India Pakistan Nuke Scenario - NFU Policy - Massive Retaliation & Possible War Scenarios

[Mikesingh]

We know where they store it, there SPD and other things, our friend Raj Sir has scan every inch of Pak, in private initiative.

Call me dumb but who is 'Raj Sir'????

 

[captscooby81]

an expert on satellite imagery and he is loved for sharing his precious finds of satellite images about our porkiland and chinnis defence establishments in his twitter handle

Call me dumb but who is 'Raj Sir'????

 

[lcafanboy]

US making 'big bet' on India in wake of Pak-China alliance: Russian media


March 26, 2017, 8:51 pm

The United States is "seriously concerned" about the growing alliance between Pakistan and China, prompting Washington to make a "big bet" on India, says Vzglyad, a Russian online newspaper.

"Washington is seriously concerned about the strengthening of the core China-Pakistan in the Asia-Pacific region," says the newspaper.

"Growing Chinese activity in the Asia-Pacific region and Central Asia against the backdrop of the loss of influence on Islamabad makes them do a big bet on India. That they see it as the main counterweight to China and the deterrent factor."

An increasing Chinese presence, according to the newspaper, in the Asia-Pacific region in general and in Pakistan in particular has prompted Washington to "actively" increase its "military cooperation with New Delhi".

The newspaper says that Islamabad's fallout with Washington in recent times "allowed China to take their niche, significantly strengthening its influence in Central Asia".

This strategic Sino-Pak alliance, it says, and the ever-increasing defence cooperation between the two countries have become a sign of concern for New Delhi.

"The planned opening of China's military bases in Pakistan actually closes the ring of Chinese bases around India. In Delhi, a growing fear that the strengthening of cooperation of Beijing and Islamabad, especially in the military sphere, may result in their aggression against India."

Islamabad considers China an "all-weather friend" and in recent years the countries have grown even closer on the back of the $57 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a Beijing-funded network of road, rail and pipelines that will link western China with Pakistan's Arabian Sea port of Gwadar.

The armies of the two countries have in recent years increased cooperation. A 90-member Chinese contingent participated for the first time in the Pakistan Day parade in Islamabad on March 23.
https://www.google.co.in/amp/nation...-wake-of-pak-china-alliance-russian-media/amp

There is a joker in house, America.

Now guess what that Big Bet is. It will allow India to cut Pakistan into smaller state s so it can retain hold in this strategic location.

 

[A chauhan]

Seeing the title of the thread, I smell something big is going to happen, but can't say what!!

 

[sayareakd]

Seeing the title of the thread, I smell something big is going to happen, but can't say what!!

Nothing just having fun at Pak's expence. Once they hear about our new doctrine, there army will adopt new one, which will force them to make even more bomb and missiles, end result there eco will suffer. We will make them bankrupt.

Pak has already given name to our new doctrine "All Spectrum Dominance".

Let them brown there salwars.

More they are scared, better for us. Just keep them on boil, short of war and they will fall on there own weight.

 

[lcafanboy]

Seeing the title of the thread, I smell something big is going to happen, but can't say what!!

Pakistan is going Kaput. India will ensure there's no Pakistan if something big happens in India like Mumbai or uri attack.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

The million dollar question is: Does India know exactly where the Paki nukes are stored? If not, this counter force strategy of knocking out the nukes in a pre-emptive strike doesn't hold water. We can however destroy all their nuclear facilities, but that won't prevent the Pakis from launching a first strike as their nukes are far removed from these facilities.

May not be but Indian plan is to hit all possible locations. Small location can be hit with non nuclear high explosive but big sites can be hit with tactical nukes.

 

[SurgicalStrike]

I dont think that pakies balls are made up of steel to launch the nukes against India!! if they do that misadventure, The rest is in history for pakies

 

[sayareakd]

I dont think that pakies balls are made up of steel to launch the nukes against India!! if they do that misadventure, The rest is in history for pakies

True, they live in there stupid world, they think that they will attack us and we wont do anything. 1965, 1971 and 1999 prove that.

