‘India might not be able to defend itself from Pakistani missiles’

[street cricketer]

ISLAMABAD: A nuclear expert from Moscow says despite heavy investments in developing anti-ballistic missile systems, India may not be able to fully defend itself in a conflict from strikes by Pakistani missiles.

“Even in 10 years and with the huge budgets that India plans to spend on the development of nuclear weapons and capabilities, it is difficult to imagine it will be able to defend its territory from possible strikes from Pakistan in case of conflict,” said Petr Topychkanov, a senior researcher at the Carnegie Moscow Centre’s Non-Proliferation Programme.

Talking about ‘Non-Proliferation and Strategic Stability in South Asia: A Russian Perspective’ at the Strategic Vision Institute (SIV) which is an Islamabad-based think tank specialising in nuclear issues, Mr Topychkanov said that despite largescale cooperation between India and Israel for the development of a ballistic missile defence system and Indian efforts for acquiring S-400 defence systems from Russia, “India is very far from developing any system that could effectively defend itself from a Pakistani missile”.

Last Sunday India tested an Advanced Air Defence (AAD) interceptor missile and is working on developing a multi-layer ballistic missile defence system and Pakistan has expressed concerns over the test.

It is feared that the development of anti-ballistic missile systems may give Indian strategists a false sense of security when contemplating military action against Pakistan with the belief that they can take care of an incoming missile.

The possession of such a system could also increase pre-emption tendencies among Indian military planners. Pakistan experts also feel that with the short missile flight time between India and Pakistan, it will be impossible for intercepting incoming missiles.

Talking about India’s candidature for the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Mr Topychkanov said the world will be cautious about India.

“The nuclear waiver given to Indian became a very important part of the lesson for the international community because Delhi did not give a lot in exchange, it didn’t change policies and approaches,” he said.

When it was getting the waiver from NSG following an India-US Civilian Nuclear Agreement, India had committed that it will separate its civilian and military nuclear facilities in a phased manner, place civil nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, sign and adhere to IAEA’s additional protocol, continue its unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing, work with the US for the conclusion of the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT), refrain from the transfer of enrichment and reprocessing technology to states that do not have them and support international efforts to limit their spread, introduce comprehensive export control legislation to secure nuclear material and adhere to the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and NSG guidelines.

Mr Topychkanov said it would not be the same this time because India will have to show “serious progress in relations with IAEA, UN and the international nuclear community”.

Meanwhile, also claiming to have sound credentials for becoming an NSG member, Pakistan won rare acknowledgement from the US for its “significant efforts to harmonise its strategic trade controls with those of the NSG and other multilateral export control regimes” on Tuesday at a meeting of the Pak-US Security, Strategic Stability, and Nonproliferation (SSS&NP) Working Group.

Talking about Russia’s policy for strategic stability in South Asia, the Mr Topychkanov said Moscow is interested in regional strategic stability and is working on avoiding crisis in the area.

He said despite longstanding strategic partnership with India, Russia was developing relations with both Islamabad and Delhi.

SVI President Dr Zafar Iqbal Cheema expressed concern about the deteriorating strategic balance in the region because of India’s acquisition of conventional and nuclear weapons and said such developments seriously impact Pakistan’s interests.

http://www.dawn.com/news/1259244/india-might-not-be-able-to-defend-itself-from-pakistani-missiles

 

[street cricketer]

What you need to know about India's newly launched ballistic missile defence

The test of Ashwin missile, part of Indian Ballistic Missile Defence Program, is part of a concentrated effort to develop a two-tiered missile defence system by India to counter the threat emanating from Pakistan's strategic missile force.

India seeks to deploy a functional ‘iron dome’ ballistic missile defence (BMD), incorporating both low-altitude and high-altitude interceptor missiles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LHHvurKATw

Why
India’s decision to develop a BMD in 1999 can be attributed to the Kargil War, when tensions between the two nuclear armed neighbours reached an all-time high, and a warning by then Pakistani Foreign Secretary Shamshad Ahmad that Pakistan can use “any weapon” in its arsenal if the limited conflict were to escalate.

Development for the anti-ballistic missile system started in 1999, with around 40 public and private companies participating in the development process. As a stop-gap measure, India procured six-batteries of the highly effective Russian S-300 air defence systems to protect major cities, including New Delhi.

What
Two interceptor missiles, the Prithivi air defence missile and the Advanced Air Defence (Ashwin) missile are designed to provide a high-low cover against incoming ballistic missiles. Prithivi is reported to be capable of intercepting missiles at exo-atmospheric altitudes of 50 – 80km, while the AAD is designed to operate at endo-atmospheric altitudes of upto 30kms.

The development makes India the fourth country in the world, after the US, Russia and Israel to have successfully developed a ballistic missile defence system.

Prompted by a growing Pakistani arsenal, of both delivery systems and nuclear warheads, India has embarked upon and given priority to creating a BMD, which will also augment India’s overall air defence capabilities. Former Indian army chief, V.K Singh, revealed in March 2014 that 97 per cent of air defences are obsolete, further reinforcing earlier reports regarding the state of air defences employed by the Indian armed forces.

