NationStates Jolt Archive

Another one of my polls! Whoopie!

We all know(or should) about how India and Pakistan are arch-enemies and have been since conception. Muslims and Hindus just, for some strange reason, dont get along that well in that part of the world. From the very beggining, both sides commited mass atrocities(mainly on trains. For example, some muslims would be taking a train to the Pakistan area, and hindus would stop the train. They would then board it, shoot all the muslims, then let the train go. Such attrocities were commited by both sides.), and there have been three wars between the two in the last 50 years. India won them all.

Now heres the question: Who would win a war NOW? Heres a few pieces of info on both nations and their armies:

India: Official language Hindi, English (+ 21 other officially recognised languages)
Capital New Delhi
Largest City Mumbai
President Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam
Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh
Area
- Total
- % water Ranked 7th
3,287,590 km²
9.5%
Population
- Total (2003)
- Density Ranked 2nd
1,065,070,607
324/km²
GDP by PPP
- Total (2003)
- GDP/head Ranked 4th
$3.022 trillion
$2,800

Independence August 15, 1947
Republic January 26, 1950
Currency
Currency Code (ISO 4217) Indian Rupee (₨)
INR

Time zone UTC +5.30 (IST)
National anthem Jana Gana Mana
National song Vandē Mātaram
Internet TLD .IN
Calling Code 91
National game Field Hockey
National animal Bengal Tiger
National bird Peacock
National flower Lotus

Military branches:

Indian Army, Indian Navy (including naval air arm), Air Force, various security or paramilitary forces (includes Border Security Force, Assam Rifles, Rashtriya Rifles and several other units) and the Strategic Forces Command.

The Supreme Commander of the Indian Armed Forces is the President of India, Dr. A.P.J Abdul Kalam.





Republic Day Parade
New Delhi, 2004[edit]
Military manpower
The data regards Males age 15-49

Military age 17 years of age
Availability 288,251,975 (2003 est.)
Fit for military service 169 million (2003 est.)
Reaching military age annually 11,035,174 (2003 est.)

Military expenditures
Dollar figure $11.52 billion (FY02)
Percent of GDP 2.3% (FY02)


Military Branches of India

Indian Army
Indian Air Force
Indian Navy
Strategic Nuclear Command
The Highest Award given by the Military of India is the Param Vir Chakra.

The Beginning
As early as June 26, 1946, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, India's soon to be Prime Minister announced "As long as the world is constituted as it is, every country will have to devise and use the latest devices for its protection. I have no doubt India will develop her scientific researches and I hope Indian scientists will use the atomic force for constructive purposes. But if India is threatened, she will inevitably try to defend herself by all means at her disposal."

The Smiling Buddha
Three decades later, India, under the leadership of Pandit Nehru's daughter Indira, conducted nuclear tests called Operation Smiling Buddha and was said to be a "peaceful nuclear test". Reports on the actual yield of these tests vary from official accounts of 12 kt, to Western intelligence reports that place the yield to be between 4-6 kt. The devices tested were essentially nuclear fission devices.

India began work on a thermonuclear weapon in 1980. According to reports, by 1989 India was making efforts to isolate and purify the lithium-6 isotope, a key requirement for the production of a thermonuclear device.

Shakti
A second series of tests, called Operation Shakti was carried out in Pokhran under a newly appointed BJP government on May 13, 1998. After the blasts, Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee announced that this was "India's due, the right of one-sixth of humankind". The devices tested were two fission devices, three low-yield devices and one thermonuclear device (the "H-bomb"). Again, reports of the actual yield vs. reported yield vary, with the yield of fission devices ranging from 4-15 kt and the thermonuclear device ranging from 12-60 kt. For the sake of comparison, the bomb that was detonated over Nagasaki was 20 kt.

Nuclear Policy
Very little is known about India's nuclear weapons program. India maintains a "no-first-use" nuclear policy in the event of war and is said to possess between 60-120 nuclear weapons, although not many are expected to be in a pre-assembled, ready for use state, largly due to the diminishing threat from India's nuclear neighbors, China and Pakistan.

India's Strategic Nuclear Command was launched in 2003, with Air Marshall Asthana as the Commander-in-Chief of the regime. The SNC is the custodian of all of India's nuclear weapons and missiles. It is also responsible for formulating India's nuclear policy. However, the political council (the civil leadership of the country) is the only body allowed to authorize a nuclear attack. This essentially means that the Prime Minister will have his finger "on the button", so to speak.


Delivery Systems
In general, nuclear weapons can be "delivered" to their targets by missiles or by fighter aircraft such as bombers.


Missiles
India's DRDO has dedicated considerable resources to the Integrated Guided Missile Development Program. The missile program consists of Prithvi missile ("Earth") an SRBM, Agni missile ("Fire"), with variants ranging from SRBM to IRBM, Akash, ("Sky") a surface-to-air missile comparable to the US Patriot Missile, Trishul ("Trident"), also a surface-to-air missile and Nag ("Cobra"), an anti-armor weapon.

The status of India's Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM), Agni IV or Surya ("Sun") whose expected range is between 5,000-12,000 km, is unclear. While Western reports hint at its existence, India has offcially denied the existence of such a weapon or a project to design it.

Aircraft
India also has fighter aircraft that could potentially deliver nuclear weapons to their targets. Analysts expect India to rely more on air power than its missiles for delivering nuclear weapons, since India's missiles are not thought to be very accurate. India is expected to rely heavily on Soviet aircraft such as MiG-29, MiG-27 and Sukhoi-30MKI and Anglo-French Jaguars. India also recently leased 4 Tu-22M "Backfire" from Russia, long range bombers that are capable of delivering nuclear payload.


India and Nuclear Treaties
India acceded to the Geneva Protocol in 1930, the Biological Weapons Convention on July 15, 1974 and the Chemical Weapons Convention on September 3, 1996. It is not yet a signatory to either the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), but did acceed to the Partial Test Ban Treaty in October 1963.



Pakistan:
Official Language(s) Urdu, English
Capital Islamabad
Largest City Karachi
President General Pervez Musharraf
Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz
Area
- Total
- % water Ranked 34th
803,940 km²
3.1%
Population
- Total (2003)
- Density Ranked 6th
150,694,740
188/km²
Independence August 14, 1947 (from the UK)
Republic March 23, 1956
Currency Pakistani Rupee
Currency Code PKR
Time zone UTC +5
National anthem Pak sarzamin shad bad
(Blessed Be The Sacred Land)
Internet TLD .PK
Calling Code 92
National Game Field Hockey

Pakistan's 610,000-member armed forces, the world's eighth largest in 2000, are well trained and disciplined. However, budget constraints and nation-building duties have reduced Pakistan's normal robust training tempo, which if not reversed, will eventually impact on the operational readiness of the Armed Forces. Likewise, Pakistan has had an increasingly difficult time maintaining their aging fleet of United States, Chinese, United Kingdom and French equipment. While the industrial base capabilities have expanded significantly, limited fiscal resources and various sanctions have significantly constrained the government's efforts to modernize the armed forces.

Until 1990, the United States provided military aid to Pakistan to modernize its conventional defensive capability. The United States allocated about 40% of its assistance package to non-reimbursable credits for military purchases, the third largest program behind Israel and Egypt. The remainder of the aid program was devoted to economic assistance. While sanctions have been in effect since 1990, various amendments have authorized return of spare parts and end items already paid for by Pakistan. In addition, the U.S. and Pakistan have come to a financial agreement on the non-delivery of F-16s. However, Pakistan's nuclear tests in response to India's May 1998 tests and the recent military coup have placed additional sanctions on Pakistan.

Military branches: Army, Navy, Air Force, Civil Armed Forces, National Guard

Military manpower - military age: 17 years of age

Military manpower - availability:
males age 15-49: 34,632,509 (2000 est.)

Military manpower - fit for military service:
males age 15-49: 21,206,148 (2000 est.)

Military manpower - reaching military age annually:
males: 1,604,806 (2000 est.)

