Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan-Sept 05, 2015

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 31 Oct 2015 10:21

ramana wrote:Shiv India does not have low yield weapons. Only high yield. So retaliation will be with what's available which happens to be high yield. So Pak will be glasses if they use anything.

What were the last 2 weapons tested in Pokran. Sub critical weapons for tactical use. We need not advertise it, but given the closeness of lahore etc to the Border we need small tactical Nukes, If we are too be serious as a nation, any Pakistani Nuclear attack must be responded by wiping out atleast 95% of the Paki population and 100% of its Miltary, this will take many hundreds of weapons- many fo them tactical especially population centres close to our Border.

We will still need a few hundred weapons as spare along with delivery capability to make sure the rest of world for once is on the side of the good.

Not responding properly to a Nuke attack is an invite for future Nuke attacks, we need the world to feel our pain and killing Indians is not an option.

We need to continuously focus and get ours sufficiently armed so that the 2 Masters China and USA realize that given our capabilities a Nook nood Pakis are in their interest. This is a many years project.

I am in no doubt that as long as the Monkeys to west have Nukes it will be definitely used one day. They are not a rational nation.

They only problem I see is the termites within our nation.

partha · Post by **partha** » 31 Oct 2015 10:33

Even if India has low yield weapons, Govt has made it clear that any nuclear attack on India or Indian forces will be met with massive retaliation.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 31 Oct 2015 14:50

I don't think India has any plans to use low yield weapons. That is a useless exercise.

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 31 Oct 2015 18:11

What if India is indeed preparing for a swift war with TSPA...... S 400 is Strategic ABM system what is the need of it now?

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 31 Oct 2015 21:06

This deserves a massive RT

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 31 Oct 2015 21:21

Pakistan to use tongue to soothe if Saudi ass is singed says Raheel Sharif
https://twitter.com/bennedose/status/660498581204275200

The key operative word here is sooth, to which Pakis will apply tongue. Tamil speakers will know..

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 31 Oct 2015 21:56

I have been seeing this proportionate response nonsense from otherwise sensible people. What they dont realize is that 'proportionate response' doctrine makes it more likely that nuclear weapons will be used in conflict than an assured massive countervalue response doctrine. It is proportionate response doctrine that dragged the US army into Vietnam, and the same doctrine that has dragged on the Kashmir issue for ages. Military force should be the last option, and if used, it should be used in an effective and murderous way. It is our proportionate response doctrine on the LoC that invites repeated provocations from Pak because they are able to do a cost benefit analysis on the violence that will be unleashed by the BSF/Army and take calculated gambles. If it was assured that Army would respond to trivial incidents by the full capability at its disposal and destroy the Paks, these pin pricks would die a very sudden death.

Proportionate response is a doctrine best suited to dealing with our own people and insurgencies. It does not apply to a nuclear adversary state.

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 31 Oct 2015 22:02

I believe this rona dhona is about trying to gauge response about the statement from foreign office. The dawn article and all others that have come about is we will use small bombs and you indians will not have will to use high yield or how can you be so unreasonable to use big guys even for a small one bomb. That means we bite you small piece at a time and you cannot use big guys because that will hurt our population of pakjabis and protistan and world community would not allow that. More puppy juppy from MMS cronies this is what happens when leaders like this come they get kind of testosterone boost.

Do hell with these sinkholes , when wars happen people die and kingdoms, empire and states get decimated or change flags deal with it and history is full of examples when even a peaceful county gets attacked by no fault of their own(you have done it, so has many countries that exist today) and the stronger will survive, it is not our fault that you are weak and small with big head,we are very reasonable only.Thats why we say they are not war fighting weapons only for deterrence. It is you who say lets say if Mumbai-II happens and you try to punish us or our proxies we will use our clown jewels do hell with you if you do a crime the nation will punish you. if you are so scared do not use them and you would be safe at cost of H&D (if you have left any after 71,argil etc.). That is should be our line you do not just try poison if you taste is price is for you to pay.

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 31 Oct 2015 22:05

ramana wrote:Are Immy the Dimmy's problems Pakistan's strategic problems?