When
The test conducted of the interceptor missile on Sunday was a success, and an important technological milestone was achieved. But a single successful test in controlled conditions does not imply that the system would retain the same level of effectiveness in combat conditions.

A BMD, although effective against a small number of incoming missiles, can be overwhelmed by employing saturation fire. If an opposing force were to shoot multiples missiles in an area of operation, a BMD battery can track and shoot down some missiles, but not all.

Capability
It is yet not known what the capability of the tracking systems linked with the Indian BMD are, as the effectiveness of the planned ‘iron dome’ will eventually come down to how effective those systems are, and their capability to track multiple incoming missiles.

The development of India’s BMD is a cause of concern for Pakistan, as an effective system would to a certain degree negate Pakistan’s strategic strike capability. It will force the armed forces to counter it, a solution which would prove to be both costly and time consuming. India has thus, once again contributed to an unhealthy arms race between the two countries.

http://www.dawn.com/news/1258707/wh...dias-newly-launched-ballistic-missile-defence

 

[JaDed]

Lol what a way to say "Keep buying from us" as its not enough!

 

[Asim2Good]

and IF there is war, and Pakistan is able to defend itself for 2 days. That will be achievement for us

 

[Sandeep]

and IF there is war, and Pakistan is able to defend itself for 2 days. That will be achievement for us

If there's a full blown nuclear war, the entire region will be destroyed. Not a joke. Probably South India and North-East might survive..

 

[Yossarian]

Anti-ballistic missile systems to defend such a vast country with such a long border, where the incoming missile flight times, and thus the defence systems reaction times, will be short .... reminds one of The Maginot Line.

 

[Pure Evil]

Anti-ballistic missile systems to defend such a vast country with such a long border, where the incoming missile flight times, and thus the defence systems reaction times, will be short .... reminds one of The Maginot Line.

Absolutely you will annihilate the western regions of India, the rest will survive. But guess what happens to all of Pakistan?

 

[Yossarian]

Absolutely you will annihilate the western regions of India, the rest will survive. But guess what happens to all of Pakistan?

Do you how how many missiles will take to devastate "the western regions of India"?

India is 3.3 million square kilometres.

The largest nuke in Pakistan's possession will devastate an area of approx 30 sq kilometres, meaning that even if pakistan fired 200 nukes, and none were intercepted, they will destroy a total area of around 6,000 square kilometres, out of 3.3 million square kilometres.

The largest Indian nukes are slightly bigger that those of Pakistan, but the numbers are similar.

so around 7,000 sq km of Pakistan out of a total of 800,000 sq km.

Even allowing for the fact if you hit only population centres, it still doesn't obliterate "all of western India or "all of Pakistan"

You've been watching too many sci-fi movies.

 

[Pure Evil]

Do you how how many missiles will take to devastate "the western regions of India"?

India is 3.3 million square kilometres.

The largest nuke in Pakistan's possession will devastate an area of approx 30 sq kilometres, meaning that even if pakistan fired 200 nukes, and none were intercepted, they will destroy a total area of around 6,000 square kilometres, out of 3.3 million square kilometres.

The largest Indian nukes are slightly bigger that those of Pakistan, but the numbers are similar.

so around 7,000 sq km of Pakistan out of a total of 800,000 sq km.

Even allowing for the fact if you hit only population centres, it still doesn't obliterate "all of western India or "all of Pakistan"

You've been watching too many sci-fi movies.

Population centers will be targeted and wasnt it what you were referring to with the Maginot line? The shield is a deterrence for a trigger happy Pakistani general, who have warned India countless times about use of nuclear weapons. For people like you who are mistaken that you can get through the shield and we wont hit back, you need to get a reality check.

 

[GoUgandaCranes]

I think we will do the rest of the world a massive favour if we blow ourselves up. Sub continental people are pathetic, mother earth can't sustain that amount of crap.

Well, instead of a nuclear apocalypse, a better way to doing that is probably making every single man sterile in this region.

An imminent wipe out in the next 100 years.

Nuclear war will result in long term problems for other places as well - like the nuclear radioactive winds and the water pollution that'll destroy flora and fauna as far as Chile and Antarctica.

Just food for thought

 

[Syed1]

Better if both countries agree to denuclearize, reduce military budgets and focus on regional trade.

But India has ambitions to become like the United States so we will have to continue to invest in defense systems so that we can maintain a minimum deterrence.

 

[anakin]

Better if both countries agree to denuclearize, reduce military budgets and focus on regional trade.

But India has ambitions to become like the United States so we will have to continue to invest in defense systems so that we can maintain a minimum deterrence.

The issue has been that Pakistan has history of reneging on its commitments time and time again.

 

[#GreenRoars]

I hope no war, let's keep this stuff only for movies.

 

[cricketjoshila]

People must understand where this guy is coming from and where he is giving his views.Take it with a pinch of salt.Yes it is difficult but not impossible to stop a barrage of nuclear missiles.Thats why every country is investing in ABMs.The thing is with a multi layered ABM that India is planning which reportedly consists of David Sling,Iron Dome,Aakash,S400 and Indias own ABM it will put enough doubts in Pakistans mind whether its missiles will hit the target because When India retaliates Pakistan doesnt have the capacity for a second strike like a Nuclear Sub and Sub launch missile.