Military expenditures - dollar figure: $2.435 billion (FY99/00)

Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 3.9% (FY99/00)

Nuclear tests in May 1998 confirmed that Pakistan, like India, has nuclear weapons. In April 1998 Pakistan test fired a long-range missile capable of reaching capital of India. This means that Pakistan's nuclear warheads can be delivered by airplanes and misslies, and reach most of India. See nuclear proliferation. Some of the sanctions that were handed to Pakistan have been relinquished and in early 2004 US president George W. Bush gave the government of Musharraf a 3 billion aid package that will undoubtablly be spent on the military.

Since then Pakistan (and India) has tested numerous long range missiles however as of 2004 this has currentlly ceased most likely due to the current and long peace talks debating both Kashmir and the countries trade ties.

The Highest Award given by the Military of Pakistan is the Nishan-E-Haider which has only been awarded to ten men since 1947

Pakistan began developing a nuclear weapons programme in the 1970s but apparently did not conduct its first test until 28 May 1998 when it detonated five separate devices. Momentum for the program was provided by Indian nuclear tests such as Smiling Buddha in 1974. However in 1999 Pakistan signed the Lahore Accords, with India, agreeing a bilateral moratorium on nuclear testing.

Weapons development takes places at Kahuta and Joharabad, where weapons grade plutonium is made; the latter allegedly with the assistance of Chinese technology. Estimates usually put Pakistan's nuclear deterrent at around 40 HEU (highly enriched uranium) warheads.

In 2002 Pakistan was accused of supplying nuclear technology to North Korea, an allegation which its military leader Pervez Musharraf admitted and caused the suspension of Pakistan's chief nuclear scientist.

Pakistan acceded to the Geneva Protocol on April 15, 1960, the Biological Weapons Convention in 1974 and the Chemical Weapons Convention on October 28, 1997. However Pakistan is not a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and, consequently, not bound by any of its provisions. Other non-signatories of the NPT include India and Israel.

Pakistan is currently the only predominantly Muslim country with nuclear capabilities, a situation sometimes refered to as the "Islamic Bomb". The Pakistani government dislikes this linkage and has publicly stated that Pakistan's nuclear weaponry is solely for the defence of Pakistan and no other nation (whether or not it is Islamic

What would start the war? How long would the build-up for war be? Should we make assumptions about the use of nuclear weapons?

The question posed as it is, I'm just going to assume both sides would just flip out and kill people, firing away all the nukes they've got. Which pisses of a lot of other people, who get involved, a bit too involved, and then they too fire lots of nukes, etc. Ending in Twilight:2k9, somewhere between Stalemate and Armageddon but probably closer to Armageddon. Just because I like modern versions of Twilight:2k...

India's conventional forces would hand Pakistan's arse to it on a silver plate with one of those cool ornate hemispherical lids on top, which waiters remove with a flourish. In the space of a couple of weeks.

At which point Pakistan would go nuclear.

Depends. Who has closer ties to US of A?

The US has usually viewed India in a more favourable light, as it is less Muslim, though it has had better relations with Pakistan recently because of its cooperation in hunting Afghan rebels.

India, they have a lot of Israeli weapons. They are among the cheif buyers for Israeli weapons.

Ok, heres the scenario:

It is August 2005, and ties between India and Pakistan have broken down yet again. President Musharraf takes a trip to see if he can salvage the peace process. En route, however, his plane "Mysteriously" explodes over the border. All signs point to India. After Musharrafs death, a bloody power struggle ensues in the government. Eventually, a radical Islamist takes power and declares Jihad against India. At this time, The U.S. pulls out support for Pakistan and now supports India. However, the muslim world(excluding Iraq and Afghanistan) overwhelmingly supports Pakistan, as does China(Pakistans long-time ally). War is declared on August 17th, and Muslim Jihadists launch an overwhelming attack on Kashmir on the 19th. .

Seeing how this is rapidly turning to the worst, the matter is brought to the U.N. Security council. Pakistan is portrayed as the agressor(correctly), but an attempt to authorize intervention by U.N. troops on the behalf of India is Vetoed by China. The Indian government sounds a call for a draft, and millions of young Indian males join the army. All across the muslim world, the call for Holy War against India is answered, and Iran, Syria, Oman, Yemen, Tunisia, Algeria, and Malaysia all offically endorse this war. Nation such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, who cant afford to piss off the U.S., secretly send millions in oil money and from the entire muslim world Jihadists(including groups such as Hamas and Al-Qaeda) all go to fight the "Hindu Devils." The two nuclear participants(Pakistan and India, o' course) are trying desperatly to not have to resort to using Nukes, but Pakistan and India are keeping their fingers awfully close to that "launch button."

Where are Israel in this scenario? We are big supporters of India, and we're a nuclear power.

Where are Israel in this scenario? We are big supporters of India, and we're a nuclear power.

Well, i was kidna trying to keep this a regional conflict but...

ill fix it.

Come on guys, this is INTERESTING!

(Note: Information on the other participants coming soon.)

Going to show a little blatant national pride here and go with India.

India has a big advantage, in its size, etc. But with the issue of nukes, and the fact that Pakistan, being smaller and weaker, becomes more desperate. Nuclear kaboomies all over the region.

And where is Russia in all this, we get most of our planes from them.

And where is Russia in all this, we get most of our planes from them.

Oh goody, i get to write about ANOTHER country...(even though all i do is copy from Wikipedia.

Meh.

Oh, and BTW- i lived in Pakistan. And Bangladesh. And been to India and possibly moving there. Just to let you know.)

India has a big advantage, in its size, etc. But with the issue of nukes, and the fact that Pakistan, being smaller and weaker, becomes more desperate. Nuclear kaboomies all over the region.


I wouldnt technically agree with your weaker argument...(well, at least not ALOT weaker. they're biggest problem is their size. Pakistani troops are better trained than Indian.), although i DO agree that there will be nuclear kaboomies. So even though i WANT Pakistan to win, It would be nuclear Armageddon.

Ouch.

Oh goody, i get to write about ANOTHER country...(even though all i do is copy from Wikipedia.

Meh.

Oh, and BTW- i lived in Pakistan. And Bangladesh. And been to India and possibly moving there. Just to let you know.)
Well, my mom is german, dad indian. Ive lived in india for most of my life.

Just recently moved to where i am now.
<-------

Well, my mom is german, dad indian. Ive lived in india for most of my life.

Just recently moved to where i am now.
<-------

(OOC: Heh, when i lived in Pakistan all i mostly heard was "Blasted Hindu Indian Cow lovers" and "We are MUCH better at Cricket!" and "We've got the bomb!"

Such fierce nationalism isnt good for that region, i must say...)

[QUOTE= Muslims and Hindus just, for some strange reason, dont get along that well in that part of the world. [/QUOTE]


name me a group that can actually get along with their muslim neighbors..of the 17 major conflicts in the world 14 involve muslims...they seem to be a group that just cant get along with anyone...and if you break it down to the different sects of muslims..they cant even get along with each other

Always get the cricket thing here.

Never actually heard anyone in india actually saying they were going to use the bomb. I think everyone I know atleast would stick with the no first use policy we got.

And yea, always have the die-hard muslim haters around the corner somewhere.

IS anyone gonna say anything?

Well, russia isint officially with pakistan. More unofficially with india.

This is what I think would happen. Tensions would rise over some new development in the Kashmir province. When tensions got high enough, Pakistan would attack India because Pakistan would feel it would need first strike because of it's smaller size. It would make rapid gains, but then the Indian army would bear down on it and slowly beat there way into Pakistan. The Pakistanis knowing they are losing would drop a nuke on the Indian army in Pakistan to prevent further Indian advances. The Indians would then drop nuke on Pakistan territory and full nuclear war would erupt.

India would "win" solely because their greater population and land area would leave more of them alive.

Well, russia isint officially with pakistan. More unofficially with india.

Well, if Russia has deployed soldiers in Pakistan to help them(as stated in the edited scenario) i dont think they're allies.

Of course, the Russians arent true allies to anyone. As is their nature, they will switch between both sides depending on which side the U.S. supports. If the U.S. were to support Pakistan, the Russians would support India. The second the U.S. supports Pakistan, the Russians will turn on the Pakistanis and "bang bang bang!"

