashmir is concerned, it is ours, there is nothing to talk about it. You can differ, and that is fine. The only gripe I have is that we as a nation do not react even to more strongly. I do not believe Pakistan's actual nuclear threshold is what they have communicated.

The problems for both our countries go back well before the particular 11's. Terrorism is not justified, its murder. But you must admit the hostility and mistrust on both sides in both cases was already there.

I am going to point something out.

And as far as Kashmir is concerned, it is ours, there is nothing to talk about it.

This is a problem. If there is nothing to talk about then India has reduced the GoP's options to either war or walking away. If they choose a hot war they lose (but Indians die too), if they walk away the government falls and an even more hostile government takes power. Terrorism has managed to walk the razors edge between two equally bad choices from Pakistan's POV. People in India who feel as you do need to wake up, there are always things to talk about. There are a thousand times a thousand things India could do to make sure the talks go on and that Pakistan profits enough from the talks to avoid terrorist attacks without in anyway harming India.

One of the main reasons the US and USSR managed to avoid war was the willingness to talk. The talks were riddled with mistrust, misunderstanding and political and cultural barriers, but they were talks.

[Tronic]

India did not need to test, or could have approached the situation differently. What Pakistan could have, or should have done is all coming after the Indian tests.



Pakistan obviously felt compelled to answer, probably due to domestic reasons.

India's first nuke test was in 1974, it was because they felt compelled to answer to China's nuclear test. Pakistan had gone on the path towards nuclear technology since '74, and during 70s Bhutto, Pakistan's than PM made a famous speech that Pakistanis are willing to eat grass, but they will end up building a bomb. Its all a dominos affect which you couldn't really stop. Once the Americans and Russians went nuclear, it was only natural for the Dominos to fall from China, India, Pakistan and eventually Israel. And Iran now, is just another case of that; after Iran will be Saudi Arabia.. and so on and on.. So you can't blame India for that.. If anyone blame America or Russia for starting the whole thing.

As for Kashmir issue, I have no say; people of both countries think it belongs to them, and it is a strategic state. What I would suggest for Kashmir is, Muslim majority valley goes to Pakistan and Hindu Majority Jammu and Buddhist Majority Ladakh stay with India. But than again, I'm not a politician, and that issue will always be there, and only way to solve it would be for both countries to come together in a closer trade bloc, as neither side is willing to walk away and give up Kashmir.