 

[Villager]

Can somebody shed some light on aftereffects in the event of nuclear explosions from either one/two or all three of nuclear powers? What will be the civillian casualities, what will be the state of economy, effect on environment and the people who survive it and the kids born later. How long will it take for all the damage to be undone?

 

[mayfair]

I dont think that pakies balls are made up of steel to launch the nukes against India!! if they do that misadventure, The rest is in history for pakies

Probably not.but their brains do reside permanently in those shrivelled prunes they call balls.

More importantly, you should understand that what we call as misadventure, is what they believe is following in the footsteps of "their Islamic ancestors, who despite set backs, kept probing and eventually conquered the sub-continent".

Our reluctance to sufficiently punish them for their misdemeanours makes them feel emboldened that the history will repeat itself and they will prevail over the kaafir Hindus in the end.

The misadventures are not likely to stop anytime soon. They will only end when Pakistan and the very idea of Pakistan including its proponents are completely put to rest.

 

[captscooby81]

If India and Pakistan fought a war detonating 100 nuclear warheads (around half of their combined arsenal), each equivalent to a 15-kiloton Hiroshima bomb, more than 21 million people will be directly killed, about half the world’s protective ozone layer would be destroyed, and a “nuclear winter” would cripple the monsoons and agriculture worldwide.

As the Indian Army considers armed options, and a member of Parliament of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party urges a nuclear attack and the Pakistan defence minister threatens to “annihilate” India in return, these projections, made by researchers from three US universities in 2007, are a reminder of the costs of nuclear war.


Visualisation by nucleardarkness.org based on study by researchers from Rutgers University, University of Colorado-Boulder and University of California, Los Angeles
BJP Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy said on September 23 that if 100 million Indians died in a Pakistani nuclear attack, India’s retaliation would wipe out Pakistan.
But the real costs would be higher and not just in India and Pakistan, where the first 21 million people – half the death toll of World War II – would perish within the first week from blast effects, burns and acute radiation, according to the 2007 study by researchers from Rutgers University, University of Colorado-Boulder and University of California, Los Angeles, all in the USA.

This death toll would be 2,221 times the number of civilians and security forces killed by terrorists in India over nine years to 2015, according to an IndiaSpend analysis of South Asia Terrorism Portal data.

Another two billion people worldwide would face risks of severe starvation due to the climatic effects of the nuclear-weapon use in the subcontinent, according to this 2013 assessment by the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, a global federation of physicians.

Pakistan has an estimated 110 to 130 nuclear warheads as of 2015 – an increase from an estimated 90 to 110 warheads in 2011 – according to this report from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a global disarmament advocacy. India is estimated to have 110 to 120 nuclear warheads.

However, he cautioned: “The fallout of the nuclear attacks on Lahore and Karachi, for instance, would not just be restricted to the Pakistani territory, and depending on the wind directions, can affect both Indian and Afghan border territories.”

This article first appeared on IndiaSpend, a data-driven and public-interest journalism non-profit.

Can somebody shed some light on aftereffects in the event of nuclear explosions from either one/two or all three of nuclear powers? What will be the civillian casualities, what will be the state of economy, effect on environment and the people who survive it and the kids born later. How long will it take for all the damage to be undone?

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Probably not.but their brains do reside permanently in those shrivelled prunes they call balls.

More importantly, you should understand that what we call as misadventure, is what they believe is following in the footsteps of "their Islamic ancestors, who despite set backs, kept probing and eventually conquered the sub-continent".

Our reluctance to sufficiently punish them for their misdemeanours makes them feel emboldened that the history will repeat itself and they will prevail over the kaafir Hindus in the end.

The misadventures are not likely to stop anytime soon. They will only end when Pakistan and the very idea of Pakistan including its proponents are completely put to rest.

This is fully correct analysis of Muzzie state pakistan.