Indis buying of russian weapons IRL provides some valuable income for them. So..

(Anyhow, im off to the pub for a drink. ill see you around.)

Indis buying of russian weapons IRL provides some valuable income for them. So..

(Anyhow, im off to the pub for a drink. ill see you around.)

So does Pakistan buying lotsa weapons(almost every third-world country does, now that i think about it...)

Oh, and have fun at the pub. DOnt get too drunk :D

Anyone else?

Awww, phoey...

bump.

"well you join us here for the test of india agains pakistan"
[sfx: rocket launch]
"Good Lord! That went straight for the boundry like a rocket!..."

but seriously... I have no Idea who might win. probably MAD.

What's so great about kashmir anyway? Why do both countries want a piece? Do they have oil or something? I thought it was just an agricultural region.

India would most certainly win a war with Pakistan.
India is clearly stronger.
Though there would be a lot of destruction in the border areas.
I hope for stability and the remaining of the status quo in the region - at least.

Everyone is forgetting the Indian and if, America is allied with them, American Navies would Control ALL shipping in the Arabian Sea cutting Pakistan off at least partially and allowing the launching of airstrikes on Iran As well.


This wouldn't go nuclear necessarily, neither side really wants it. And the USA definetly wouldn't launch unless 1 of 2 things happened. American Marines or Soldiers are struck with Nuclear weapons, American Assets or Territories were struck.

Pakistand and Russia would definetly show restraint in the use of Nuclear weapons and avoid touching them off any where NEAR US assets. Because last thing Either side wants is a US vs. Russia exchange of arms. Also your assuming China, Russia and the United States would send troops? That is a hefty assumption. Russia more than likely cannot afford to send much of Anything due to the fact that Chechnya is draining them dry as far as money and Resources for the Military go.

I can see smaller nations sending troops but i doubt any of the big three would.

Going by a general long term reading of this conflict (looking at various souces and at history):
A) India wins a full scale conventional war.
B) Most other non-nuclear (un-conventional warfare) scenarios result in a continuation of the current situation.
C) Nuclear conflict is possible, but A Very Bad Thing (tm). Both sides lose.

Some material to browse:
Strategy Page's Armed Forces of the World Rankings for India (#1) and Pakistan (#2) (http://strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/databases/armies/sa.asp)
http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/rsepResources/si/feb03/southAsia2.asp
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-060202nukes.story
http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1450/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-pak.htm

Also consider:
The First and Second Kashmir Wars ('47-9, '65) were stalemates (althoughthe first was slightly favorable to Pakistan and the second was favorable to India). The '71 Indo-Pakistani War was an Indian victory. The whole situation in Kashmir has been a (very literally!) mini-cold war, occassionally flashing warm, for some 40 years.

Ending in Twilight:2k9, somewhere between Stalemate and Armageddon but probably closer to Armageddon. Just because I like modern versions of Twilight:2k...

Another fan of T2K? One of my all time faves. :)
There are some nice alternates out there. You have a favorite?

Ok, heres the scenario:

It is August 2005, and ties between India and Pakistan have broken down yet again. President Musharraf takes a trip to see if he can salvage the peace process. En route, however, his plane "Mysteriously" explodes over the border. All signs point to India. After Musharrafs death, a bloody power struggle ensues in the government.Eventually, a radical Islamist takes power and declares Jihad against India. At this time, The U.S. pulls out support for Pakistan and now supports India. However, the muslim world(including Iraq and Afghanistan) overwhelmingly support Pakistan, as does China(Pakistans long-time ally). War is declared on August 17th, and Muslim Jihadists launch an overwhelming attack on Kashmir on the 19th. Bangladesh has sided with India, thus making it the "outcast" muslim nation. Seeing how it has quite a few soldiers, Indias army is bolstered by a swarm of Bangladeshi Volunteers. Chinese soldiers attack Indian Kashmir in support of Pakistan.

Seeing how this is rapidly turning to the worst, the matter is brought to the U.N. Security council. Pakistan is portrayed as the agressor(correctly), but an attempt to authorize intervention by U.N. troops on the behalf of India is Vetoed by China. By this time the U.S. Army is too stretched to send alot of troops to India, so the U.S. sends only 7,000 Marines. China, however, can afford to deploy well over 300,000 soldiers, and possibly much higher. The Indian government sounds a call for a draft, and millions of young Indian(And Bangladeshi) males join the army. All across the muslim world, the call for Holy War against India is answered, and Iran, Syria, Oman, Yemen, Tunisia, Algeria, and Malaysia all offically endorse this war. Nation such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, who cant afford to piss off the U.S., secretly send millions in oil money and from the entire muslim world Jihadists(including groups such as Hamas and Al-Qaeda) all go to fight the "Hindu Devils." The five nuclear participants(Pakistan, India, China, the U.S., and Iran which recently joined the club) are trying desperatly to not have to resort to using Nukes, but Pakistan and India in particular are keeping their fingers awfully close to that "launch button."

Edit: Israel has thrown its support for India, thus causing it to REALLY piss off the muslim world. Even more than usual. While Israel has deployed some of its top-notch fighters(around 200 of them) to the Dehli area, the distance between the two nations is too far to send alot of soldiers. They have also begun to supply the Indians with training and weapons, seeing how the indian army isnt as well trained as the Pakistani. Due to the fact that the muslim world(ALL of it, cept for Bangladesh, Malaysia, and Indonesia), tensions are running extremely high.

Edit: Russia, although it has helped India a bit, has gone to supporting Pakistan(mostly to piss off the Americans. Thats what they did in the Cold War too.) The Russian Military is sending weapons and instructors the train the by now vast Pakistani army(which has been bolstered by recruits from all over the Muslim World.) They are deploying 20,000 soldiers to the city of Lahore(near the border) and have heavily foritified it. In return, Pakistan has agreed to a 20 year alliance with Russia, which baisically says if one of them is attacked the other will do all it can to defend them.


Ooohhh. Good scenario! I like it.

Questions, nitpicks, and monkey wrenches:
1) Was Musharraf actually assassinated, or was it an accident? If it was assassination, what might be the motive? If it was an accident, how will that effect India's response?
2) Will Iran be able to field a nuclear bomb next year? How will the ("coming" ;)) Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear sites affect this whole scenario? (Isreal might not get it all, causing all sorts of trouble.:))
3) Why on earth would Russia support a radical Islamist Pakistani state?
4) Where do Japan and the Koreas fit in? What's the possibbility of a North Korean distraction for the US and Japan (or a conflict to help pull the PRC off India)?

(I'm sure I'll be able to both enhance and monkey wrench parts of this in the morning.)

Ooohhh. Good scenario! I like it.

Questions, nitpicks, and monkey wrenches:
1) Was Musharraf actually assassinated, or was it an accident? If it was assassination, what might be the motive? If it was an accident, how will that effect India's response?
2) Will Iran be able to field a nuclear bomb next year? How will the ("coming" ;)) Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear sites affect this whole scenario? (Isreal might not get it all, causing all sorts of trouble.:))
3) Why on earth would Russia support a radical Islamist Pakistani state?
4) Where do Japan and the Koreas fit in? What's the possibbility of a North Korean distraction for the US and Japan (or a conflict to help pull the PRC off India)?

(I'm sure I'll be able to both enhance and monkey wrench parts of this in the morning.)


Hmmmm, this is developing more into WWIII....

1. The Indians blew up Musharrafs plane with SAM's. BIG boom.
2. If you read the info on secondary characters post, Iran has 4 nukes.
3 To get the U.S. Pissed off. If you havent noticed, Putin is a BIG anti-U.S. person.
4. Well, im guessing Japan will support the U.S., as will S. Korea. N. Korea will prolly support the Chinese, if only to piss off the U.S.

Oh, and just to put my two cents in.