 

[troodon]

Russia wants India to buy some more weapons which it will never use.

This is the money I want Indian Govt to spend on building toilets for poor and homeless.

 

[Yossarian]

Population centers will be targeted and wasnt it what you were referring to with the Maginot line? The shield is a deterrence for a trigger happy Pakistani general, who have warned India countless times about use of nuclear weapons. For people like you who are mistaken that you can get through the shield and we wont hit back, you need to get a reality check.

Stop being jingoistic. I'm not favouring either side vis-a-vis a nuclear war.

Get it into your head that when it comes to war, it's no good chest-thumping, since no one wins in the long run. That is other than the industrialists who provide armaments and all the other support services to the military, from catering supplies/military rations, to army uniforms, to army boots, etc

It's also in the interests of the generals to keep the tensions high. That allows them to have more money from the government for their military toys, more money to live high lifestyles, more money to send their own kids to private schools .... and so on. And that applies to both sides And poor fools like you lap it all up lock, stock and barrel.

 

[Yossarian]

Population centers will be targeted and wasnt it what you were referring to with the Maginot line? The shield is a deterrence for a trigger happy Pakistani general, who have warned India countless times about use of nuclear weapons. For people like you who are mistaken that you can get through the shield and we wont hit back, you need to get a reality check.

Do you understand the analogy with the Maginot Line? Do you know what was the Maginot Line? It was nothing to do with 'targeting population centres' as you seem to think.

 

[Yossarian]

Better if both countries agree to denuclearize, reduce military budgets and focus on regional trade. .

But that would mean the big industrialists who's factories provide everything from bullets and tanks, to military rations and uniforms, having to cut back and see their profits reduced. And the generals having to make do with smaller villas and unable to send their kids to the very best private schools. So you can forget it.

 

[CricketCartoons]

I just hope no missiles where I live.

 

[Pure Evil]

Do you understand the analogy with the Maginot Line? Do you know what was the Maginot Line? It was nothing to do with 'targeting population centres' as you seem to think.

The purpose of a shield, is to protect our population from possible nuclear attack. There is only 1 country which has consistently threatened a nuclear attack over the last 2 decades. Our doctrine is no-first-use. Hence the heavy investments in second strike capability.

And for your poor analogy on the Maginot line, it was a relatively financially and technically inferior French defense to a more sophisticated German attack. I dont know what you are smoking, to assume that the Pakistani army can match the Indian army, technically, financially or even plain numbers. Go and read your history, you will find out what happened to your deluded brethren in the past.

 

[sshakir411]

The purpose of a shield, is to protect our population from possible nuclear attack. There is only 1 country which has consistently threatened a nuclear attack over the last 2 decades. Our doctrine is no-first-use. Hence the heavy investments in second strike capability.

And for your poor analogy on the Maginot line, it was a relatively financially and technically inferior French defense to a more sophisticated German attack. I dont know what you are smoking, to assume that the Pakistani army can match the Indian army, technically, financially or even plain numbers. Go and read your history, you will find out what happened to your deluded brethren in the past.

consistently threatened? wow you guys are an easy bunch to scare

 

[Pure Evil]

consistently threatened? wow you guys are an easy bunch to scare

Scare?? If we dont upgrade our defenses what use is the no-first-use doctrine? Or you believe we should wait around for a lunatic like Musharaff or Ayub to try another misadventure?

Peace only works when we eliminate the thought of a win or a quick nuclear strike from your Army's mind.

 

[Pakpak]

Better if both countries agree to denuclearize, reduce military budgets and focus on regional trade.

But India has ambitions to become like the United States so we will have to continue to invest in defense systems so that we can maintain a minimum deterrence.

There is no way Pakistan would or should ever do that. Without nukes India enjoys superior numbers from Army to weapons and winning any war against that numerical advantage becomes very hard for Pakistan.

Nukes will ensure no matter how many planes India makes, how many soldiers, how many tanks they churn out they won't mean squat all.

 

[sshakir411]

Scare?? If we dont upgrade our defenses what use is the no-first-use doctrine? Or you believe we should wait around for a lunatic like Musharaff or Ayub to try another misadventure?

Peace only works when we eliminate the thought of a win or a quick nuclear strike from your Army's mind.

lol, you seem to know a lot about what's on the mind of our Army. Shouldn't be this obsessed.

 

[Pakpak]

lol, you seem to know a lot about what's on the mind of our Army. Shouldn't be this obsessed.

Don't you know its Bharat's that's peaceful while we are just savages.

 

[sshakir411]

Don't you know its Bharat's that's peaceful while we are just savages.

military budget of the savage: $7.6bn
military budget of the innocent angels: $40bn

trust Indians to find a way to always be victims. Sounds schizophreniac to me.

 

[Syed1]

Don't you know its Bharat's that's peaceful while we are just savages.

Yes Maha Bharat and its "janta" are all doodh ke dhulay howay sweet angels. While Pakistanis are these vile, monstrous hairy beasts.

