RimmerLast 4 odd posts have NOTHING TO DO WITH IAF.
Can we now stop this? :confused:
RimmerNice pictures of new smart PAF VIP jets.
Citation Excel
Gulfstream
RimmerIs there a feature where a mod can ban posters from specific threads based on history ?
George Bernard Shaw said – I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it. A mod will understandably be hard pressed to defend someone who chose to jump in.
Back to PAF, other than India, Does PAF have any other intended use ? Is there any planning in PAF that focusses on threats from say – Afghanistan ? Iran ? US ? internal revolts ? I have only seen PAF comparisons with IAF, here and other forums.
Does any Pakistani poster here have any information about what other goals PAF has ?
You really do want to screw up this thread dont you?
RimmerIndia is an emerged economy (as per BRIC) and with a burgeoning middle-class of some 300m+, she doesn’t need to concern herself with the needless WMD chest-beating of her neighbour with a
India should be preparing herself to take her rightful place @ the G10 within as little as 5 years (ironically displacing her former imperialist master :D:D:cool:;):p).She doesn’t need to engage with tyranical, fanatical (religious or other) failed states, who’s only contribution to the World is nuclear blackmail.
As for her immediate vicinity, the Afghanitan-Pakitan question can be left to the Obama-nation.
How is that in any way,shape or form related to the post I made?
You just had a rant!
:confused:
RimmerThey do?….anyway Pakistan is much much smaller.
Did you read the links I posted about what a “massive” attack by Pakistan can do or not do?
Kasturiranga Santhanam, the coordinator of India’s 1998 nuclear tests, went public with allegations that India’s much heralded Pokhran II test of a thermonuclear bomb 11 years ago was actually a fizzle.
“We are totally naked vis-a-vis China, which has an inventory of 200 nuclear bombs, the vast majority of which are giant H-bombs of power equal to three million tons of TNT,” Santhanam told reporters in New Delhi this week.
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/india/090928/thermonuclear-test-india-fizzle
Some senior Indians are debating if India actually has an efficient capability to deliver any nuclear weapons.
RimmerIts no dig. I’m not questioning the morality of sponsoring terrorism, as that would be a political discussion. But pakistani leaders in the past have repeatedly stressed that use of ‘non-state’ actors is a legitimate tactic to force india to negotiate on kashmir as well as to tie up indian military resources. Indian military accepts the real problems created by this tactic and continues to make plans and purchases to counter this threat.
The covering fire provided by pakistanis at the borders for helping terrorists cross over is real, documented and occurring very often even a few days back. You can question the use of word terrorist and call them non-uniformed commandoes instead, but insertion of such individuals into india by pakistan is a real military issue we have to deal with.
There has been some debate in india about returning the favor, but there is little point in killing civilians in pakistan when its rulers do not heed public opinion. Also the cost of setting up a system to create and support non state actors is too costly to the host nation. We believe its cheaper to defend against terrorism than fight it with the same tactics.
What is there for me to play at ? other than hope indian military makes the right choices to manage this ?
I have no problem accepting India’s conventional and strategic shortcomings w.r.t china just as I know pakistan is a receeding threat to india militarily. I do not think this will be a meaningful discussion as you may find it difficult to acknowledge it openly given your other posts.
OK, I am bugging out of this one.As we know,one mans terrorist is another freedom fighter. I can list why people take up arms against India, but dont feel that would contribute to this thread. You candebate this with yourself.
RimmerPLA dont bother replying. It is obviouswhat some posters are trying to do here.
RimmerWhich is what I said. India as of today cannot fight a full blown conventional war against China because a) We have only defensive capability against China and b) We have a major weakness in strategic capability in terms of nukes and missiles wrt china.
Thus india can only defend. A purely defensive posture is a disadvantage because the aggressor always has the first mover advantage and gets to choose time and place of engagements.
Hence india will not have a conventional war with China – except holding actions, until we have nuke parity. After that it will be a stalemate and resolution of issues by talks only.
This is similar to Pakistan’s problem with India. Pakistan cannot afford a conventional war with india.
Difference being terrorism is not an acceptable tactic for india against china or anyone else. The internal price to pay is too heavy (even assuming we are not the good guys) as pakistan is discovering.
I’m sorry for Pakistanis that their leaders chose to go that way, but these choices have made pakistan’s economy so weak it is not a threat to india any more in terms of conventional military capabilities. While Pakistan may have one or two type of equipment of good quality in limited numbers, in terms of the entire war fighting system and infrastructure, it is far behind india and the gap is increasing fast each day. Having a couple of submarines or a few f-16s does not make a big difference by itself. It may mean a little extra caution but hardly a major planning effort by indians.