Im guessing Pakistan(with the combined might of the Muslim world behind its back) will make initial victories(like in the three other wars) and then get bogged down. It seems the Pakistani Army is best at attacking, not defending. Once the Indians send in their army, the Pakistanis will eventually use nukes. Pakistan would be facing a threat to it national integrety, and if you knew anything about the region you know that it would probably go to Nuclear war(seeing how both peoples utterly despise each other.)

the rest of the world would jump in to STOP THEM. they would not bother to get involved any other way, there is no upside to it for them.

in the past we (the US) have jumped into conflicts as a way of fighting the USSR by proxy (korea, vietnam) this strategy is now gone by. we have NO desire to fight the chinese by proxy by backing pakistan while they back india.

everyone else will stay OUT.

pakistan has nukes but they dont have MANY of them. they can hurt india but they cannot defeat her with nukes. if they DID nuke india, india would have no option but to crush them utterly.

at THIS point, our efforts would be to keep the other moslem countries out of it. i think we could do that.

indias allies would try to restrain india from utter retribution by offering massive rebuilding programs. its not too too likely to work

SO what im saying is, the outside countries would put all their efforts into making sure that this war doesnt happen. it is utterly NO WIN.

What's so great about kashmir anyway? Why do both countries want a piece? Do they have oil or something? I thought it was just an agricultural region.

Kashmir is more of a pride thing.

You see, in 1947 Kashmir was an independant state. It was a nation that was 3/4 muslim, but it was ruled by a Sikh. When Muslims tried to push for going to PAkistan, the Prince got all jumpity and fled to Delhi when the "freedom fighters" began to flood into the country. The attackers were backed by Muslim Pakistan, and the prince asked Delhi to help. They said theyd repulse the attack IF Kashmir would become part of India. The back-stabbing Prince agreed, and Kashmir was declared by India to be part of India. Of course, Pakistan renounced this claim and invaded in full. For a little over a year Pakistan and India Duked it out, and while neither side "won", Pakistan managed to kill more Indians and take about 3/7th's of Kashmir(a little less than half). It then gave a large part of its claim to China. Of course, India doesnt recognize either of these actions and refers to all of Kashmir that is under foreign control as "Pakistani-occupied Kashmir"(they dont recognize the China claim.)

the rest of the world would jump in to STOP THEM. they would not bother to get involved any other way, there is no upside to it for them.

in the past we (the US) have jumped into conflicts as a way of fighting the USSR by proxy (korea, vietnam) this strategy is now gone by. we have NO desire to fight the chinese by proxy by backing pakistan while they back india.

everyone else will stay OUT.

pakistan has nukes but they dont have MANY of them. they can hurt india but they cannot defeat her with nukes. if they DID nuke india, india would have no option but to crush them utterly.

at THIS point, our efforts would be to keep the other moslem countries out of it. i think we could do that.

indias allies would try to restrain india from utter retribution by offering massive rebuilding programs. its not too too likely to work

SO what im saying is, the outside countries would put all their efforts into making sure that this war doesnt happen. it is utterly NO WIN.


It is actually speculated amoung Information circles that Pakistan most likely has more nukes(just in secret). It is confirmed, however, that Pakistani nukes have better rockets, and although they arent ICBM's, they could certainly cause ALOT of hurt in India.

If their major cities were threatened, Pakistan would deffinetly launch ALL of its nukes. Say Buh bye Delhi, New Dehli, Kolkatta, Mumbai, Bollywood, and about 40+ other cities. Oh, and dont forget to say buh bye to Peshawar, Karachi, Lahore, Faislabad, Islamabad and Quetta, just to name a few Pakistani cities.

It is actually speculated amoung Information circles that Pakistan most likely has more nukes(just in secret). It is confirmed, however, that Pakistani nukes have better rockets, and although they arent ICBM's, they could certainly cause ALOT of hurt in India.

If their major cities were threatened, Pakistan would deffinetly launch ALL of its nukes. Say Buh bye Delhi, New Dehli, Kolkatta, Mumbai, Bollywood, and about 40+ other cities. Oh, and dont forget to say buh bye to Peshawar, Karachi, Lahore, Faislabad, Islamabad and Quetta, just to name a few Pakistani cities.
big time no win situation

i guess thats why they have so far avoided all out war.

If there was a non-nuclear war to break out, I believe it would be India. They have American and Israeli weapons, and in general have a much larger standing army.

Ok lets reiterate a point

Yes Putin doesn't like the US

BUT HE WON'T INVOLVE HIMSELF IN A FRUITLESS STRUGGLE WITH NO STRATEGIC VALUE JUST TO PISS US OFF.......especially one that might go nuclear



Pakistan will get support from the Muslim world i agree there. But the Major players will probably not involve themselves in something as brutal and bloody as this.


United states may send Aid and logistical support but no actual troops

I can see Russia doing that as well

China probably will aid pakistan, may send troops but very doubtful.

This isn't old fashioned East vs. West where the Red's and Capitalist/Socialists would go at it.


The only time a scenario would possibly draw in this many of the major powers would be Taiwan or South Korea.


Afganistan won't make a move especially if Tenous US support is there and with the United States on Pakistans back door (the Division or So in Afganland)

Iraq wouldn't send official support either with the number of US troops that will probably still be in their country at the time of this incident.


Your scenario has some serious flaws, this isn't 1950

Ok lets reiterate a point

Yes Putin doesn't like the US

BUT HE WON'T INVOLVE HIMSELF IN A FRUITLESS STRUGGLE WITH NO STRATEGIC VALUE JUST TO PISS US OFF.......especially one that might go nuclear



Pakistan will get support from the Muslim world i agree there. But the Major players will probably not involve themselves in something as brutal and bloody as this.


United states may send Aid and logistical support but no actual troops

I can see Russia doing that as well

China probably will aid pakistan, may send troops but very doubtful.

This isn't old fashioned East vs. West where the Red's and Capitalist/Socialists would go at it.


The only time a scenario would possibly draw in this many of the major powers would be Taiwan or South Korea.


Afganistan won't make a move especially if Tenous US support is there and with the United States on Pakistans back door (the Division or So in Afganland)

Iraq wouldn't send official support either with the number of US troops that will probably still be in their country at the time of this incident.


Your scenario has some serious flaws, this isn't 1950

Um, China and Pakistan have been allies for WELL over 4 years. China would no doubt support one of its few actual Allies.

If you think my scenario sucks, YOU come up with it. Of course, you dont have the added advantage of having lived in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and have been to India. So you havent as much of a clue of what its like there...

Um, China and Pakistan have been allies for WELL over 4 years. China would no doubt support one of its few actual Allies.

If you think my scenario sucks, YOU come up with it. Of course, you dont have the added advantage of having lived in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and have been to India. So you havent as much of a clue of what its like there...


notice how i didn't say anything about how Pakistand, Bangladesh and India would act.

The reason I won't come up with such a scenario is Pakistan and India would be a regional war and to tell you the truth, thats their own problem. WWIII would not likely spring from that part of Asia

Also You said china has been allied with Pakistan for the Last 4 years, didn't know that, but would china really support Islamic Fundementalist govenrment overtly like that considering they have been having problems with Islam as well in their Western Provinces. And would a Fundementalist Islamic government want the support of an Athiest power wanting to stamp out all religion in their country since they want total political control????


I don't deny that Pakistan and India could come to blows. In the Long Run Conventionaly i say India since they could starve Pakistan from all its Maritime trade.

Short term, i'm not sure.

Nuclear, Whole of Southern Asia loses. World Economy takes a Moderate Hit.


No need to get defensive i know this all theoretical but you have made far too many assumptions on the conduct of Western and Eastern Powers. No one wants a war like that. China has fought with India but they probably wouldn't want to again. Leave in all the minor powers, but I really don't see Israel sending overt support either. It's not really their style.


I can see plenty of Covert Support but little in the way of overt support. This is not the cold war anymore

notice how i didn't say anything about how Pakistand, Bangladesh and India would act.

The reason I won't come up with such a scenario is Pakistan and India would be a regional war and to tell you the truth, thats their own problem. WWIII would not likely spring from that part of Asia

Also You said china has been allied with Pakistan for the Last 4 years, didn't know that, but would china really support Islamic Fundementalist govenrment overtly like that considering they have been having problems with Islam as well in their Western Provinces. And would a Fundementalist Islamic government want the support of an Athiest power wanting to stamp out all religion in their country since they want total political control????