 

[Pakpak]

military budget of the savage: $7.6bn
military budget of the innocent angels: $40bn

trust Indians to find a way to always be victims. Sounds schizophreniac to me.

Never mind that, look at the massive arms build up for the last few years.

Wait till Pure Evil, like all his comrades, tells us its aimed at China, which begs the question why is he so paranoid about our so-called gun trigger army then if all the build up from his government is aimed at China and not us?

 

[street cricketer]

military budget of the savage: $7.6bn
military budget of the innocent angels: $40bn

trust Indians to find a way to always be victims. Sounds schizophreniac to me.

To be fair, Pakistan still allocates a higher proportion of its gdp than India to its annual military budget.

Not that I accuse of Pakistan being the aggressor though.

 

[anakin]

military budget of the savage: $7.6bn
military budget of the innocent angels: $40bn

trust Indians to find a way to always be victims. Sounds schizophreniac to me.

Can we do an analysis based on % of GDP and see who spends way more than their own means!!
Talk about paranoia!

 

[Pure Evil]

military budget of the savage: $7.6bn
military budget of the innocent angels: $40bn

trust Indians to find a way to always be victims. Sounds schizophreniac to me.

Absolutely, you are no match to us financially, technically or just numbers/strength. The shield will take away the one weapon your Army likes to harp about, the missiles.

 

[Pure Evil]

Never mind that, look at the massive arms build up for the last few years.

Wait till Pure Evil, like all his comrades, tells us its aimed at China, which begs the question why is he so paranoid about our so-called gun trigger army then if all the build up from his government is aimed at China and not us?

We have to be ready for China. Pakistan is the constant threat. The Pakistan army wont last more than a few days in a conventional war.

 

[Yossarian]

The purpose of a shield, is to protect our population from possible nuclear attack. There is only 1 country which has consistently threatened a nuclear attack over the last 2 decades. Our doctrine is no-first-use. Hence the heavy investments in second strike capability.

And for your poor analogy on the Maginot line, it was a relatively financially and technically inferior French defense to a more sophisticated German attack. I dont know what you are smoking, to assume that the Pakistani army can match the Indian army, technically, financially or even plain numbers. Go and read your history, you will find out what happened to your deluded brethren in the past.

Why do you keep on chest-thumping? "India has a bigger stick than Pakistan's stick". Why can't you understand that the only winners in this chest-thumping are the generals and the industrialists who make wads of profits out of it? The Afghanistan and Iraq invasions have cost the lives of thousands of U.S. soldiers (I'm not even counting the Iraqi and Afghan civilians), with tens of thousands of more wounded and maimed. But the ones who've gained are the likes of Halliburton, and the weapons manufacturers, along with a few generals here and there. So I suggest unless you're related to an Indian Army general or a rich Indian industrialist providing services to the Indian forces, stop your chest-thumping.

 

[Stewie]

If there's a full blown nuclear war, the entire region will be destroyed. Not a joke. Probably South India and North-East might survive..

Thats correct and it worries me to no end. If there is a war, some of us should not feel concerned about how much damage we can inflict on each other because a total destruction and a major loss of life will be on the cards for not just us but possibly our neighbors too.

 

[sshakir411]

Absolutely, you are no match to us financially, technically or just numbers/strength. The shield will take away the one weapon your Army likes to harp about, the missiles.

The weapon of choice for Pakistan has never been the nukes..it's just a deterrence, stopping you maniacs from using yours.

 

[sshakir411]

To be fair, Pakistan still allocates a higher proportion of its gdp than India to its annual military budget.

Not that I accuse of Pakistan being the aggressor though.

Can we do an analysis based on % of GDP and see who spends way more than their own means!!
Talk about paranoia!

Point here isn't who spends more based on their GDP but rather who has a larger stockpile. Pretty sure all your 'new' weapons aren't pointing to the East.

 

[Pure Evil]

Why do you keep on chest-thumping? "India has a bigger stick than Pakistan's stick". Why can't you understand that the only winners in this chest-thumping are the generals and the industrialists who make wads of profits out of it? The Afghanistan and Iraq invasions have cost the lives of thousands of U.S. soldiers (I'm not even counting the Iraqi and Afghan civilians), with tens of thousands of more wounded and maimed. But the ones who've gained are the likes of Halliburton, and the weapons manufacturers, along with a few generals here and there. So I suggest unless you're related to an Indian Army general or a rich Indian industrialist providing services to the Indian forces, stop your chest-thumping.

So you dropped the Maginot line now?

Unless Pakistan and China, resolve all border disputes with us. Pakistan returns to be a stable, growth development path, we have no choice but to modernize our military. This can de-escalate easily, why not ask your generals to give up? They are not going to win away.

 

[Pure Evil]

The weapon of choice for Pakistan has never been the nukes..it's just a deterrence, stopping you maniacs from using yours.

So you should not be bothered what systems we build to protect against your nukes.

 

[#GreenRoars]

To be fair, Pakistan still allocates a higher proportion of its gdp than India to its annual military budget.

Not that I accuse of Pakistan being the aggressor though.

You sure? As far i know in year 2015 India's military spending in 2015 was $51.3 billion an increase of 0.4 per cent over the previous year. Where as Pakistan $9.5 billion.