Of course !
According to his critics:
If Kaptaan, cannot "properly manage" one person in his life, how is he expected to "keep happy" 130 million Bhooka Nanga Aam Abduls(when he becomes PM) So, according to this logic, it becomes a strategic problem for Pakistan

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 31 Oct 2015 22:28

shiv wrote:I don't think India has any plans to use low yield weapons. That is a useless exercise.

I dont agree, there are major Paki population centres close to the Indian border, we need to target these without affecting our population, we also need to take out any miltary capability as part of Nuke strike which will include Big nukes against population centres.

Do to India Pak geaography we need low yeild Nukes.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Nov 2015 00:34

Aditya_V, they were building blocks of the weapons. Only the triggers were tested. No plans for low yield weapons.

Pak wants low yield to be responded with low yield. Wont happen.

Once nuke is used all bets are off.
MAD is very much there.
Pak thinks they can use nuke and run to US to bail them out.

Not happening.

Even if it means fallout on India prevailing winds Pindi channa what ever.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 01 Nov 2015 03:40

Ya Allah!
This T-37 !!!

@Ammar dear bro.these fighter can be used for techtical pupose. more light and agile fighter for dog fighting. it will even give a run to su 35 fighter

I'll bet they'll use these to deliver their "Low Yield Techtical Nuclear Bummbs" too

Abhay_S · Post by **Abhay_S** » 01 Nov 2015 04:17

ramana wrote:Are Immy the Dimmy's problems Pakistan's strategic problems?

Fake dr Shahid Masood in his show. TIWIW

A senior officer of an agency that monitors people had informed Immy and warned Reham to not go ahead with the marriage. More news is to come..

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2015 06:01

Aditya_V wrote:
I dont agree, there are major Paki population centres close to the Indian border, we need to target these without affecting our population, we also need to take out any miltary capability as part of Nuke strike which will include Big nukes against population centres.

You are wrong in your conclusions Aditya. Low yield nukes have more fallout than more efficient high yield nukes because larger amounts of fissile material are needed to get an explosion in a bomb that is small and light. A 12-15 kiloton bomb can be made from 2 kg Plutonium. But a 0.2 to 1 kiloton low yield tactical nuke may use up 4-6 kg of Plutonium - most of which is simply dispersed in the local area by the small explosion.

Plutonium does not occur in nature and will remain in that area posing a danger for 100,000 years

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 01 Nov 2015 06:14

So what we may be having is an optimal 12-15 yield ones. If we are using one or two after a tactical one is used on us we will be inviting further attacks. The response shall be immediate, automatic and exterminating in nature. IAEN if you please. If they use then that is it - THE END.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 01 Nov 2015 06:29

Bakistan Tactical Daala, India ne Saara Pakistan uurra Daala
Nuclear deterrence

The adoption of so-called full-spectrum deterrence has been projected by the Pakistani security establishment as a strategic guarantee that Pakistan will be safe from an Indian attack, either small-scale or large-scale. But is that true and at what cost, particularly in terms of risk, is full-spectrum deterrence being pursued? Within the strategic community and at least among senior retired military officials, there are questions quietly being asked — if the Indian arms build-up is unwelcome, isn’t the Pakistani counter-response of full-spectrum deterrence exacerbating the dangers and increasing the risk of catastrophic conflict in South Asia? There are serious questions at both ends of what can effectively be termed a new deterrence strategy. Does Pakistan fundamentally need long-range missiles to hit the Andaman and Nicobar Islands to deny India a secure second-strike capability when Pakistan is not known to have the technology to track Indian land-based missiles? At the low end of the spectrum, which is where the main international concern appears to be, is Pakistan really committed to the idea of launching small nuclear missiles on its soil, even if against rapid Indian invasion forces?Unhappily, even asking questions of the country’s evolving and more muscular nuclear policy is considered problematic by the security establishment. But does the use of seemingly scientific language and the adoption of exotic strategies really make Pakistan safer and better protected? Time and again, be it 1965, 1971 or 1999, the country has woken up to disasters that were created by what were argued to be the most robust of assumptions and infallible of theories. There is surely a case to be made that Indian military build-up is a problem for Pakistan’s security and peace in South Asia. But must the answer to those new challenges increasingly and automatically be a nuclear response by Pakistan? Perhaps the more uncomfortable truth is that twice in the new century, the threat of war between India and Pakistan has been triggered by terrorist attacks. To what extent will Pakistan go to neutralise that threat?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 01 Nov 2015 06:30