I don't deny that Pakistan and India could come to blows. In the Long Run Conventionaly i say India since they could starve Pakistan from all its Maritime trade.

Short term, i'm not sure.

Nuclear, Whole of Southern Asia loses. World Economy takes a Moderate Hit.


No need to get defensive i know this all theoretical but you have made far too many assumptions on the conduct of Western and Eastern Powers. No one wants a war like that. China has fought with India but they probably wouldn't want to again. Leave in all the minor powers, but I really don't see Israel sending overt support either. It's not really their style.


I can see plenty of Covert Support but little in the way of overt support. This is not the cold war anymore

Then you come up with a new scenario.

I read too many Tom Clancy books and i have a Pakistani-mentality when it comes to India(IE that of a cold war, which is baisically what the Pakistan/India conflict would be.)

It doesn't matter who would win. It'd be like World War I: No real "bad guys", just people killing each others. They've got nuclear weapons, too, and situations are pretty heated down there... I was really scared during that crisis a few years ago.

NATO and the UN would most likely join, staying true to tradition. We did in the Gulf War, in Korea, and so on and so on. Whether it'd be as peace-keepers (if somewhat possible) or taking a certain side, though, I don't know.

Informative post, though (first one in the thread). Nice job. :)

Informative post, though (first one in the thread). Nice job. :)

Thanks :D

Then you come up with a new scenario.

I read too many Tom Clancy books and i have a Pakistani-mentality when it comes to India(IE that of a cold war, which is baisically what the Pakistan/India conflict would be.)


I read a lot of clancy as well.


I don't see a WWIII situation happening in the current world enviroment. Some large scale wars possible but mostly smaller conflicts.

I read a lot of clancy as well.


I don't see a WWIII situation happening in the current world enviroment. Some large scale wars possible but mostly smaller conflicts.


Yeah, but what if the war goes Nuclear?

Thanks :D

i think he was talking to me.

If not ::shrugs::

i think he was talking to me.

If not ::shrugs::

Was your post the first in the thread?

HMMMM?

Yeah, but what if the war goes Nuclear?

then no one will want to get involved.

I see a lot of nations sitting on their hands till the bombs stop falling.

China may or may not launch against india, I'm leaning to they wouldn't unless they think they could get away with it.

But the US and Russian arsenals would stay out of it

So would France, Britain, and South Africa, I don't See Israel or Tawain launching either.

Well i interpeted as first informative post in the thread. not First post but now that i think about it, its probably the latter.

then no one will want to get involved.

I see a lot of nations sitting on their hands till the bombs stop falling.

China may or may not launch against india, I'm leaning to they wouldn't unless they think they could get away with it.

But the US and Russian arsenals would stay out of it

So would France, Britain, and South Africa, I don't See Israel or Tawain launching either.

So the world will just sit by as 1/3 of the worlds population incinerates itself in fiery death?

Well i interpeted as first informative post in the thread. not First post but now that i think about it, its probably the latter.

Did you even READ the first post? (the one with all the states, a brief history of the India-Pakistani Relations, and the Nuclear Arsenals and Militaries of both.)

So the world will just sit by as 1/3 of the worlds population incinerates itself in fiery death?


what would they do? they'd try to negotiate a ceasefire.

But other than that what do you want the US or Russia to do? Start Launching? what would that accomplish incinerating probaly the other 2/3's of the world population.

And you mean 1/3 with china included right?
That one is Iffy, Allie or not they may not intervene because what would they gain by this war? Is their alliance with Pakistan really important enough to risk their cities falling under Indian Nuclear Strikes.


I read about the history in your post, i'm familiar with it. I'm familiar somewhat with the sizes of their militaries. BUT! I still don't see why you would even want to think about a US/Russia nuclear strike.

Are you reaching out and hoping that India/Pakistan relations are as dear to the rest of world as they are to you?

Yes i understand the consequences of a war involving the above nations but I see the world doing their best diplomaticaly to prevent a nuclear war between the two of them.

But if India/Pakistan does get incenerated I guess they would stop outsourcing american jobs there.

You see every cloud has a silver lining

what would they do? they'd try to negotiate a ceasefire.

But other than that what do you want the US or Russia to do? Start Launching? what would that accomplish incinerating probaly the other 2/3's of the world population.

And you mean 1/3 with china included right?
That one is Iffy, Allie or not they may not intervene because what would they gain by this war? Is their alliance with Pakistan really important enough to risk their cities falling under Indian Nuclear Strikes.


I read about the history in your post, i'm familiar with it. I'm familiar somewhat with the sizes of their militaries. BUT! I still don't see why you would even want to think about a US/Russia nuclear strike.

Are you reaching out and hoping that India/Pakistan relations are as dear to the rest of world as they are to you?

Yes i understand the consequences of a war involving the above nations but I see the world doing their best diplomaticaly to prevent a nuclear war between the two of them.

But if India/Pakistan does get incenerated I guess they would stop outsourcing american jobs there.

You see every cloud has a silver lining


Yeah, but this one has a silver linign made up of noxious chemicals and nuclear winter.

Because, of course, if South Asia blew itself to bits, not only would at LEAST 1/5 of the worlds population die, but the world will probably 1, have a new sea(where India used to be) and 2, be enveloped in a dark, radioactive cloud for at LEAST a few months.

Oh goody, i get to write about ANOTHER country...(even though all i do is copy from Wikipedia.

Meh.

Oh, and BTW- i lived in Pakistan. And Bangladesh. And been to India and possibly moving there. Just to let you know.)

Dang your hard at work here, you deserve a pat on the back! Not being sarcastic.

Yeah, but this one has a silver linign made up of noxious chemicals and nuclear winter.

Because, of course, if South Asia blew itself to bits, not only would at LEAST 1/5 of the worlds population die, but the world will probably 1, have a new sea(where India used to be) and 2, be enveloped in a dark, radioactive cloud for at LEAST a few months.

I doubt the sea part, where did u get that idea from and the latter, depends on the amount of bombs dropped, payloads, wind direction, wind speed, wether they are plutonium or uranium devices, wether they were thermo- nuclear or just fission devices etc however i do kinda agree that is is extremly likely to go nuclear and if that happens i believe the world will not just sit on its hands it will do something, mabee deliver ultimatums i dunno

Yeah, but this one has a silver linign made up of noxious chemicals and nuclear winter.

Because, of course, if South Asia blew itself to bits, not only would at LEAST 1/5 of the worlds population die, but the world will probably 1, have a new sea(where India used to be) and 2, be enveloped in a dark, radioactive cloud for at LEAST a few months.


well we're overpopulated anyway.

well we're overpopulated anyway.

lol!

lol!

LOL tru

Excuse me please, what the hell is this? The full version of the nation of India, is Democratic Socialist SECULAR Sovereign Republic of India. Make this a Hindu vs. Muslim issue, and you have civil war inside India.

The foundations of the secular plural structure are strong as ever, there will never be a civil war inside India.

WRT war, what is the objective, because to win a war, you need an objective to meet!!

This is my scenario:

Pakistan provokes the war, by either invasion across the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir, or a massive terrorist attack.
India retaliates with massive offense across the Thar Desert from Rajasthan and from Indian Punjab, as well as Siachen Glacier, which we hold. Pakistan retaliates with nuclear warfare. However, India is MUCH larger, Pakistan just has 25 missiles with horrible CED. If this war is in the next decade, we will have missile defence systems already. We have the Israeli Green Pine system already fully integrated into our military, and we will wait for the Arrow or S-400V to develop. Pakistani nuclear attack is neutralized totally.

The only external player in this conflict is the United Nations (US primarily). I am thinking, 3-4 weeks from the time war erupts to UN ceasefire. Given all the time, India will take Pakistan in 3 months. However, given 3 weeks, we will be holding Pakistani Punjab, Baluchistan and Sindh. They will occupy some of our Kashmir, although we will hold some of their Kashmir, more actually.