And The first full budget of the Modi government presented to Parliament on February 28, 2015 set aside Rs. 2,46,727 crore (US$ 40.4 billion) for defence, which amounts to a 7.7 per cent increase over the previous year’s allocation.

 

[street cricketer]

You sure? As far i know in year 2015 India's military spending in 2015 was $51.3 billion an increase of 0.4 per cent over the previous year. Where as Pakistan $9.5 billion.

And The first full budget of the Modi government presented to Parliament on February 28, 2015 set aside Rs. 2,46,727 crore (US$ 40.4 billion) for defence, which amounts to a 7.7 per cent increase over the previous year’s allocation.

Pakistan allocated 3.5% of its gdp towards its military budget in 2015.

India does somewhere between 2 to 2.5%.

 

[street cricketer]

Point here isn't who spends more based on their GDP but rather who has a larger stockpile. Pretty sure all your 'new' weapons aren't pointing to the East.

Of course bigger economies will have a bigger military strength because of the threats that come along with the status (not referring to Pakistan alone).

 

[Pure Evil]

You sure? As far i know in year 2015 India's military spending in 2015 was $51.3 billion an increase of 0.4 per cent over the previous year. Where as Pakistan $9.5 billion.

And The first full budget of the Modi government presented to Parliament on February 28, 2015 set aside Rs. 2,46,727 crore (US$ 40.4 billion) for defence, which amounts to a 7.7 per cent increase over the previous year’s allocation.

Can you read it again? Percentage of GDP is different from the actual allocation or even the increase yoy.

This is from the world bank website: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS

 

[speed]

Pakistan allocated 3.5% of its gdp towards its military budget in 2015.

India does somewhere between 2 to 2.5%.

That's official data, unofficial is about double the amount.

 

[street cricketer]

Got bored with all the God and spirituality threads here for the last few weeks and so I started a good ol' fashioned India Pakistan thread expecting some entertainment.

Must say I was a bit disappointed at the start when posters were exchanging peace talks and pleasantries. But thread back to track again

 

[Syed1]

Got bored with all the God and spirituality threads here for the last few weeks and so I started a good ol' fashioned India Pakistan thread expecting some entertainment.

Must say I was a bit disappointed at the start when posters were exchanging peace talks and pleasantries. But thread back to track again

Welcome change from the PTI vs PML-N threads as well

 

[Yossarian]

So you dropped the Maginot line now?

Unless Pakistan and China, resolve all border disputes with us. Pakistan returns to be a stable, growth development path, we have no choice but to modernize our military. This can de-escalate easily, why not ask your generals to give up? They are not going to win away.

More chest-thumping. Poor fella thinks military conflicts are like IPL matches: There's a winner, there's a loser. At the end of the match, everyone goes home. That's until the next match or the next IPL season, where everyone starts all over again with a clean slate, with the same number of points (zero), albeit with some teams having slightly better squads than others.

 

[anakin]

That's official data, unofficial is about double the amount.

Who is your source of unofficial data bro!!
Better than World Bank, SIPRI, CIA, Mossad, RAW ... plz share that.

 

[#GreenRoars]

Can you read it again? Percentage of GDP is different from the actual allocation or even the increase yoy.

This is from the world bank website: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS

Pakistan allocated 3.5% of its gdp towards its military budget in 2015.

India does somewhere between 2 to 2.5%.

Actually i am interested that which country is spending more money on his military defense

 

[JaDed]

Ok so what's the discussion here who is more stupid generally?Or who is more stupid GDP% wise?

 

[Stewie]

All we need to do is unleash our Angel Eyes guy on the Indians and watch them run for cover!

Thats one WMD, they will have no answer for. HAAAAAAAAAAA!

 

[CricketCartoons]

All we need to do is unleash our Angel Eyes guy on the Indians and watch them run for cover!

Thats one WMD, they will have no answer for. HAAAAAAAAAAA!

You Pakistanis can only dream. When time comes we will show you like we have shown always.

 

[Stewie]

You Pakistanis can only dream. When time comes we will show you like we have shown always.

I dont think you Indians will ever have an answer for Taher Shah.

FACT!

 

[Pakpak]

We have to be ready for China. Pakistan is the constant threat. The Pakistan army wont last more than a few days in a conventional war.

More fantasies. If our army can't last more than a few days why not attack us before nukes during the 90'?

India enjoys a significant advantage numerically and in a conventional conflict would probably be favorites to overwhelm our army due to sheer numbers. However with newer weapons on both sides and both sides having a decent airforce it'd be a dirty conflict lasting months.

This isn't Bharat Rakshak where you can peddle your fantasies.

This is the real world.

 

[Stewie]

More fantasies. If our army can't last more than a few days why not attack us before nukes during the 90'?

India enjoys a significant advantage numerically and in a conventional conflict would probably be favorites to overwhelm our army due to sheer numbers. However with newer weapons on both sides and both sides having a decent airforce it'd be a dirty conflict lasting months.

This isn't Bharat Rakshak where you can peddle your fantasies.

This is the real world.