Islam's symbol Pakistan No 1 Country in Girls Prostitution

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2015 06:46

Yagnasri wrote:So what we may be having is an optimal 12-15 yield ones. If we are using one or two after a tactical one is used on us we will be inviting further attacks. The response shall be immediate, automatic and exterminating in nature. IAEN if you please. If they use then that is it - THE END.

This is correct.

Proportionate response is like man pinches your wife's bottom and you pinch his bottom back. He then survives to do it again. What he needs is to be thrashed black and blue. Disproportionate response.

The Pakistani calculation is that if they use small tactical nukes - India will not have the guts to nuke them back, or will only do some mild kissy-kissy response like tactical nukes back on them and that they will get away lightly. No. They will have the shit nuked out of them

member_29089 · Post by **member_29089** » 01 Nov 2015 07:45

shiv wrote:
Yagnasri wrote:So what we may be having is an optimal 12-15 yield ones. If we are using one or two after a tactical one is used on us we will be inviting further attacks. The response shall be immediate, automatic and exterminating in nature. IAEN if you please. If they use then that is it - THE END.
This is correct.

Proportionate response is like man pinches your wife's bottom and you pinch his bottom back. He then survives to do it again. What he needs is to be thrashed black and blue. Disproportionate response.

The Pakistani calculation is that if they use small tactical nukes - India will not have the guts to nuke them back, or will only do some mild kissy-kissy response like tactical nukes back on them and that they will get away lightly. No. They will have the shit nuked out of them

I think it's too simplistic a scenario that a) pakis will mount a terrorist attack b) indian army will cross the border at Punjab c) pakis will use a tactical nuke on our tanks d) india will destroy pak with massive nuke strike back.

Largely due to ancient hindu genes, the pakis do have little bit of brain left. What if their next terrorist attack on India is a dirty nuke in downtown Kolkata with reasonable deniability? What if they contaminate the air with a dirty nuke (without any missile strike) in the path of the advancing Indian army? What if they plant nuclear-tipped mines on Pakistani soil and one is triggered by an Indian tank.

In other words, would the Indian army's tank commanders be carrying a Geiger counter to radio back "NUKE" and we will wipe off pakistan? (I hope that's the case).

What if we decide that any kind of nuke attack (clean or dirty that results in 1000 or more deaths will automatically presume that the nuke attack had it's origin in Pakistan and China. And our response would be to attack both in such a massive way that a) pakistan will not exist b) top 10 cities in china will not exist

member_29089 · Post by **member_29089** » 01 Nov 2015 08:15

Jhujar wrote:Islam's symbol Pakistan No 1 Country in Girls Prostitution

Cross posting in "Pakistan Economic Stress Watch" thread. I love the words used by this host..
(translating) "it is proven that in Governance, Democracy, and Islamic Principles we have failed as nation... watch our program"

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2015 08:28

GunterH wrote: I think it's too simplistic a scenario that a) pakis will mount a terrorist attack b) indian army will cross the border at Punjab c) pakis will use a tactical nuke on our tanks d) india will destroy pak with massive nuke strike back.

Largely due to ancient hindu genes, the pakis do have little bit of brain left. What if their next terrorist attack on India is a dirty nuke in downtown Kolkata with reasonable deniability? What if they contaminate the air with a dirty nuke (without any missile strike) in the path of the advancing Indian army? What if they plant nuclear-tipped mines on Pakistani soil and one is triggered by an Indian tank.