 

[scatterStorm]

Nothing just having fun at Pak's expence. Once they hear about our new doctrine, there army will adopt new one, which will force them to make even more bomb and missiles, end result there eco will suffer. We will make them bankrupt.

Pak has already given name to our new doctrine "All Spectrum Dominance".

Let them brown there salwars.

More they are scared, better for us. Just keep them on boil, short of war and they will fall on there own weight.

I beg to differ, we might be in the impression that they will crush under there own pile of economic crisis, but I am not seeing this to happen very soon, not even after WW3. There's always somebody that aids them, from 70s to till 2014 US was aiding them, they still do but they've dropped the few million dollars in there aid, now China is aiding them, and it will continue to do so until the chinkies think that there geo political rival, i.e. US and us have not lost the steam, soon the saudis will follow the suite, as it's not new that Paki army and Saudi royal family have plans to covertly set up islamic stronghold, it's all over the saudi documentaries. Russia has also seen interest in them as a good dog that would keep in check of our country so that we continue to milk them for years after years.

What I am trying to say is, as long as a nation whose entire economy is woven upon religious ideologies of Islam, there will be other Islamic countries and other super powers for there own geo-political interest will that will continue to breed such leeches.

We might be thinking that preventing them to wage a war is a good strategy but I think it should be secondary policy of our geo-political stance against them, the primary should be building strong ties with other nations and dropping them into a pool of sanctions. But sanctions won't do any good, as they don't shy away to beg for aid from UN and other European countries.

IMO if we go again to a war with them, we should goodness darn make sure we cripple or downright make there place obsolete, by nuking there strategic nuclear arsenal sites. We should drop our NFU policy of nuclear retaliation, because these mofos will not shy away to take us with them to there so called paradise.

Prof. Vipin Narang at MIT center for geopolitical studies has said that our NFU policy stance is changed, to which he quoted:

A comprehensive first nuclear strike may be a decision that India could take, as the tactical nukes of Pakistan directly opens the door to be a key incentive for India to provoke a massive nuclear strike on strategic targets inside Pakistan.

Here's a link to recent article on our stance on NFU policy from the credible source -- The wire

https://thewire.in/118062/is-the-indian-nuclear-doctrine-evolving/

Here's a recent 2017 Carnegie International Nuclear policy conference video where Vipin Narang gives us some insights as well, start from 13:39 to 20:01 for his intro, but I suggest to view the whole video, it's so insightful.

 

[lcafanboy]

Especially worried about Hindutva plus nukes', say Pakistani experts

PTIIndia's nuclear-capable Agni-V intercontinental ballistic missile. (Photo: PTI)
HIGHLIGHTS

• A retired Pakistani general said Islamabad has “always been sceptical about Indian 'no first use' (NFU) claims”
• An MIT expert this week flagged that India might be okay with a pre-emptive first use of nukes against Pakistan for defensive purposes

NEW DELHI: Pakistan's nuclear experts are worried, of course, about signals emerging from New Delhi that it might be reconsidering its 'no first use' of nukes policy.

They are, however, especially worried this change is "happening against the backdrop of (the) extremist Hindutva agenda of the Bharatiya Janata Party government", said a retired Pakistani general still associated with Islamabad's own nuclear strategy, Dawn reported today.



India's rethink "is the latest in a series of provocative actions," said retired general Ehsan ul Haq, a former chairman of Pakistan's Joint Chiefs of Staff.

A Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) expert of Indian origin was the first to flag a possible change in India's thinking. That is, New Delhi moving away from its policy of 'no first use' (NFU) and carrying out a pre-emptive nuclear strike against Pakistan if it believed Pakistan was going to use nuclear weapons against it.

"India will not allow Pakistan to go first. And that India's opening salvo may not be conventional strikes trying to pick off just Nasr batteries in the theatre," Vipin Narang, a nuclear strategist from MIT, said at a seminar in Washington on Monday.

The retired Pakistani general said Islamabad has "always been sceptical about Indian NFU claims."