Nobody is going to attack. It was harakari before the nukes and its harakari after nukes. None of the countries in such close proximity can afford to go to war and now with nukes its almost impossible any leaders in their right minds would sign on the declaration of war line.

Both countries have developed their WMDs to the extent the whole region can be wiped out completely. There is no defense at such close range.

 

[enkidu_]

It's always sad to see peoples talk of potential nuke attacks and the concluding post-apocalyptic landscape as some rehearsal of Call of Duty, but thankfully we remain pretty irrelevant there and the politicians are rational enough to know that they have more to gain through regional economic integration than national suicide, which is the strategy of China since few years - Asian nations should be able to cooperate like they have been doing millennia before the ridiculous idea of nationalism (which is nowadays limited to YouTube comments, rarely helping our populations pooping in open nature or fighting illiteracy).

Everyone should take a look at the book The Next Decade, by one of the leading American geopolitical strategist today, George Friedman : if the US will keep helping Pakistan (why do you think they keep the "alliance", despite Pak military's support for Taliban insurgency in AFG ?), basically, he says, it's to make sure that the Indian budget is diverted towards a pseudo-nuclear warfare hype, that he's sure will never happen (like any rational human being) ; but he says that that's what will keep India far from reaching its true potentialities, benefiting the US by blocking India for developing a strong navy, which since centuries has been the motor of world domination.

On the seas, the Indians have been interested in developing a navy that could become a major player in the Indian Ocean, protecting India’s sea-lanes and projection Indian power. But the United States has no interest in seeing India proceed along these lines. The Indian Ocean is the passage way to the Pacific for Persian Gulf oil, and the United States will deploy powerful forces there no matter how it reduces its presence on land.

To keep Indian naval development below a threshold that could threaten U.S. interests, the United States will strive to divert India’s defence expenditure towards the army and the tactical air force rather than the navy. The cheapest way to accomplish this and pre-empt a potential long-range problem is for the United States to support a stronger Pakistan, thus keeping India’s security planners focused on the land and not the sea.

The real threat is US' neo-imperialist schemes, pseudo successor to the British, which itself used the most perverse and cynical methods in its colonial experience. Chinese have learned the meaning of realpolitik in the last years, hopefully Pakistanis/Indians will eventually come to that conclusion in the foreseeable future, that there are more benefits in cooperation than fuelling a foreign nation's military-industrial complex for no real gain at home.

The US doesn't fear Pak generals/Indian politicians making virile-martial speeches and earning 1000s of YouTube comments or flag-weaving, but the revival of the Silk road, which will definitely reshape world-economy and take its gravitational centre back to its legitimate arena.

 

[speed]

It's always sad to see peoples talk of potential nuke attacks and the concluding post-apocalyptic landscape as some rehearsal of Call of Duty, but thankfully we remain pretty irrelevant there and the politicians are rational enough to know that they have more to gain through regional economic integration than national suicide, which is the strategy of China since few years - Asian nations should be able to cooperate like they have been doing millennia before the ridiculous idea of nationalism (which is nowadays limited to YouTube comments, rarely helping our populations pooping in open nature or fighting illiteracy).

Everyone should take a look at the book The Next Decade, by one of the leading American geopolitical strategist today, George Friedman : if the US will keep helping Pakistan (why do you think they keep the "alliance", despite Pak military's support for Taliban insurgency in AFG ?), basically, he says, it's to make sure that the Indian budget is diverted towards a pseudo-nuclear warfare hype, that he's sure will never happen (like any rational human being) ; but he says that that's what will keep India far from reaching its true potentialities, benefiting the US by blocking India for developing a strong navy, which since centuries has been the motor of world domination.



The real threat is US' neo-imperialist schemes, pseudo successor to the British, which itself used the most perverse and cynical methods in its colonial experience. Chinese have learned the meaning of realpolitik in the last years, hopefully Pakistanis/Indians will eventually come to that conclusion in the foreseeable future, that there are more benefits in cooperation than fuelling a foreign nation's military-industrial complex for no real gain at home.

The US doesn't fear Pak generals/Indian politicians making virile-martial speeches and earning 1000s of YouTube comments or flag-weaving, but the revival of the Silk road, which will definitely reshape world-economy and take its gravitational centre back to its legitimate arena.

Uncle sam can do what it likes but the reality is they are losing global GDP share every year, back in 2001 they were 31% of the worlds economy today they are 20% or less.

 

[Stewie]

Uncle sam can do what it likes but the reality is they are losing global GDP share every year, back in 2001 they were 31% of the worlds economy today they are 20% or less.

the wars on terror are their downfall. Their companies profited from it, but also moved their HQs to the EMirates so they dont have to pay a lot of tax. The US govt and the average citizens are getting poorer but the US corporations are only getting richer.

And that folks is all this modern world is about. Its no longer about nations and countries. Its about corporations. They are the kingmakers, they are the string pullers and they have all the nations fighting wars so they can profit from them. India, Pakistan, whatever are just pawns in that game. The Chinese realize this and they are playing their game.

 

[cricketjoshila]

military budget of the savage: $7.6bn
military budget of the innocent angels: $40bn

trust Indians to find a way to always be victims. Sounds schizophreniac to me.

