Ladakh Flash Point

Mohsin77 said:

For those still surprised at Indian propaganda on Ladakh:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

^ This is how narratives are enforced in democratic India.

If Muslims of India celebrate Pakistan's win (in a sports match), they will be facing Life in prison.

As Chappelle said: "That's a brittle spirit"

Click to expand...

If this was China, the western media would have been going on about it for months and hyping up anger, fear, and exaggerating more propaganda to suit their narratives. The world is sick my friend but it's all a bit of a funny experience isn't it.

At least with this article some attention is brought to it even though this is barely scratching the surface at how divisive Indian society is getting.

Meanwhile Indian trolls paid or otherwise (just the supremacist loyal bhakts) are very busy on their shifts with "shaping wars of perception".

Xsizor said:

India won't be reaching Lhasa. Nah. Not with theatre nukes.

The threat of theatre nukes hampers both India and China from making deep incursions to each others territory. So in a conflict, if at all India is able to make gains and China is somehow suddenly weak, then India would take some parts of Kailash ranges and Aksai Chin. That's it.

Click to expand...

Nukes can't effectively be detonated by India on its own territory in the case of a "deep incursion." They have a densely populated geography. India would effectively be committing suicide on every level with that option, politically, militarily, economically etc. Losing the war is a safer option for them compared to nuking its own territory, especially considering the resulting holocaust that would follow from a retaliatory nuclear strike.

If any full-scale conflict occurs in South Asia, it is expected to be very short, intense and conventional. Therefore, what matters here is conventional deterrence. And India is far behind in this front. Just as a case-study, look at the IAF's Rafale purchase, which is an indicator of what matters most: Air Power. Let's see what it adds to the equation. 2 Sqadrons of Rafales, 1 deployed in each theater (Ambala AFB in the West and Hasimara in the East). No. 5 Squadron at Ambala, oriented towards Pakistan, will be facing 50 Block IIIs (AESA + PL-15s) + *36 J-10CEs (AESA + PL-15s), while their second squadron is facing a legion of PLAAF AESA+PL-15s/PL-21s. The propaganda of the Meteor's supposed superiority is also just hype. Chinese AAMs have Dual-Pulse motors, which are arguable a better kinematic solution than the Meteor's ducted-air-compressor, which has a lot of variables effecting performance compared to a second rocket-motor. Also, the PL-15/21s AESA seeker is much more dangerous than the Meteor's seeker. We can run another analysis on the other magic silver-bullet that the Indians are hyping about (the S-400) but let's leave that aside.

TLDR: There is no conventional parity here, hence, no conventional deterrence. And that's going to matter more than nuclear deterrence.

FairAndUnbiased said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

they can't play this game. well, they can, but it won't end well for them.

Click to expand...

The 45kt indian bomb test wasn't a scale down of a 200kt bomb as mentioned in Wikipedia. It was a partial failure where there was an incomplete fusion burn because the bomb blew apart before it can complete its burn. So it was a 200kt bomb that yield a 45kt blast.

Mohsin77 said:

Nukes can't effectively be detonated by India on its own territory in the case of a "deep incursion." They have a densely populated geography. India would effectively be committing suicide on every level with that option, politically, militarily, economically etc. Losing the war is a safer option for them compared to nuking its own territory, especially considering the resulting holocaust that would follow from a retaliatory nuclear strike.

If any full-scale conflict occurs in South Asia, it is expected to be very short, intense and conventional. Therefore, what matters here is conventional deterrence. And India is far behind in this front. Just as a case-study, look at the IAF's Rafale purchase, which is an indicator of what matters most: Air Power. Let's see what it adds to the equation. 2 Sqadrons of Rafales, 1 deployed in each theater (Ambala AFB in the West and Hasimara in the East). No. 5 Squadron at Ambala, oriented towards Pakistan, will be facing 50 Block IIIs (AESA + PL-15s) + *36 J-10CEs (AESA + PL-15s), while their second squadron is facing a legion of PLAAF AESA+PL-15s/PL-21s. The propaganda of the Meteor's supposed superiority is also just hype. Chinese AAMs have Dual-Pulse motors, which are arguable a better kinematic solution than the Meteor's ducted-air-compressor, which has a lot of variables effecting performance compared to a second rocket-motor. Also, the PL-15/21s AESA seeker is much more dangerous than the Meteor's seeker. We can run another analysis on the other magic silver-bullet that the Indians are hyping about (the S-400) but let's leave that aside.

TLDR: There is no conventional parity here, hence, no conventional deterrence. And that's going to matter more than nuclear deterrence.

Click to expand...

Wait. Why are we leaving aside S-400? India seems to be positioning them against both Pakistan and China ( with South Tibet becoming a Hotspot).

Also, the Rafale in the Hasimara - it'll be operating with S400. But the Indian Air Defence command would have the task of integrating the Russian AD with French 4.5 fighter. And I think that, even if it'd take some time, would materialize within a few years.

India is dissuaded from delivering a crushing blow to Pakistan ( which it can do if it is serious enough and is ready to suffer the pains) because of Pakistani threat of using theater nukes ( even if apparently is within its own territory or border regions ). During the cold War, theater nukes were considered seriously to be used in central - eastern Europe. Yes, low yield nukes are a double edged sword but the threat of escalation is severe and so dissuassion power is high.

