No ‘Cold Start’ doctrine, India tells US

[Mihais]

In the Indo-Pak context the ATGM/ anti-tank weapon concentration is even higher.

But there nothing that good arty pounding cannot solve.

Sir,fully agree with the conclusion,but do you care to explain that statement.

Are air/heliborne assaults considered?

[Skywatcher]

The problem with pounding each and every Pakistani strongpoint with artillery is that it takes artillery away from providing support fire to the mechanized forces.

[zraver]

I am aware of the logistics, but when we discussion "cold start" the objectives are not very deep.

They have to be at least deep enough to either threaten a major target and thus force the PA to fight, or deep enough to somehow isolate a major PA formation and then destroy it/force it to surrender. Anything less is just territory that may or may not be important in and of itself, but that lets the PA know where the IA is.

In the Indo-Pak context the ATGM/ anti-tank weapon concentration is even higher.

But there nothing that good arty pounding cannot solve.

Artillery failed the IDF, and more of their assets are modern systems rather than towed tubes. Arty is only marginally useful against forces that do not rely on heavy concentration but instead rely on heavy cover like a town or high mobility like anti-tank teams equipped with trucks and jeeps.

For India to use the bulk of her artillery she has to move it forward, set it up, and then fire and quickly un-ass if there is a danger of PA CBF missions. That is a slow dangerous way to use towed tubes. India's tube artillery is barely adequate at best and is more reasonably described as obsolete. The guns lack mobility, range, and numbers as well as most being under gunned in the amount of HE filler they throw vs PA 155mm guns

India's Smerch system on the other hand is an absolute beat down hammer vs any PA force of massed armor, at least until the PA counters with enough A-100's of its own. But, sub munitions are not effective at reducing strong points and cost more per salvo than tube rounds.

India needs a lot of modern SP guns of at least 152mm size that can fire a variety of modern rounds. Without it she is giving Pakistan the edge in tube artillery. The PA has several hundred 155mm SP platforms to support the mobile battle. This makes Indian counter-battery less effective and could allow a higher operational tempo by the PA.

[Officer of Engineers]

They have to be at least deep enough to either threaten a major target and thus force the PA to fight, or deep enough to somehow isolate a major PA formation and then destroy it/force it to surrender. Anything less is just territory that may or may not be important in and of itself, but that lets the PA know where the IA is.

Z,

Like you, I'm trying to see what our Indian bretherns are seeing and like you, not very well at understanding their points but even still, the destruction of all border fortifications would at least have a punitive effect. I don't know if the Indians have the stomach for scorched earth but burning the entire Pakistani side of the border and laying nasty booby traps (ala the 1984 2nd Sino-Vietnam War style) would render further Pakistani adventures too expensive to bear (just as the Chinese bankrupted the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia).

[Cactus]

They have to be at least deep enough to either threaten a major target and thus force the PA to fight, or deep enough to somehow isolate a major PA formation and then destroy it/force it to surrender. Anything less is just territory that may or may not be important in and of itself, but that lets the PA know where the IA is.

Z,
The Pakistanis define both objectives you laid out as causes for a nuclear first-strike. To summarize their four red-lines: 1. Indepth invasion, 2. Overt military support and recognition of a separatist state, 3. Destruction of a major military formation, and 4. Economic strangulation. Like I mentioned before, it is wait and watch time.

Edit: OoE provided a much more likely solution to persistent low-level provocations. Major attacks, of course, invalidate conventionally understood and accept logic.

[Officer of Engineers]

Actually, thinking from a politicial PoV. Can the Pakistanis decline battle when offerred by the Indians? Would their propaganda allow them to retreat before an Indian advance?

[Deltacamelately]

But there nothing that good arty pounding cannot solve.

Sir,

Do I owe you a Black Label pitcher with your favourite..."Tandoori Chicken" already?

[Officer of Engineers]

Black Label? That swamp water? I miss my scotch but I will NEVER TOUCH THAT swamp pee.

[Deltacamelately]

Actually, thinking from a politicial PoV. Can the Pakistanis decline battle when offerred by the Indians? Would their propaganda allow them to retreat before an Indian advance?

Sir,

The PA has trained with the PLA, fortunately their leadership has learnt squat from the CCCP.

[Deltacamelately]

Black Label? That swamp water? I miss my scotch but I will NEVER TOUCH THAT swamp pee.

Your frustrations Sir are showing colours lately....
Alas...we called it Beer in our canteens. ;)

[Deltacamelately]

Z,
The Pakistanis define both objectives you laid out as causes for a nuclear first-strike. To summarize their four red-lines: 1. Indepth invasion, 2. Overt military support and recognition of a separatist state, 3. Destruction of a major military formation, and 4. Economic strangulation. Like I mentioned before, it is wait and watch time.

Cactus,

The last three are envisaged, NEVER can they be practised. Cactus Sir, Let sleeping dogs sleep. Atleast, their JCOs and NCOs still don't over-rule the commanders at GHQ (R).

Edit: OoE provided a much more likely solution to persistent low-level provocations. Major attacks, of course, invalidate conventionally understood and accept logic.

So true. If only they could understand this logic. Nonetheless....

[antimony]

Z,
To summarize their four red-lines: 1. Indepth invasion, 2. Overt military support and recognition of a separatist state, 3. Destruction of a major military formation, and 4. Economic strangulation. Like I mentioned before, it is wait and watch time.

I understand 1 and 3, but 2 and 4?

I read about the interview given by General Khalid Kidwai to the Landau Network. Now invasions and destruction of the military I can understand, but economic strangulation and internal destabilization? So if the Pakistani army somehow convinces themselves that it it India behind the Baluchistan affairs they are going to launch a nuke?

That seems pretty far fetched. Also interesting is what is not in. If India manages to pull off several small scale border skirmishes (far more likely than cleaving Pakistan in two with the strike corps) than that does not constitute a threshold event.

[Deltacamelately]

I don't know if the Indians have the stomach for scorched earth....just as the Chinese bankrupted the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia).

Sir,
Expecting these refrains from a post colonial nation state, having inherited the most disciplined ruthless state policy?
And when last, did the Chinese indulge in mass massacre of the Viet Congs or Cambodians based upon culturo-religious supremacies, directed against them?

If they could do without provocations, well....

[Deltacamelately]

India has to breach, exploit and defend in any war where she seeks to punish Pakistan through the use of ground forces. She also has to make sure she does not have her formations defeated in detail. Because of the deserts, the way Pakistan can be effectively cut in half, and the fact she has few major centers of gravity, for a rapid break through the Indians are likely to go with number 1. It allows the maximum amount of combat power to be avaible if the PA can send in an armored counter strike.

Z,

Sir, we can go round and round and round....
All I can say is, me and you, have not been trained with the same modules. We don't deny that they know how to bleed us, we just know, that we know how to bleed them faster and bloodier.

[Officer of Engineers]

The PA has trained with the PLA, fortunately their leadership has learnt squat from the CCCP.

The Pakistani are still thinking fortified lines while the PLA has moved onto maneuvers.

Expecting these refrains from a post colonial nation state, having inherited the most disciplined ruthless state policy?

Major, it's easy. Too easy. The problem is not starting the butchering. The problem is stopping once you start.

And when last, did the Chinese indulge in mass massacre of the Viet Congs or Cambodians based upon culturo-religious supremacies, directed against them?

If they could do without provocations, well....

The Indochinese got a taste of it but nowhere near what the Chinese had to endure themselves. To answer your question, Major, the Tai Ping rebellion, 1850-1864