My reasons for zero external involvement:
1) Bangladesh: They are officially the poorest country in the world, they can contribute nothing to neither side.
2) China: Will be like the UN, will definitely militarize its border, especially the Aksai Chin Highway they have built. It won't invade, by next decade, Sino-Indian trade will eclipse Sino-American trade.
3) Israel: Are you crazy? They are smarter. Israel gets into the act, you have a clash of civilizations practically. Indian secularists HATE Israel, because we equate it with Pakistan. Only reason we have relationship with them is temporary reasons. America will invade Israel if it tries to act too smart in this scenario.
4) Iran: They have interest in both Pakistan and India, they are building pipeline through both of us. They will either remain neutral, or provide bases to India.
5) Tajikistan: Many don't know this, but India as a full-fledged Air Force base in this critically important Central Asian country.

By next decade, Afghanistan is going to fall back to Talibanic government. Pakistani Occupied Kashmir, North-West Frontier Province and Waziristan will remain with Pakistan by the time UN Ceasefire sets in. These will probably merge in with Afghanistan to set up a central Asian Khalifa, they had solid plans of doing this just before 9/11 when Pakistan betrayed the Taliban.

Then, begins a period of massive terrorism and massive re-education of the Pakistani population, out of the hateful ideology of political Islam (Jihad), and back to secularism as Indians, regardless of faith. In 24 years, the local insurgency will subside, foreign-based terrorism will remain for a couple more decades.

Then, we will all live together as brothers under one nation.

Ek Bharat, Ek Lok, Ek Raj!!

Jai Hind!!

Excuse me please, what the hell is this? The full version of the nation of India, is Democratic Socialist SECULAR Sovereign Republic of India. Make this a Hindu vs. Muslim issue, and you have civil war inside India.

The foundations of the secular plural structure are strong as ever, there will never be a civil war inside India.

WRT war, what is the objective, because to win a war, you need an objective to meet!!

This is my scenario:

Pakistan provokes the war, by either invasion across the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir, or a massive terrorist attack.
India retaliates with massive offense across the Thar Desert from Rajasthan and from Indian Punjab, as well as Siachen Glacier, which we hold. Pakistan retaliates with nuclear warfare. However, India is MUCH larger, Pakistan just has 25 missiles with horrible CED. If this war is in the next decade, we will have missile defence systems already. We have the Israeli Green Pine system already fully integrated into our military, and we will wait for the Arrow or S-400V to develop. Pakistani nuclear attack is neutralized totally.

The only external player in this conflict is the United Nations (US primarily). I am thinking, 3-4 weeks from the time war erupts to UN ceasefire. Given all the time, India will take Pakistan in 3 months. However, given 3 weeks, we will be holding Pakistani Punjab, Baluchistan and Sindh. They will occupy some of our Kashmir, although we will hold some of their Kashmir, more actually.


My reasons for zero external involvement:
1) Bangladesh: They are officially the poorest country in the world, they can contribute nothing to neither side.
2) China: Will be like the UN, will definitely militarize its border, especially the Aksai Chin Highway they have built. It won't invade, by next decade, Sino-Indian trade will eclipse Sino-American trade.
3) Israel: Are you crazy? They are smarter. Israel gets into the act, you have a clash of civilizations practically. Indian secularists HATE Israel, because we equate it with Pakistan. Only reason we have relationship with them is temporary reasons. America will invade Israel if it tries to act too smart in this scenario.
4) Iran: They have interest in both Pakistan and India, they are building pipeline through both of us. They will either remain neutral, or provide bases to India.
5) Tajikistan: Many don't know this, but India as a full-fledged Air Force base in this critically important Central Asian country.

By next decade, Afghanistan is going to fall back to Talibanic government. Pakistani Occupied Kashmir, North-West Frontier Province and Waziristan will remain with Pakistan by the time UN Ceasefire sets in. These will probably merge in with Afghanistan to set up a central Asian Khalifa, they had solid plans of doing this just before 9/11 when Pakistan betrayed the Taliban.

Then, begins a period of massive terrorism and massive re-education of the Pakistani population, out of the hateful ideology of political Islam (Jihad), and back to secularism as Indians, regardless of faith. In 24 years, the local insurgency will subside, foreign-based terrorism will remain for a couple more decades.

Then, we will all live together as brothers under one nation.

Ek Bharat, Ek Lok, Ek Raj!!

Jai Hind!!

Woah woah WOAH!

25 Missiles with poor CED? BWHAAHHAHAHAHA!!!

Even WIKIPEDIA says its 40! And Pakistani missiles are WAY better than the Indian(although India is catching up quickly.)

Also, you would NEVER be able to take Sindh, Punjab, AND parts of Baluchistan. You didnt even come CLOSE in the last 3 wars, and now the Pakistani army is much better trained. Pakistan would fight bloodily and desperatly, and for every foot of land you would pay dearly in blood.

Besides, not even the U.S. could stop a nuclear Missile. And "Pakistan Occupied Kashmir" is the "Northern Territories", by the way. The northern territories are CONSTANTLY pushing to be put a part of Pakistan.

And Pakistan, although it may declare a peace or something, would NEVER join with india under one flag. Pakistani Nationalism is Fierce, and they wont jsut overnight forget all the pain and suffering you have caused(dating back to 1947).

All in all, i dismiss this scenario as hopefull Indian Nationalism!

Zafar! Zafar!

Pakistan mera mulk hai

پاکستان جيتے گا

[QUOTE=Shonar Bangla]America will invade Israel if it tries to act too smart in this scenario.QUOTE]

America, INVADE isreal PAHHH!!! US will NEVA invade isreal, they invented the damed nation, most rich and powerful americans are jewish or backed by the jews (no offence to jews) have you seen the isreali army, M1 abrams's, american i believe along with everything they own! never gonna happen

"America, INVADE isreal PAHHH!!! US will NEVA invade isreal, they invented the damed nation, most rich and powerful americans are jewish or backed by the jews (no offence to jews) have you seen the isreali army, M1 abrams's, american i believe along with everything they own! never gonna happen"

I was just saying, you take me out of context. America won't commit suicide for Israel's activities. Didn't America FORCE Israel to do shiit during GW1, because America didn't want the issue to expand into an Arab-Israeli war? They'll do the same thing.


@The Lightning Star, as if the Indian Army sucks thumbs. Where was your well-trained army when we dissected your country, castrated you guys, lol. Have you paid attention to your bankrupt economy that lives off American and Chinese benevolence, have you paid attention to the fact that 70% of your public education funds go to Talibanic madrasaahs?
When it comes to war, Pakistan has learnt a lesson, lol, that's why you engage in pussy shiit like sending soldiers in civilian clothes across the border trying to kill civilians.

You cannot doubt me about the war itself. As for the aftermath, that is up for debate. You will say your people will die before they pay allegiance to the flag of India, I say otherwise. Now we go into political rhetoric, I don't think this thread was for that purpose, so let's leave that alone.

BTW, how armed is your local population? I believe that will be a major factor in an invasion of Pakistan.

PS: When I said Baluchistan, Sindh and Punjab, I meant everything besides the major urban centers like Lahore, Karachi, Gujranwala, Rawalpindi, Faisalabad, Hyderabad, etc, because urban warfare is treacherous stuff, that takes time, and by the time the UN Ceasefire comes into play, you will still hold the power centers in your cities and stuff.
That is unless India mercilessly carpet bombs, which I doubt. If the objective is reintegration of Bharat Varsha, we don't want to make enemies of our own people.

"America, INVADE isreal PAHHH!!! US will NEVA invade isreal, they invented the damed nation, most rich and powerful americans are jewish or backed by the jews (no offence to jews) have you seen the isreali army, M1 abrams's, american i believe along with everything they own! never gonna happen"

I was just saying, you take me out of context. America won't commit suicide for Israel's activities. Didn't America FORCE Israel to do shiit during GW1, because America didn't want the issue to expand into an Arab-Israeli war? They'll do the same thing.