Larry420 said:

I think the same, it is meaningless holding on the tough terrains while we can lure the enemy into a bigger trap and take full advantages on PLA's artillery and logistic capacity, the only question is will the enemy be dumb enough to step onto this trap but only take the high ground and never come down the mountains and call it a day, that will be a tough fight if we want to take it back.

Click to expand...

This isnt the past era of using human waves tactics

Cluster bombs
and 20 such swarm-drones launchers would annihilate any Indian dreams about using their numerical "advantage"

Xsizor said:

Wait. Why are we leaving aside S-400? India seems to be positioning them against both Pakistan and China ( with South Tibet becoming a Hotspot).

Also, the Rafale in the Hasimara - it'll be operating with S400. But the Indian Air Defence command would have the task of integrating the Russian AD with French 4.5 fighter. And I think that, even if it'd take some time, would materialize within a few years.

Click to expand...

We can discuss S-400s too as another case study. It's no silver bullet. The S-400s will be the primary target of the opening salvo of cruise missiles, UCAVs and other SEAD/DEAD tactics. And just like the Russian S-400 completely failed in Syria to intercept cruise missiles, they will have have a very tough time here, especially when they are the target.

The biggest advantage of an Air Defence system like the S400 is not that it makes you invulnerable. It's that it forces the attacker to dedicate a lot of air/land/electronic resources for SEAD/DEAD. But if an attacker is prepared to do that and has the advantage of striking first, the defending ADS is the first casualty of the opening shots.

Xsizor said:

India is dissuaded from delivering a crushing blow to Pakistan ( which it can do if it is serious enough and is ready to suffer the pains) because of Pakistani threat of using theater nukes ( even if apparently is within its own territory or border regions ). During the cold War, theater nukes were considered seriously to be used in central - eastern Europe. Yes, low yield nukes are a double edged sword but the threat of escalation is severe and so dissuassion power is high.

Click to expand...

That's a misconception. According to Praveen Sahwney, the nuclear umbrella was not the deciding factor in the calculus in 2019. India is conventionally unprepared for war with Pakistan and this is why it refused to escalate.

Mohsin77 said:

That's a misconception. According to Praveen Sahwney, the nuclear umbrella was not the deciding factor in the calculus in 2019. India is conventionally unprepared for war with Pakistan and this is why it refused to escalate.

Click to expand...

I never said the threat of nuclear weapons dissuaded a party from any conflict, rather just a full out war where massive territories are seized.

Why did India not escalate after the 2019 strikes on Pakistan? Sure, India might've have initiated the potential conflict but they didn't escalate after Pakistan strike the day after. You or me can't say that India didn't proceed due to the threat of theatre nukes but - nuclear Pakistan primarily being a theatre nuke nation - we can't insist that theatre nukes wasn't a consideration for India.

Praveen Sawhney isn't an insider. India is trying to upgrade itself to be a conventional power by buying weapons and reorganizing its defence manufacturing base.

Xsizor said:

I never said the threat of nuclear weapons dissuaded a party from any conflict, rather just a full out war where massive territories are seized.

Why did India not escalate after the 2019 strikes on Pakistan? Sure, India might've have initiated the potential conflict but they didn't escalate after Pakistan strike the day after. You or me can't say that India didn't proceed due to the threat of theatre nukes but - nuclear Pakistan primarily being a theatre nuke nation - we can't insist that theatre nukes wasn't a consideration for India.

Praveen Sawhney isn't an insider. India is trying to upgrade itself to be a conventional power by buying weapons and reorganizing its defence manufacturing base.

Click to expand...

First of all, there is no such thing as a "theater nuke nation," and the premise of such a fictional term is flawed and dangerous. Secondly, you are the one insisting that Pakistan needs nukes to defend itself from India. This is your assertion, not a fact. Thirdly, Sawhney is a former Indian Army officer and a former JANES editor, with valid reasoning. So using him as a source to counter your assertion is well within scope:

Mohsin77 said:

First of all, there is no such thing as a "theater nuke nation," and the premise of such a fictional term is flawed and dangerous. Secondly, you are the one insisting that Pakistan needs nukes to defend itself from India. This is your assertion, not a fact. Thirdly, Sawhney is a former Indian Army officer and a former JANES editor, with valid reasoning. So using him as a source to counter your assertion is well within scope:

Click to expand...

"Theater nuke nation" is my tagging to define a Pakistan whose nuclear force makeup is composed of small nuclear weapons in IRBM and cruise missiles.

A lot of Pakistanis heap praises on this person Pravin sawnhey ( in the comments) because apparently he is well balanced. Sure, he is different from other Indian YouTube defence analysts but I won't take his word for what the Indian Army's strategy and decision making path.

I'm merely stating this - Indian military is very cognizant of the threat posed by Pakistani Nukes and its readiness to use it in battle. Pakistan indeed need nukes to defend itself from India. For a particularly poor country with even shoddier MIC, Pakistan was ready to go all the way in creating nukes after the Indians tested them. Pakistan's nuclear posture only has one major target - India. Sure, my wording may make Pakistan look weak but that's not my intention. Objectively, Pakistan's conventional strength is very considerable too.

An ever growing India ( economy, military, diplomacy etc) is a guarantee. But a Pakistan that'd keep up with India isn't. Nukes will defend that country.