Narang's recent comments have "only vindicated Pakistan's position that India-declared NFU policy is a sham", general Haq reportedly said, adding "he's happy that the Indians are now themselves exposing their claims", Dawn wrote.

India's recent steps "from admission of interference in erstwhile East Pakistan to references to Balochistan and Gilgit-Baltistan, scuttling the Saarc summit, escalation along the Line of Control, claims of surgical strikes, diplomatic manoeuvring to isolate Pakistan and domestic war hysteria had heightened tensions between the two countries," the retired Pakistani general added.

At the same time, Haq said India was "challenging the credibility of Pakistan's nuclear deterrence through doctrinal as well as technological developments".

Haq made these comments at the launch of a book, 'Learning to Live with the Bomb, Pakistan: 1998-2016', by Dr Naeem Salik, who's a former official of the Strategic Plans Division.

Salik said India's changing nuclear strategy has kept Pakistani strategists on their toes.

"We have not only got to study our side of the game, we also have to watch out what is happening on the other side so that we learn from there also and adapt and reform own processes as well," the author said.
http://m.timesofindia.com/india/esp...ukes-strategy-vs-pak/articleshow/57957975.cms


Now even their generals are rattled, good.:bounce::bounce::bounce:

 

[Flame Thrower]

If India and Pakistan fought a war detonating 100 nuclear warheads (around half of their combined arsenal), each equivalent to a 15-kiloton Hiroshima bomb, more than 21 million people will be directly killed, about half the world’s protective ozone layer would be destroyed, and a “nuclear winter” would cripple the monsoons and agriculture worldwide.

As the Indian Army considers armed options, and a member of Parliament of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party urges a nuclear attack and the Pakistan defence minister threatens to “annihilate” India in return, these projections, made by researchers from three US universities in 2007, are a reminder of the costs of nuclear war.


Visualisation by nucleardarkness.org based on study by researchers from Rutgers University, University of Colorado-Boulder and University of California, Los Angeles
BJP Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy said on September 23 that if 100 million Indians died in a Pakistani nuclear attack, India’s retaliation would wipe out Pakistan.
But the real costs would be higher and not just in India and Pakistan, where the first 21 million people – half the death toll of World War II – would perish within the first week from blast effects, burns and acute radiation, according to the 2007 study by researchers from Rutgers University, University of Colorado-Boulder and University of California, Los Angeles, all in the USA.

This death toll would be 2,221 times the number of civilians and security forces killed by terrorists in India over nine years to 2015, according to an IndiaSpend analysis of South Asia Terrorism Portal data.

Another two billion people worldwide would face risks of severe starvation due to the climatic effects of the nuclear-weapon use in the subcontinent, according to this 2013 assessment by the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, a global federation of physicians.

Pakistan has an estimated 110 to 130 nuclear warheads as of 2015 – an increase from an estimated 90 to 110 warheads in 2011 – according to this report from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a global disarmament advocacy. India is estimated to have 110 to 120 nuclear warheads.

However, he cautioned: “The fallout of the nuclear attacks on Lahore and Karachi, for instance, would not just be restricted to the Pakistani territory, and depending on the wind directions, can affect both Indian and Afghan border territories.”

This article first appeared on IndiaSpend, a data-driven and public-interest journalism non-profit.

I always wanted to ask this question can you please clarify my doubts...

If 100 warheads of 15 KT could do such damage, then what were the affects of 50MT Tzar (Test) bomb or the countless nuclear tests by both Russia and USA...

I am just an IT professional with very little knowledge on Nuclear radiation, but I understand that cold war nuclear tests or radiation will be way too higher than anything published in the article.

I assume that author has intentionally lied about the after affects of radiation this is my understanding about the article

 

[scatterStorm]

I always wanted to ask this question can you please clarify my doubts...

If 100 warheads of 15 KT could do such damage, then what were the affects of 50MT Tzar (Test) bomb or the countless nuclear tests by both Russia and USA...

I am just an IT professional with very little knowledge on Nuclear radiation, but I understand that cold war nuclear tests or radiation will be way too higher than anything published in the article.