Rather than posting numbers like this,why not tell the percentage of GDP?

And while you are at it,do remember to read who started 65,71,99?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Why do you keep on chest-thumping? "India has a bigger stick than Pakistan's stick". Why can't you understand that the only winners in this chest-thumping are the generals and the industrialists who make wads of profits out of it? The Afghanistan and Iraq invasions have cost the lives of thousands of U.S. soldiers (I'm not even counting the Iraqi and Afghan civilians), with tens of thousands of more wounded and maimed. But the ones who've gained are the likes of Halliburton, and the weapons manufacturers, along with a few generals here and there. So I suggest unless you're related to an Indian Army general or a rich Indian industrialist providing services to the Indian forces, stop your chest-thumping.

From when did you get to decide what Indian generals or industrialists or Indians in general think or must think?

Oh and unlike Pakistani generals our generals are not above and beyond law and living in luxury.They are like generals of any other Army around the world who are govt. servants

 

[cricketjoshila]

Pakistan allocated 3.5% of its gdp towards its military budget in 2015.

India does somewhere between 2 to 2.5%.

I believe the defence allocation must be raised and kept constant at 3% of GDP.

 

[cricketjoshila]

More fantasies. If our army can't last more than a few days why not attack us before nukes during the 90'?

India enjoys a significant advantage numerically and in a conventional conflict would probably be favorites to overwhelm our army due to sheer numbers. However with newer weapons on both sides and both sides having a decent airforce it'd be a dirty conflict lasting months.

This isn't Bharat Rakshak where you can peddle your fantasies.

This is the real world.

What newer weapons on Pakistan's side are we talking here?

And Pakistan has limited number of 4 and 4.5 gen Aircrafts so it is behind India in terms of both numbers and quality of systems.

So no,there will be no month long conflict rather it will be a matter of weeks at the best.

Stop listening to Lal Topi and those false defence analysts you have on Tv.

 

[Waseem]

It's a HUGE shame if both countries keep spending billions on security when we can sit down and sign some kind of treaty and save massive amount of money. If only we can somehow Kashmir issue with each side softening their stance, it would enhance living standards of millions.

 

[Pakpak]

What newer weapons on Pakistan's side are we talking here?

And Pakistan has limited number of 4 and 4.5 gen Aircrafts so it is behind India in terms of both numbers and quality of systems.

So no,there will be no month long conflict rather it will be a matter of weeks at the best.

Stop listening to Lal Topi and those false defence analysts you have on Tv.

I don't listen to Lal Topi, I come on a topic and reply. Unlike Maha-Bharat dreamers coming here with their fantasies. You can call it a matter of weeks that's upto you. With millions of soldiers on both sides and the region awash with weapons the conflict would be drawn out.

Anyway who am I talking to? You're to India what Lal Topi is to Pakistan, I was waiting for you to make your appearance, seems like you have an India/BCCI radar permanently on. Hence this discussion is pointless, thankfully due to nukes there will be no war.

 

[Pakpak]

Rather than posting numbers like this,why not tell the percentage of GDP?

And while you are at it,do remember to read who started 65,71,99?

Your government started 71 due its open meddling and arming the rebels long before any Pakistan strike, Modi bragged about it himself. While Pakistan has been naughty too your peace loving hasn't been too peaceful either.

One second in my mind I want peace, nothing but peace with India, but people like you make me reconsider and lose any respect for Indians I have.

 

[Pakpak]

What newer weapons on Pakistan's side are we talking here?

And Pakistan has limited number of 4 and 4.5 gen Aircrafts so it is behind India in terms of both numbers and quality of systems.

So no,there will be no month long conflict rather it will be a matter of weeks at the best.

Stop listening to Lal Topi and those false defence analysts you have on Tv.

Anyway, I don't have time to debate your trash, I don't even know why I log in here on TP to engage keyboard warriors like yourselves.

Keep enjoying Pakistani cyberspace Joshila saheb to further peddle your hate.

 

[cricketjoshila]

I don't listen to Lal Topi, I come on a topic and reply. Unlike Maha-Bharat dreamers coming here with their fantasies. You can call it a matter of weeks that's upto you. With millions of soldiers on both sides and the region awash with weapons the conflict would be drawn out.

Anyway who am I talking to? You're to India what Lal Topi is to Pakistan, I was waiting for you to make your appearance, seems like you have an India/BCCI radar permanently on. Hence this discussion is pointless, thankfully due to nukes there will be no war.

Rather than making personal comments etc etc etc and posting nothing to back your statement,please tell me which new weapons on the Pakistani side you are talking about?

How many 4 and 4.5 gen fighters can Pakistan deploy againist India?

Pakistan has a million soldiers?Active army of Pakistan is about 650k.Now if you want to add reserve plus para military it goes to 1.4mn but then if you add the same for India it goes to 4.8mn.

And if someone thinks that nukes will mean no war then he is wrong.There is a scope of limited war like Kargil and that scope will become bigger as and when ABM capabilities become better.

Now instead of talking about me,please backup what you said.

 

[161]

ABM system wont defend against low flying cruise missiles ... specifically submarine launched cruise missiles targeting India's shore cities.