@The Lightning Star, as if the Indian Army sucks thumbs. Where was your well-trained army when we dissected your country, castrated you guys, lol. Have you paid attention to your bankrupt economy that lives off American and Chinese benevolence, have you paid attention to the fact that 70% of your public education funds go to Talibanic madrasaahs?
When it comes to war, Pakistan has learnt a lesson, lol, that's why you engage in pussy shiit like sending soldiers in civilian clothes across the border trying to kill civilians.

You cannot doubt me about the war itself. As for the aftermath, that is up for debate. You will say your people will die before they pay allegiance to the flag of India, I say otherwise. Now we go into political rhetoric, I don't think this thread was for that purpose, so let's leave that alone.

BTW, how armed is your local population? I believe that will be a major factor in an invasion of Pakistan.

PS: When I said Baluchistan, Sindh and Punjab, I meant everything besides the major urban centers like Lahore, Karachi, Gujranwala, Rawalpindi, Faisalabad, Hyderabad, etc, because urban warfare is treacherous stuff, that takes time, and by the time the UN Ceasefire comes into play, you will still hold the power centers in your cities and stuff.
That is unless India mercilessly carpet bombs, which I doubt. If the objective is reintegration of Bharat Varsha, we don't want to make enemies of our own people.


You thought i was Pakistani? BWAH! Im American and lovin it! I just spent many many years living in Pakistan, and baisically all of my life after living there studying it. I think of meself as an American with a Pakistani heart.

Anyhoo, i agree that in a war against India, Pakistans chances of victory are slim. But so are Indias. Im thinking that yes, the Indian army may be able to take the vast chunks of land that no one freaking lives in, but taking cities(EXPECIALLY Karachi, Lahore, 'Pindi, and Islamabad) would be Impossible. Same for the PAkistanis.

Not to mention, there are ALOT of AK-47's lying around in Pakistan. So the civilian populace would have the ability to get hands on alot of AK-47's. And rocks. And Molotov Cocktails.

Also, i ne'er said that Indias army "suck thumbs". I just said that Pakistans army was better trained(although vastly outnumbered.) Why is Pakistans army better trained? Because about 70% of the freaking budget goes to the Army! 2 of the three Pakistani-India wars were baisically stalemates, with practically no land being gained(except for in Kashmir, of course.) the Bangladesh rebellion though... That was just sad on the part of Pakistan. You're right in how Pakistan has learned its lesson. But not in the way you think(IE sending soldiers dressed as civilians). Nay, Pakistan learned that for an army to be good it has to be TRAINED. It also helps to have the support of the local populace(which, in 1971, it had zilch). Thats why an Indo-Pakistan war would be more like the 1947 war, just with alot more soldiers and n00kz thrown in.

Whichever country was losing would get desperate and use nukes unfortunately =[.

Let's just hope that Indian -Pakistani relations will improve in the future, through Bollywood. :p

India would win because it has a bigger population and becuase they aren't dirty muslims. . . so they would have much more support.

I beat Pakistan will punch the nuclear button first.

I bet Pakistan will punch the nuclear button first.

I agree and wager 5 RS.(Pakistani Rupees :D)!

I agree and wager 5 RS.(Pakistani Rupees :D)!

I up the wager to 5 Indian Rupees. :P

I up the wager to 5 Indian Rupees. :P

Ill up the wager 1,000 Rupees from the Legend of Zelda Videogame series!

How do you come to the judgement that your soldiers are better trained than ours? I still don't get it.

As for holding the countryside, what's wrong with that? We'll probably hold the Indus river as well, remember in 1971, when we sent our warships up the Indus river, and bombarded Karachi while you guys were wondering what the hell is happening? We take away the countryside, we take away the river, what worth is the city? Your city will starve, you will HAVE to surrender.


Actually, the best chance Pakistan ever had of comprehensively defeating India, was in the 1950s. Thing is, India started with Rs.0 divided by 350 million, Pakistan started with Rs.0 divided by 100 million, when the British left. As time went by, India keeps increasing its lead over Pakistan. Even Pakistanis will acknowledge this. Pakistan had a superior airforce in 1965 and 1971. However, today, India keeps increasing its lead over Pakistan more and more, and when we finally set the target, Pakistan will be all out before it reaches the target. With our SU-30MKIs, and our Mig-29s and Mig-21s whipping American butt this year, I have total confidence in our armed forces.

How do you come to the judgement that your soldiers are better trained than ours? I still don't get it.

As for holding the countryside, what's wrong with that? We'll probably hold the Indus river as well, remember in 1971, when we sent our warships up the Indus river, and bombarded Karachi while you guys were wondering what the hell is happening? We take away the countryside, we take away the river, what worth is the city? Your city will starve, you will HAVE to surrender.


Actually, the best chance Pakistan ever had of comprehensively defeating India, was in the 1950s. Thing is, India started with Rs.0 divided by 350 million, Pakistan started with Rs.0 divided by 100 million, when the British left. As time went by, India keeps increasing its lead over Pakistan. Even Pakistanis will acknowledge this. Pakistan had a superior airforce in 1965 and 1971. However, today, India keeps increasing its lead over Pakistan more and more, and when we finally set the target, Pakistan will be all out before it reaches the target. With our SU-30MKIs, and our Mig-29s and Mig-21s whipping American butt this year, I have total confidence in our armed forces.


As i stated before, Pakistans soldiers are better trained because Pakistan is a MILITARY DICTATORSHIP/Parlimentary Democracy(kinda funky, aint it?) Also, Pakistan has increased its Navy, so i highly doubt that you could just prance up the Indus and go "bang bang".

Also, what makes you think that Indians Airforce is better than Americas? THAT is over-patriotism my friend. Also take into thought that there will be massive terrorrist organizations supporting Pakistan. I dont think Indians will want to wage war as eagerly when New Delhi is rocked by the largest terrorist attack since 9/11.

You guys all agree that nukes are the LAST LAST resort, right?

What does it mean, when Musharraf says that "I was prepared to do it if Indian forces crossed an inch into Pakistani territory."

Maybe the Indian Army crossing one inch into Pakistani territory is the same as the Indian Army knocking on his door in Islamabad.

The Pakistani General President himself knows pathetic his own armed forces are, maybe you should listen to your man who knows your military inside-out, instead of coming up with shiit from your ass.

You guys all agree that nukes are the LAST LAST resort, right?

What does it mean, when Musharraf says that "I was prepared to do it if Indian forces crossed an inch into Pakistani territory."

Maybe the Indian Army crossing one inch into Pakistani territory is the same as the Indian Army knocking on his door in Islamabad.

The Pakistani General President himself knows pathetic his own armed forces are, maybe you should listen to your man who knows your military inside-out, instead of coming up with shiit from your ass.

listen, this is one of the saddest attempts at de-grading the Pakistani military i have ever heard. What would the U.S. do if it was invaded by a rival nation like Russia? Launch its nukes. What would China do if it was invaded by Russia? Launch its nukes. What would N. Korea do if S. Korea invaded? Launch its nukes. What would Israel do if it was invaded? Launch its nukes.

Oh, of course, Pakistan has developed, I never said it didn't. But India has developed more. As I said, our lead grows over you. Of course, your navy is better compared to what you had in 1971. Ours is much better though. We got 3 aircraft carriers, getting nuclear submarines, we are the largest naval presence in the Indian Ocean. Our navy can blockade China from Middle Eastern oil supply, as long as Gwadar is not built. Our navy recently provided security for the African Union summit.


"I dont think Indians will want to wage war as eagerly when New Delhi is rocked by the largest terrorist attack since 9/11."
On the contrary, let me ask you a question. If I killed your mother, would you come and suck and my dick, or come and kill me, my whole family, and every person in the world that remind you of me?

You guys should have blown up the Parliament, seriously. State of democracy is no better in India than in Pakistan. Those old pricks don't care about the people, they use us as sheep to make peace with Pakistan, to better their international image. That way, you would have done with our old fools ruling the country, and we would also do away with Pakistan.