Please speak for yourself. You are displaying the complex Hindu genes that you speak of that result in an intense langoti knots. The ideal gift for a Paki. Fortunately all Hindus don't carry those complex ones and some have simplistic ones. All we need is for those to be in place.

member_29089 · Post by **member_29089** » 01 Nov 2015 08:44

shiv wrote:
GunterH wrote: I think it's too simplistic a scenario that a) pakis will mount a terrorist attack b) indian army will cross the border at Punjab c) pakis will use a tactical nuke on our tanks d) india will destroy pak with massive nuke strike back.

Largely due to ancient hindu genes, the pakis do have little bit of brain left. What if their next terrorist attack on India is a dirty nuke in downtown Kolkata with reasonable deniability? What if they contaminate the air with a dirty nuke (without any missile strike) in the path of the advancing Indian army? What if they plant nuclear-tipped mines on Pakistani soil and one is triggered by an Indian tank.
Please speak for yourself. You are displaying the complex Hindu genes that you speak of that result in an intense langoti knots. The ideal gift for a Paki. Fortunately all Hindus don't carry those complex ones and some have simplistic ones. All we need is for those to be in place.

Saar, I highly respect you and consider you a Guruji. Even if you rebuke me. it is my good fortune. Apologies for something I wrote that required this reaction. But was not intentional.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2015 08:51

GunterH wrote:
Saar, I highly respect you and consider you a Guruji. Even if you rebuke me. it is my good fortune. Apologies for something I wrote that required this reaction. But was not intentional.

No need to apologize. I am not saying that we should become Pakis - but the biggest difference between Pakis and Indians is the open expression of fears, doubts, anxieties and hesitation among Indians. Pakis have jackshit but they talk like a superpower. That is what gives Indians their reputation of weakness. And those who have those fears doubts anxieties will always question other Indians about how they can be so confident when so so many things can go wrong. Over 5000 years ago an entire story was told of a war in the middle of which one warrior had all these doubts, anxieties, worries etc and a classic philosophical work was created in response to that. But I digress.

When Pakis are watching never show doubt or anxiety. That scares the shit out of Pakis. The military speak confidently because they know that. Modi and the current government may never fight a war but they speak with confidence and do not attach a 1Terabyte pdf of doubts, worries and anxieties that they suffer from in case they have to nuke Pakistan.

The Indian nuclear doctrine says Pakistan will be nuked punitively. Accept that as the truth and rest easy. Delete the 1TB pdf

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2015 09:20

Jhujar wrote:Haramistani Link

Ensconced inside a multiple-barrelled mobile launcher the four 60-kilometre-range missiles are said to be tipped with nuclear warheads each roughly one-tenth the size of a Hiroshima-sized weapon. Pakistan says these tactical weapons will not destabilise the current balance or pose significant command and control problems, a claim that many believe as incorrect.[/b]
Pakistan is not the first country tempted by nuclear force multipliers. Nor, as claimed by ISPR, is making small warheads a significant technical feat. In fact in the 1950s the Americans had developed even smaller ones with sub-kiloton yields, and placed them on the Davy Crockett recoilless guns deployed at forward positions along the Turkey-USSR border. Wars are fought to be won, not to be lost. So how will Pakistan’s new weapons help us win a war? This fundamental question is never even touched.

Hudoodboy is talking shit

Nasr has a payload of 200 kg - OK maybe they have made it 300 kg and reduced range
This graph shows the weight versus diameter chart of a Pu bomb. 30 cm will be 500 kg, 40 will be 1000 kg

You can make it lighter by putting more Pu and less high explosive. That will give you a fizzle. That fizzle is called a "low yield nuke". The UK Davy Crocket was essentially a 0.2 kt fizzle You can expect nasr to be the same, if it works at all

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 01 Nov 2015 09:20

Jhujar wrote:Islam's symbol Pakistan No 1 Country in Girls Prostitution

Anchor says prostitution is the fastest growing means of livelihood in Pakistan, due to economic deprivation. This is sad.

India can and should help out at this point. India needs brides, due to a slightly lopsided gender ratio. A system needs to be put in place to funnel Pakistani brides to India, with suitable monetary compensation to their families in Pakistan. This will help ordinary Pakistanis monetarily, their daughters' future will be brighter in India, and certainly their honour will be secure.

