Valkan S. wrote:
Nukes, by their very nature, are meant to deter/respond to a very strong tactical conventional manouvre ( FU ) , or to deter a nuclear strike ( NFU ).
Nonsense. NFU does not deter a nuclear strike, as much as you would like to pretend it does. This is well understood, so don't start making up stuff.
And isn't it rather convenient to pretend that WMDs that cannot deter the enemy from attacking you with conventional weapons, will somehow deter him from attack you with nukes? How do we know that the enemy has been "deterred" as opposed to "just waiting until the time is right"? Can you tell the difference? how?
In other words, their use is to deter serious damage to socio-economic and military infrastructure.
Err..um...maybe it is just my faulty logic engine, but common sense would dictate that if a WMD cannot deter "mild damage to socio-economic infrastructure", then it cannot deter "serious damage to socio-economic infrastruture"....or does one have to be a Vulcan to figure this one out?
Subconventional warfare and terrorist threats with plausible deniability are not covered under the "deterrence" paradigm.
Ah, right. As my buddy in college said:
There are only 5 uses for nuclear energy because that is all that is in the syllabus. Don't confuse me with reality.
So what if it is not covered under the "normal deterrence" paradigm but only in the "Extended gonzo edition deterrence" paradigm? Reality is still the same, is it not? Or are we going to pretend that if a textbook claims that under a certain model (that was authored by people based on a different reality), proxy warfare cannot be dealt with, then we are all supposed to ignore proxy warfare just so we can neatly fit reality into the textbook model?
This "forgiving" image of India is rather over-hyped.
We all have seen, and continue to see, the response of the Indian govt. to an ever-detriorating internal and external security environment. I double dare you to prove to people here that the events, as reported in the aftermath of 7/11 upto the present time, do not present a "forgiving image of India". Maybe the Indian govt. is extremely furious deep inside, but that is not being reported in the newspapers last I saw.
Pakistan has been forced to make quid-pro-quo concessions every time it mistakenly upped the ante.
Really, why don't you spell out what these quid-pro-quos were for the last 10 terror attacks in India. And no "cancelling secreatary level talks" does not count.
Although this falls short of the "kick it in the groin" demand from hyper-nationalists here, it is the results that count.
There is a logical reason for giving a kick in the groin, so cut the nonsense about this being some sort of emotional demands from "hyper nationalists".
If you cannot give a rebuttal that is fine, just don't pull stuff out of your hat.
So tell me, what are these "results" you talk about? Is the mumbai train bombing the "result" of some earlier "quid pro quo"? Let us see what
Pakistan has gotten after bombing mumbai: intel sharing, plausible deniability for conducting terrorist ops in India, the recent shipping agreement, to name just a few. Why don't you spell out what pakistan gave up for all of this?
The strategy of this game is to limit Pakistan's range of options and tire it out, while isolating it diplomatically with regards to J&K.
Err...in case you have not been paying attention, Pakistan's options have increased all around India. How does this amount to "limiting Pakistan's options"? Or are we going to pretend that the Indo-pak border is all of pakistan's options?
By any and all measure, India has been reasonably successful in this endeavour.
Yes, yes, denial is only a river in Egypt.
It may not satisfy your appetite for a final crushing showdown ( "Ispar Uspar" according to ABV ), but it is an effective policy of carefully calibrated escalation called "managed conflict".
Sounds like a wonderful paradigm, as long as one's arse is not hanging from the lamppost after a terrorist attack. No, I don't crave for a showdown or a bakeoff with Pakistan, but if we supposedly have a "credible deterrent", it better deter attacks on India that seem to happen on a monthly basis.