Also ABM systems can't deal with MIRVed warheads with numerous decoys.

Huge waste of money by India IMO.

 

[Saeed]

Well played Russia. Keep riling up the sides and keep taking money from the fools.

 

[Rishikesh]

ABM system wont defend against low flying cruise missiles ... specifically submarine launched cruise missiles targeting India's shore cities.

Also ABM systems can't deal with MIRVed warheads with numerous decoys.

Huge waste of money by India IMO.

Don't know why Pakistani media and politicians are worried about India wasting money.

 

[Syed1]

Lol at the Indians claiming that they will defeat the sixth largest army in the world in a matter of days.

Also a defensive army is always at a considerable advantage due to developed bunkers and established trench lines. Some military strategists claim that you only need one third of the offensive army to effectively drive back the offense.

I won't expect keyboard warriors like you guys to know about this.

Also for the joshila folks Pakistan has plenty of F16 and JF17 both which are 4th gen fighters. You don't need to worry about our capabilities. Thank you very much.

Also as soon as we concede even an inch of our motherland India should be ready for a barrage of nukes.

 

[Prince_]

Your government started 71 due its open meddling and arming the rebels long before any Pakistan strike, Modi bragged about it himself. While Pakistan has been naughty too your peace loving hasn't been too peaceful either.

One second in my mind I want peace, nothing but peace with India, but people like you make me reconsider and lose any respect for Indians I have.

What a ridiculous claim. Lol. Who lost the general election to mujib in 1970? Who refused to hand over the power to the democratically elected government?

Which part of Pakistan used to receive 3 times more money from the common budget even after having far lesser population than other part?

Who started operation operation searchlight and what was the reason behind it? Who were the primary target of this operation and what was their fault?


According to ur logic all these r India's fault, right? India really did a very bad job by giving shelter to almost 10 million refugees and by helping Bengalis who were being brutally killed by the Pak army.

 

[Romali_rotti]

All this defence missile shield India is working on with prithvi, ashwin etc are just smoke screens to distract their enemies, the real thing they are working on which no one has much info about is the KALI missile shield, once this is ready it will be the real game changer:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9C1ARdH-eq0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Romali_rotti]

JF17 both which are 4th gen fighters.

LOL sorry kid had to laugh at the JF17 comment .....

 

[cricketjoshila]

Lol at the Indians claiming that they will defeat the sixth largest army in the world in a matter of days.

Also a defensive army is always at a considerable advantage due to developed bunkers and established trench lines. Some military strategists claim that you only need one third of the offensive army to effectively drive back the offense.

I won't expect keyboard warriors like you guys to know about this.

Also for the joshila folks Pakistan has plenty of F16 and JF17 both which are 4th gen fighters. You don't need to worry about our capabilities. Thank you very much.

Also as soon as we concede even an inch of our motherland India should be ready for a barrage of nukes.

Plenty of F 16s?Please tell me the numbers.LOL.plently.

And read about JF 17 from neutral experts.That fighter is not much.

Yes Pakistan is 6th or 7th largest Army but it will be againist the 3rd largest Army.And history says India Pakistan wars havent gone on for months as you may think.

Also trench and bunkers lose significance when the other airforce is superior and can bomb out the bunkers.

Now someone may say that Pakistan will use tactical nukes but that will risk a full scale nuclear attack from India.As India has already stated that any use of chemical biological or nuclear attack againist India will invite a full scale nuke attack from India.

In terms of a conventional war between India and Pakistan it will be a matter of weeks and not months nor days either.

 

[cricketjoshila]

ABM system wont defend against low flying cruise missiles ... specifically submarine launched cruise missiles targeting India's shore cities.

Also ABM systems can't deal with MIRVed warheads with numerous decoys.

Huge waste of money by India IMO.

You need to read about air defence.There are systems that can stop cruise missiles.

Also lets suppose your cruise missiles hit a Indian shore city.What will be the Indian response?Full scale retaliation againist every city in Pakistan and Pakistan will have nothing to stop it.

 

[anakin]

JF-17 ... which no country wants to buy

 

[Syed1]

JF-17 ... which no country wants to buy

Better than the LCA which only exists on paper

 

[Romali_rotti]

Better than the LCA which only exists on paper

junk fighter 17

 

[Syed1]

junk fighter 17

Even junk is better than something that doesn't exist


Itni kyun jal rahi hai haan? "Supa powa" honay ke bawajood aek lulloo sa jahaz nahi bunna ) ) )

 

[Yossarian]

Now someone may say that Pakistan will use tactical nukes but that will risk a full scale nuclear attack from India.As India has already stated that any use of chemical biological or nuclear attack againist India will invite a full scale nuke attack from India.

When your backs are to the wall and you're in danger of losing anyway to a much larger force .... "If we're going down anyway, we'll just make sure we take enough of you down with us so that even if we get annihilated, you won't get away scott-free either. Apart from any destruction we inflict upon you, just the fall-out from our death and destruction will cause havoc to you and to others in the region". Isn't that the whole point of a deterrence and why Pakistan will not rule out a first-strike nuclear option if attacked?