Message tweeted here

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 01 Nov 2015 09:24

Agnimitra wrote:
Jhujar wrote:Islam's symbol Pakistan No 1 Country in Girls Prostitution

Anchor says prostitution is the fastest growing means of livelihood in Pakistan, due to economic deprivation. This is sad.

India can and should help out at this point. India needs brides, due to a slightly lopsided gender ratio. A system needs to be put in place to funnel Pakistani brides to India, with suitable monetary compensation to their families in Pakistan. This will help ordinary Pakistanis monetarily, their daughters' future will be brighter in India, and certainly their honour will be secure.

I think this can have tricky situation. The brides will have a soft-corner for Pakistan. Certainly, the kids of such relationships will be against any hard action against pakistan. I think its better to let them be for the time being and until Bhaarath is ready for Akand Bhaarath. Till then, let the pakistanis chart their course and if that happens to be prostitution, then so be it.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 01 Nov 2015 09:35

johneeG wrote:I think this can have tricky situation. The brides will have a soft-corner for Pakistan. Certainly, the kids of such relationships will be against any hard action against pakistan. I think its better to let them be for the time being and until Bhaarath is ready for Akand Bhaarath. Till then, let the pakistanis chart their course and if that happens to be prostitution, then so be it.

This is unnecessary dhoti-shivering. Creating the structures and methods for acculturation will happen only when we engage.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 01 Nov 2015 10:35

^^^
Why this largesse on Pakistani wimmens hain ji?
I say that the countries of CIS have an equally dire economic situation, minus the pakiness.
Why not import blondes and brunettes from there hain ji?

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 01 Nov 2015 10:56

Apne Newclear Program ko lekar Papistan Zyada na hawe me ude Parvaiz Hudbhoy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0604v7hNrho

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 01 Nov 2015 11:42

Lots and lots of complaints
US choose only those countries where nobody works like Pakistan: Paki Dsicussion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OLcdzeHvi8

rajpa · Post by **rajpa** » 01 Nov 2015 12:42

shiv wrote: I am not saying that we should become Pakis - but the biggest difference between Pakis and Indians is the open expression of fears, doubts, anxieties and hesitation among Indians. Pakis have jackshit but they talk like a superpower. That is what gives Indians their reputation of weakness. And those who have those fears doubts anxieties will always question other Indians about how they can be so confident when so so many things can go wrong. Over 5000 years ago an entire story was told of a war in the middle of which one warrior had all these doubts, anxieties, worries etc and a classic philosophical work was created in response to that. But I digress.

Fantastic! No digression! Please continue with what the warrior was told by his guruji!

All doubts were resolved in that battle 5000 years ago as to how and why war should be waged!!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2015 14:15

rajpa wrote:
Fantastic! No digression! Please continue with what the warrior was told by his guruji! All doubts were resolved in that battle 5000 years ago as to how and why war should be waged!!

That certainly sounds more sensible to me than worrying constantly. After all the nuclear doctrine does not express any such worries - and says that if they use nukes they will be nuked back massively. Your worries are not going to make any difference to the outcome. If you have any worries - keep them inside yourself. Putting on a brave face makes a better spectacle than getting one's undies in a huge incontinent twist and whining about all the things that can go wrong. If Pakistan nukes us - not much more can go wrong.

Of course it is possible that you may have some brainy ideas about what could be right for us after our troops get nuked by Pakistan for responding to a terror attack. I suspect that a few people, perhaps even yourself, will have ideas about how we could suffer a terror attack and then get nuked for responding, and not nuke them back in return. That is exactly what Pakistan would want anyway and any idea that you may have in support of that would be an interesting subject of debate for me. Until then, your support of putting on a brave face is welcome.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 01 Nov 2015 14:18

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... tPo-58WGps

MJ Akbar - Rips Into Pakistan and Clears shyte up... don't know if posted earlier.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 01 Nov 2015 14:38

Ramana, Shiv- I have always agreed that there cannot be different levels of 2nd strike option, once Nuclear we need to throw the Kicthen sink at Pak, including using nukes on Indian forces within Pak or a Dirty bomb attack on Indian soil. But what are the best weapons for Lahore, Sialkot etc.