You know what.I am gonna let the dig about sponsorship of terrorism go. Its not a political forum here, and I can guess what you are playing at.
The gap is increasing? Thats reall strange. From all the news going on recently evidence points to the contrary. Several areas where India had advantges in conventional warfare over Pakistan have now disappeared. I can list them for you if you want?
Admins:
By DoveR
“Difference being terrorism is not an acceptable tactic for india against china or anyone else. The internal price to pay is too heavy (even assuming we are not the good guys) as pakistan is discovering.”
??????
RimmerAs of today only USA and Russia are capable of any thing that can be called a Mass Nuclear Attack. Others, even china, can take out a few high value targets, hopefully enough to force the enemy to do the math and come to the negotiating table – or as protection against attacks on their own high value targets.
India will be able to destroy may be top 5 pakistani cities. But the entire pakistani countryside, its agriculture etc will be untouched. The less industrialized a country is, the less damage nukes can cause. Pakistan’s ability to destroy india is even more limited. It can take out parts of say mumbai, delhi and may be bangalore. It will be a bad hit, but india will be back on track in 10 – 15 years.
Nuclear war is horrible, but hardly the end of anything. There is no alternative to continually building conventional capabilities, even as you make more friends and less enemies.
Back on track in 10-15 years!!!!!!!!!???????? 😮
Indian industry is heavily centralised, as are its population centres. More so then Pakistan which is a more rural society still.
Your statement does not take this into account.
Also, from press reports India has had massive issues with both its actual nuke warhead yields and its missile systems.
Most estimates actually give Pakistan more warheads then India. Additionally Pak warheads have higher yield.
Anyhow, to take of a country that will be back on track in 10-15 years after a massive missile strike is utterly insane.Hell, alot of cities will not be inhabitable by that time frame.
I dont want to go into a conversation about he effects of a nuclear war. It is beyond the scope of this thread, and also quite depressing to think about.
RimmerIMO, indian military planning has evolved beyond conventional wars with Pakistan. India knows that Pakistan knows a full blown conventional war with india will very quickly end with large parts of pakistan in indian hands and perhaps pakistan broken into 3-4 pieces. However use of terrorists continues to be a ‘viable’ option for pakistan. Indian civil society will not allow use of similar tactics to respond and indian conventional superiority is deterred by pakistani nukes. Thus in case of pakistan indian military planning is focussed on anti-terrorist equipment to locate and eliminate crossings, suppress pakistani supporting fire at the border, commando protection for cities and vital installations etc.
Major conventional military planning by india is now almost entirely focussed on China. Here the situation is reversed, where while china is deterred by indian nukes from a major invasion, they can (if they wish) carry out minor operations at the borders with the indian ability to respond limited to defence and damage control. Basically any quick attack by China will end with Chinese being able to declare peace and hold on to territory that india won’t be able to dislodge them from.
This is what india is trying to solve with military upgrades.
Matching China has an added advantage of also taking care of pakistan as most pakistani equipment these days are chinese and less capable than what chinese themselves use.
It is IMHO, meaningless to talk about Pakistani military equipment as a factor that influences indian choices. 20 years ago, may be. Not any more.
However, Pakistan’s self proclaimed enmity does offer a convenient excuse for India to avoid naming others as enemies while making major military expenses.
Funny.Some posters claimIndian strategy is the other way round and they will never have a conventional war with China. Infact had a PM exchange with a Indian poster convincing me this was definately the case.
In terms of Pakistani weapons I would not be so sure.
For every major piece of military hardware Pakistan is aqquring it is following a dual track proecurment procedure. Small numbers of high tech western weapons accompanied by larger numbers of Chinece weapons. This gives us a sanctions proof war fighting capability as well we stranghth in numbers.
RimmerTroll alert!
Mod please look into this. Unnecessary, unrelated!
Nice try Rajan.I simply point out your post was about an Indian system that is not even fully developed and theoretical and you reply using the term “Troll” in highlights.
Not quite what explanation I was looking for regarding hw India has a working ABM system, but I guess that may have been asking for too much….
RimmerYou are right in a “perfect world.” Just whip out a missile, add nuclear bomb and send them to India. it is not so. Anyone threatening nukes is an international outcast. There are very sophisticated equipment continuously looking at international weapons sites (including Pakistan and India).
If MIRV threat comes, the BMD defenses will change to adopt to that need. Nano electronics, better sensors etc, higher capacity chips etc. It will change. Look at the BMD in Poland issue. People are more worried of a BMD as much as a nuclear missile test.
What I am trying to impress upon you is that no country can launch a “mass strike” on another country with nuclear tipped missile. They will be lucky to launch even one. This is an outdated theory which even US and Russia have stopped subscribing.