I assume that author has intentionally lied about the after affects of radiation this is my understanding about the article

The Tasar Thermonuclear test was deliberately scaled down to 50% of its actual yield. If they would've swapped the lead tamper with depleted uranium tamper, its final yield would've been 100MT. The Russian reduced the yield because scientist with there yield models believed it would put a hole in ozone that would lead to quick melting of ice near Siberia and the fallout would gravely affect entire Russia and its neighbouring countries. With all of there effort to reduce the yield, still the Tsar did put a whole in ozone, much of which the fallout escaped into vacuum of space.

If they detonated the device with its full yield, the aircraft that dropped the fissile device would've not made it back to base and the all the officials within its vicinity would've been vaporised to death. The destructive power would be so much that it would've ignited the oceans "theoretically", as simple chemistry tell us that oceans have water, water contains hydrogen, and the detonation would produce so much heat at zero point(typically our nearest star surface temperature) that it would separate hydrogen from oxygen, hydrogen being consumed by the bomb as fuel with chain of multiple stages and oxygen would've further ignited this fuel. The entire theoractical science is scary.

Tsar was a test and a not a bomb, to prove the Null hypothesis that "there's no limit to the yield on earths atmosphere".

Nevertheless scientist were smart and knew that repurcussion of not putting a limiter on a thermonuclear weapon could be very scary, since then all modern thermonuclear weapons contain some amount of "tritium" also called "boosted" warheads that allows to literally "dial-a-yield" concept.

Much safer bombs are then made such as ERW fission device also called a neutron bomb. Our country declared in 1999 that we have an ERW(enhanced radiation weapon) in our nuclear arsenal, which is a full scale neutron bomb. The yield of this device is same as that of a 15KT fission device, less destructive than MT class weapons but 40-60 % more radiation force multiplier. To put it into perspective, a normal fission device puts about 5% of deadly radiation, but a neutron bomb will put about 40-60% of enhanced deadly radiation that would kill any organic species within few Km. In layman, it would kill only humans and animals thus less colletral damage. It's a clean weapon too, since nuetron is bombarded, it reacts to other isotopes in atmosphere quickly and the area after few months becomes free from radiation which means you can literally walk there, grow some plants and trees, unlike aftermath of a fission device detonation.

 

[Chinmoy]

I always wanted to ask this question can you please clarify my doubts...

If 100 warheads of 15 KT could do such damage, then what were the affects of 50MT Tzar (Test) bomb or the countless nuclear tests by both Russia and USA...

I am just an IT professional with very little knowledge on Nuclear radiation, but I understand that cold war nuclear tests or radiation will be way too higher than anything published in the article.

I assume that author has intentionally lied about the after affects of radiation this is my understanding about the article

Although @scatterStorm already mentioned most of the facts, I would add one point from my side. When you talk about something like Tsar Bomba, you are talking about a Hydrogen bomb. Now a hydrogen bomb is much clean then a nuclear bomb in respect to nuclear fallout. It means it does have a lot less unused fuel in it in form of Uranium or Plutonium. So radioactive fallout of a hydrogen bomb is much less then that of a conventional nuclear bomb.

 

[Kshatriya87]

Pakistan calls for nuclear restraint, conventional forces balance for South Asia peace


Look who's shitting their pants now that rumors are coming in about India thinking of rejecting no first use policy.

Funny thing is, a country which refuses to sign the no first use policy is asking for nuclear restraint.

 

[Kshatriya87]

Nothing just having fun at Pak's expence. Once they hear about our new doctrine, there army will adopt new one, which will force them to make even more bomb and missiles, end result there eco will suffer. We will make them bankrupt.

Pak has already given name to our new doctrine "All Spectrum Dominance".

Let them brown there salwars.

More they are scared, better for us. Just keep them on boil, short of war and they will fall on there own weight.

It is also important to restrict them economically. With the chinese coming in and bailing them out in every industry, that area looks weak now.