rajpa · Post by **rajpa** » 01 Nov 2015 15:07

shiv wrote:
rajpa wrote:
Fantastic! No digression! Please continue with what the warrior was told by his guruji! All doubts were resolved in that battle 5000 years ago as to how and why war should be waged!!
That certainly sounds more sensible to me than worrying constantly. After all the nuclear doctrine does not express any such worries - and says that if they use nukes they will be nuked back massively. Your worries are not going to make any difference to the outcome. If you have any worries - keep them inside yourself. Putting on a brave face makes a better spectacle than getting one's undies in a huge incontinent twist and whining about all the things that can go wrong. If Pakistan nukes us - not much more can go wrong.

Of course it is possible that you may have some brainy ideas about what could be right for us after our troops get nuked by Pakistan for responding to a terror attack. I suspect that a few people, perhaps even yourself, will have ideas about how we could suffer a terror attack and then get nuked for responding, and not nuke them back in return. That is exactly what Pakistan would want anyway and any idea that you may have in support of that would be an interesting subject of debate for me. Until then, your support of putting on a brave face is welcome.

Right. Just philosophically we say (taking cues from the 5000 yr old adage) whack the heck out of them if they dare us.

In fact at the time of the tactical attack, it is already war and will already be part of the military plan to retaliate and makes no sense at all for us to worry unless if we are wargaming it.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2015 15:36

rajpa wrote:
In fact at the time of the tactical attack, it is already war ...

This is exactly the point.

Pakistan's threat of using tactical nukes has appeared in the last 4-5 years after the Cold Start doctrine was discussed. By making this threat Pakistan seeks to avoid the possibility of anyone having to say "it is already war". If it is "already war" Pakistan will have to live up to its threat of using tac nukes and India will have to live up to its retaliation threat. The threat of using tactical nukes is to make Indians think (i.e have doubts, anxieties and hesitation) about whether we will really nuke the crap out of Pakistan if they use a few teensy weensy nukes on our armoured columns inside Pakistan.

When one looks at it in this way, it is a mind game. A mind game that is rhetorically asking India if it will wage a disastrous nuclear war simply on the provocation or a tactical nuke within Pakistani territory. I can state my view of the Indian response to this mind game in a few words- its very simple "Yes we will nuke the crap out of Pakistan after a teensy weensy nuclear provocation". Why? Because if we do not make this threat and have doubts, it means that Pakistan can continue terror attacks and paralyse any response from India simply because we are scared that we will have to destroy them after a tiny tactical nuke provocation, with all the guilt and remorse that is supposed to go with it. Hence it makes logical sense to be absolutely and unshakably certain that we WILL nuke Pakistan out of existence if they use even a single tiny nuke. No one should even express doubts.

So far it is a mind game and this is the only way to play this mind game.

So how will we know who is "winning" this mind game

1. If horrendous Pakistani terror attacks continue and India does not make a satisfactory response - it means that India is scared of responding and that Pakistan is winning the mind game

2. If Pakistani terror attacks start drying up and serious provocations do not occur, India' mind game is beginning to prevail

We have to see where this goes. My personal guess is that Pakistan is dysfunctional enough to conduct one or more terror attempts - because winning the mind game and avoiding retaliation from India is also victory for them even if they get nothing more than more international opprobrium. But here things get a little hazy for me. I suspect that India is not sitting back on its haunches. I suspect that sooner or later India will be able to conduct some lightning strikes on Pakistani targets even before they can start mobilizing their Nasr and thinking about launching them. That would be deep humiliation for Pakistan and the only way they can avoid that is a pre planned coordinated terror attack with tactical missiles already in place ready for an Indian response. Currently, my feeling is that they wll not do this. I hope I am right though.

member_29119 · Post by **member_29119** » 01 Nov 2015 16:03

http://www.timesnow.tv/Pakistan-loses-U ... 482240.cms
Pissfuls loose rights to modulate piss. who's gonna now usher the rights of gazhis in gazwa-e-hind?