Its is a deterrent. It is not an offensive weapon.
As per your theory, if there are 80 nuclear weapons striking India, it will wipe out Pakistan too. No need for second India strike. You will alter the environmental balance of the entire world. You can understand this will not be allowed by the world. Why do you think there is such intense scrutiny on Pakistani nuclear weapons. This is precisely this reason. there is no evil axis which is trying to take out Pakistani nuclear weapons. Your leaders have brought it upon you. Had they been responsible like “NFU’, No order of arming missile with nuclear weapons during kargil (as per the press reports) etc, probably Pakistan wouldn’t be trying to protect those nuclear weapons from international community.
Zero
A mass nuclear attack is extacly what Pakistan antcipates. I dont doubt in the future countermeasures may be devloped, but then counter measures to the countermeasures will be developed, such is the history of warfare.
I agree, Pakistan will face annhiliation in a Nuclear war. I would nevr even debate that, but the point if detterence is that even if India survives, here may not be much left worth surviving for.
As for what the world will allow, tragically for both nations if may be too late.
My end point to this debate, is there is no safe full proof defence in place against a Pakistani mass missile attack.
RimmerThe fact is that Sweden do not have the leverage the other nations have. So if we insist ok we will buy the Gripen now if you will not offer it to PAF in future the chances are that they will go for it.
The only jet in the MRCA that the PAF can get or afford is an inferior version of the F 16. The LM guys in India for example insist it is superior to the PAF jets all the time.
Actually the MRCA is such a big deal that the GOI can make all other nations bar Americans not sell the fighters to the PAF. Upgrading/buying submarines UAV and other equipment is a totally different matter altogether.
Sweden is a very advanced and wealthy nation.It has plenty of leverage. Should India decide not to do business with Sweden India will be shooting itself in the foot. Swedes are very well aware of this.
What you are in effect saying is that the MRCS deal is so big you can make a potential seller place what amounts to an arms embargoe on Pakistan?
There is no precedent for this and again it shows some lack of knowledge on the international arms trade.
Let me give you an example.
US has a MASSIVE amount of leverage on Pakistan, yet this has not stopped Pakistan trading weapons with Iran and Venezuala.
Right now as I posted, many MRCA contender nations are selling all sorts of advanced weaponry to Pakistan. Even Russia is providing us fighter engines, as I type this.
None of this will change once an orderis plcaed. You may think this, and I respect your opnion.Mine is very different, that is all.
Rimmerwell, you yourself propound “sole operator” theories, amazing ‘mathematics’ and erm, convert your “opinions” into “facts” ….
didnt see you answer any of the questions posed to you …On what basis then you claim that others dont answer to your questions !! :rolleyes: 😮
Nirav. I thought we have been through this. I dont communicate with people who throw around religious insults. Or have you forgotton this?
Is my approval or recognition still so important to you?
RimmerRimmer,
Pakistani or not, discussing shooting down a nuke arsenal is not really pointless. This is an international headache. While it is not possible to launch as salvo you had mentioned, which caught my attention. Using a nuclear weapon is a taboo and shooting down one ain’t. Today countries are spending a lot of money not on launching a weapon, but, methods to shoot down one.
India is spending a lot on such research and it has verified lot of technology with tests.
India launching a nuclear missile on Pakistan is a as much as the current level of BMD Pakistan has fielded. That means “none.’ India has a NFU policy.
The possibility of Pakistan launching one nuclear missile is equivalent of India able to stop one. I mean, both are a shot in the dark. Incrementally, India will deploy a basic BMD. That means the shot in the dark possibility of Pakistanis launching a nuclear missile “might” remain the same or even more retarded (due to US and other events in Pakistan). Where as Indian basic BMD capability and the possible chance of US/israel/Russian involvement in development of BMD (they are offering Patriots etc) will increase the chances of rouge launch getting shot down.
And, don’t look at this as a US/Israeli/Indian/Russian conspiracy. Its only logical that prevention of nuclear strike is an international priority. Secondly, Indian nukes are in civilian government control. Indian Armed forces are involved in security, maintainence and upkeep of the arsenal subsets. We don’t talk about nuclear weapons as an offensive capability. We call it just deterrence.
I just wanted to make few points. I hope you will understand.
Zero
I see your point about defeating a rogue launch, but shoting down one random missile is a very different scenario from all out war.
In a few years Pakistan will probably have MIRVs. It will make efforts to destory any Indian ABM system. It will also launch mass attacks.
No foolproof system for “winning” in such a scanrio exists as I am sure you can appreciate….
Sign In