Dont know the implication of this in future diplomacy? Gurus could shed some light on this?

rajpa · Post by **rajpa** » 01 Nov 2015 16:08

shiv wrote:
rajpa wrote:
In fact at the time of the tactical attack, it is already war ...
This is exactly the point.

Pakistan's threat of using tactical nukes has appeared in the last 4-5 years after the Cold Start doctrine was discussed. By making this threat Pakistan seeks to avoid the possibility of anyone having to say "it is already war". If it is "already war" Pakistan will have to live up to its threat of using tac nukes and India will have to live up to its retaliation threat. The threat of using tactical nukes is to make Indians think (i.e have doubts, anxieties and hesitation) about whether we will really nuke the crap out of Pakistan if they use a few teensy weensy nukes on our armoured columns inside Pakistan.

When one looks at it in this way, it is a mind game. A mind game that is rhetorically asking India if it will wage a disastrous nuclear war simply on the provocation or a tactical nuke within Pakistani territory. I can state my view of the Indian response to this mind game in a few words- its very simple "Yes we will nuke the crap out of Pakistan after a teensy weensy nuclear provocation". Why? Because if we do not make this threat and have doubts, it means that Pakistan can continue terror attacks and paralyse any response from India simply because we are scared that we will have to destroy them after a tiny tactical nuke provocation, with all the guilt and remorse that is supposed to go with it. Hence it makes logical sense to be absolutely and unshakably certain that we WILL nuke Pakistan out of existence if they use even a single tiny nuke. No one should even express doubts.

So far it is a mind game and this is the only way to play this mind game.

So how will we know who is "winning" this mind game

1. If horrendous Pakistani terror attacks continue and India does not make a satisfactory response - it means that India is scared of responding and that Pakistan is winning the mind game

2. If Pakistani terror attacks start drying up and serious provocations do not occur, India' mind game is beginning to prevail

We have to see where this goes. My personal guess is that Pakistan is dysfunctional enough to conduct one or more terror attempts - because winning the mind game and avoiding retaliation from India is also victory for them even if they get nothing more than more international opprobrium. But here things get a little hazy for me. I suspect that India is not sitting back on its haunches. I suspect that sooner or later India will be able to conduct some lightning strikes on Pakistani targets even before they can start mobilizing their Nasr and thinking about launching them. That would be deep humiliation for Pakistan and the only way they can avoid that is a pre planned coordinated terror attack with tactical missiles already in place ready for an Indian response. Currently, my feeling is that they wll not do this. I hope I am right though.

The TSP way is for the army to create tactical trouble, get thoroughly whacked and send wazir-e-bosom to suck up to other powers to intervene and give them goodies. Nothing new in this. This time, the PM was sent in advance but TSPA did not have a terror attack in tow to raise the threat perception (because they knew that we will respond disproportionately). So they raised LoC violations, tic-tac-toe etc and got their dummy F-16s. Seems to me that the TSPA has been neutered except for the coup threat to their w-e-b. They simply cannot stand up to our disproportionate response. And they know it. They are finished.

The only thing TSPA wants is some form of equalitis so they can keep their relevance. There is no equal-equal now. They simply cannot match up to us anymore.

--- With regard to their tic-tac-toes there are all these think tanks which are getting aggressive over it saying that these weapons are uncontrollable and will inevitably land up in the wrong hands. So that argument is also a fail.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2015 16:33

rajpa wrote:
The TSP way is for the army to create tactical trouble, get thoroughly whacked and send wazir-e-bosom to suck up to other powers to intervene and give them goodies. Nothing new in this. This time, the PM was sent in advance but TSPA did not have a terror attack in tow to raise the threat perception (because they knew that we will respond disproportionately). So they raised LoC violations, tic-tac-toe etc and got their dummy F-16s. Seems to me that the TSPA has been neutered except for the coup threat to their w-e-b. They simply cannot stand up to our disproportionate response. And they know it. They are finished.

We may not be near the end yet, but Paki desperation is showing. As a complete diversion from the topic of retaliation and tactical nukes I got a big kick out of Raheel Sharif's assertion that Pakistan will "retaliate strongly" if Saudi Arabia's sovereignty is harmed. The Paki army must have been told to fall in line after all the lack of support the Saudis got in their war. That apart, Nawaz Sharif is saying "We don't want war with India". On the surface it sounds like he is such a peacemonger. But why would Pakistan say that they don't want war with India if they are not planning to start war. India has not threatened to start a war either - except if Pakistan conducts another terrorist attack. In this connection Nawaz Sharif apparently stated repeatedly that Pakistan is a nuclear power.

All this is definitely aimed at saying that Pakistan seems to have read the signal that India might start a war. While Pakistan accuses India of being a warmongering nation, it is certain they they have read India's signal that there will be war in response to terror and that Pakistan has to be ready to arm its nuclear missiles in the knowledge that those missiles, if used is certain to invite nuclear retaliation from India. It is Pakistan's turn to "think" how war can be avoided if they are so certain that they are going to nuke us. The warning is clear. No more terror attacks.

I do not think that will be India's last demand. there must be no more harbouring of criminals and there must be no more economic warfare. These are dinosaur-dung sized pills for Pakistan to swallow - but they must be made to swallow them. What astounds me is the degree of ignorant buggering about and sloth that Indian government and diplomatic circles have shown while failing to understand simple facts about Pakistan that have now been available in a tsunami of literature for over a decade

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 01 Nov 2015 16:48

Pakistan intrsopectin on the recent electoral loss in the UN

According to an insider, Pakistan was planning to raise at the council the issue of human rights violations in India-occupied Kashmir in a big way. Now the country will not have this advantage at least till it gets re-elected.

“There were multiple reasons why Pakistan didn’t get elected,” an official at the Foreign Office said.

The two major blocs that did not vote for Pakistan were the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).

The Asean countries did not vote for Pakistan because of its policy on the South China Sea dispute, while the Gulf states had their own set of grievances.

Votes from the Organisation for Islamic Cooperation always helped Pakistan in the past elections, but this time the group was divided on the issue because of the stance of GCC.

Western countries also had their qualms. The Nordic countries in particular had concerns about Pakistan’s human rights record — death penalty, the blasphemy issue and persecution of Christians, Ahmadis and Shias. Others were uncomfortable over the strong position Pakistan took on issues like drones and ‘Islamophobia’.

Assertiveness has a price

“The West ganged up against Pakistan because of the strong and independent policies that Pakistan has pursued in the HRC. Western support for docile countries like Mongolia, Kyrgyzstan, South Korea and the Philippines appears to be part of a concerted effort to make the HRC more compliant to western agendas,” an observer said.

“It also explains why Mongolia, a small country with limited means and certainly no visible campaign, was able to get the highest number of votes.”

According to an official, incumbency was another factor behind the defeat. Pakistan had been on the council almost since its inception. Therefore, some countries felt it was time to give a chance to others.

But at the same time there were some blunders committed by the Foreign Office.

The permanent representative in Geneva, where the council is based, was changed at the wrong time. The new representative had taken over the charge of the mission from Zamir Akram barely a fortnight before the elections and could not do much. The voting took place in New York, but still the outreach of the representative in Geneva is considered very important for the election.

“The outgoing Pakistani representative may have lost interest and the new one had little time to lobby,” sources said.

While there was practically no canvassing in Geneva, the foreign ministry too did little to contact the embassies here for securing their countries’ votes.

The campaigning by officers of the Pakistani mission at the UN in New York was also found wanting.

There has also been a controversy over the reciprocal arrangements worked out with various countries. The country put its weight behind the individual candidatures of Anwar Kamal and Barrister Zafarullah for two UN committees that cost votes for the national candidature this time.

“The decision to give preference to an individual candidate for the Committee for Elimination of Racial Hatred over the national candidacy for the HRC led to the loss of at least 20 votes that could have been secured if the arrangement had not been made,” the sources said.

More importantly, the Foreign Office failed to timely anticipate the electoral defeat and withdraw from the race.

“It is a setback, but with robust diplomacy and an active role in other forums, this will not be difficult to overcome,” an official said.