BTW, a secular India and an Islamic Pakistan canNOT co-exist, it is impossible, we have over-lapping boundaries. Indian secularists claim all Pakistanis as part of the Indian body, Pakistanis claim all of Indian Islam as part of the sub-continental and also global Islamic body.
A Hindu India and Islamic Pakistan can co-exist. Remember, relations were really getting better when the Hindu nationalists were in power. Right when you get the secular nationalists into power, peace is impossible.

I personally, am in favor of the secularists. In the quest for a global human nation, divisive ideologies such as Pakistan must be left in the history books.

But weren't the nukes supposed to be last resort? Even when America invaded Iraq, they didn't expect "WMD" attacks when they were attacking Basra, but they did expect them when they were going into Baghdad.

You leave your best for your last stand. Hitler saved his V-4s till the Allies were taking major German cities. When you say you will use them if you cross an inch, it not only shows your hawkishness, it shows your panic in the incompetence of your military.

Oh, of course, Pakistan has developed, I never said it didn't. But India has developed more. As I said, our lead grows over you. Of course, your navy is better compared to what you had in 1971. Ours is much better though. We got 3 aircraft carriers, getting nuclear submarines, we are the largest naval presence in the Indian Ocean. Our navy can blockade China from Middle Eastern oil supply, as long as Gwadar is not built. Our navy recently provided security for the African Union summit.


"I dont think Indians will want to wage war as eagerly when New Delhi is rocked by the largest terrorist attack since 9/11."
On the contrary, let me ask you a question. If I killed your mother, would you come and suck and my dick, or come and kill me, my whole family, and every person in the world that remind you of me?

You guys should have blown up the Parliament, seriously. State of democracy is no better in India than in Pakistan. Those old pricks don't care about the people, they use us as sheep to make peace with Pakistan, to better their international image. That way, you would have done with our old fools ruling the country, and we would also do away with Pakistan.

BTW, a secular India and an Islamic Pakistan canNOT co-exist, it is impossible, we have over-lapping boundaries. Indian secularists claim all Pakistanis as part of the Indian body, Pakistanis claim all of Indian Islam as part of the sub-continental and also global Islamic body.
A Hindu India and Islamic Pakistan can co-exist. Remember, relations were really getting better when the Hindu nationalists were in power. Right when you get the secular nationalists into power, peace is impossible.

I personally, am in favor of the secularists. In the quest for a global human nation, divisive ideologies such as Pakistan must be left in the history books.


Actually(in response to my terrorrist attack thing), countries have fallen because of attacks before. Take Spain, for example. BEOFRE the Madrid Bombings, Spain was an active member in coalition against Iraq. The pro-war government was leading in the polls by a large margine. HOWEVER, after the attacks, government ratings went down considerably and the anti-war party took office.

And "doing away" with Pakistan would be impossible. Sure, you may defeat it, but even if you DID occupy it, it would turn into and 1980's-afghanistan/Palestine occupation scenario. The local population would utterly DETEST you, and you would have massive terrorist attacks rocking your nation every day. Pakistan would constantly be rebelling, and eventually India would be forced to pull out due to the fact that the war has drained your economy dry. It would also make Pakistan into an extremist-muslim state, which is overly bad for India because it means swarms of terrorists will attack your country. Pakistan would be backed by all the Muslim countries in the world, and baisically the "Jihad" on America would disappear and the "Jihad" on India will begin.

In other words, if India doesnt try to Annex Pakistan, that is good. India tries to annex pakistan=bad.

But weren't the nukes supposed to be last resort? Even when America invaded Iraq, they didn't expect "WMD" attacks when they were attacking Basra, but they did expect them when they were going into Baghdad.

You leave your best for your last stand. Hitler saved his V-4s till the Allies were taking major German cities. When you say you will use them if you cross an inch, it not only shows your hawkishness, it shows your panic in the incompetence of your military.

Think of it this way. Islamabad is EXTREMELY close to India. America was expecting WMD attacks when attacking Baghdad because it was close. When you think about it, if India invaded anywhere north of Lahore, it would be EXTREMELY close to Islamabad and thus a threat to the government.

Basra and Baghdad are LEAGUES away from each other.

I *think* ive found something we can both agree on.

There would be ALOT of casualties. Now, we may argue on whos side will loose more(im going to go with India, because there are ALOT more Indians to n00kz0rz), but we can both agree there will be alot of dead people. EXPECIALLY if i destabilizes and goes n00klear.

Lightning Star, go look at the scenario, I said that insurgency would continue for 24 years, that is no little time. That is like 1-2 generations. I don't think India is prepared to do that. Trying to keep places like Bihar, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh floating itself drains the Indian treasury, to bring another 140 million people (hostile) into better living standards is bankrupting India.

The military victory is possible, military forced occupation is possible, but administration will be impossible. So yes, India will be forced to pull out.

But as I said, give it a few more decades or so, India's lead over Pakistan will accomodate even that.

Another thing my friend, you forget the power of brainwashing. Brainwashing was what made Pakistan. I have a book written by Western authors, titled The History of the British Raj.
The results of the 1945 elections are published in there. In the North-West Frontier Province, the Indian National Congress won a whopping majority. It also won Baluchistan. Punjab was taken by a coalition of the Indian National Congress and Muslim Unionists. Only places where the Muslim League won, were Sindh and Bengal.
What does that mean? Punjabis, Pathans, Baluchis, were made part of Pakistan without consent, yet today, they are the more militant Pakistanis. Brainwashing my friend.

Grow up an entire generation or two with Indian history books, Islamic homeland in the sub-continent become history.

Lightning Star, go look at the scenario, I said that insurgency would continue for 24 years, that is no little time. That is like 1-2 generations. I don't think India is prepared to do that. Trying to keep places like Bihar, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh floating itself drains the Indian treasury, to bring another 140 million people (hostile) into better living standards is bankrupting India.

The military victory is possible, military forced occupation is possible, but administration will be impossible. So yes, India will be forced to pull out.

But as I said, give it a few more decades or so, India's lead over Pakistan will accomodate even that.

Another thing my friend, you forget the power of brainwashing. Brainwashing was what made Pakistan. I have a book written by Western authors, titled The History of the British Raj.
The results of the 1945 elections are published in there. In the North-West Frontier Province, the Indian National Congress won a whopping majority. It also won Baluchistan. Punjab was taken by a coalition of the Indian National Congress and Muslim Unionists. Only places where the Muslim League won, were Sindh and Bengal.
What does that mean? Punjabis, Pathans, Baluchis, were made part of Pakistan without consent, yet today, they are the more militant Pakistanis. Brainwashing my friend.

Grow up an entire generation or two with Indian history books, Islamic homeland in the sub-continent become history.


Ah yes, the British Raj.

I have a firm belief on who started this whole thing: The U.K.

They, idiotically, decide to keep the key state of Kashmir part of neither, the purposly create Muslim/Indian conflict, and they create the borders of both countries TOTALLY wrong.

Damn brits.

I wouldn't support India nuking Pakistan, I think of Pakistanis as Indians with different political leanings, but that doesn't warrant genocide.

What's the point of nuking? Isn't that the same as terrorism? Murder of unarmed civilians? You guys nuke us, because you don't think of us as brothers, that's okay. We are more powerful, what we think is what will count. With the advantage India has over Pakistan with the induction of Green Pine and the S-400V, India won't need nukes to defeat Pakistan.

I just hope, that India always has Plan A, Plan B, Plan C........Plan Z, so that in case war breaks out, our army can do something, something to take control of your missile storage yards b4 anything happens. That prevents a lot of stuff.

Or, I have heard some pretty well-based rumours, that China holds Pakistan's nukes. If that is true, thank God.

UK was pissed because they were being made to leave without a fight. They partitioned India out of malice. Why did they draw the line of Pakistan through Punjab and stuff, when democratically, the only people wanting a Pakistan were Sindhis and Bengal. They catered to the interests of a few, like the Muslim fundamentalists and Hindu fundamentalists, to strike a blow at the secular movement that was being led by Gandhi, Nehru, Bose, etc.

Actually, at the time of 1947, India made a lot of mistakes. One of our founding fathers, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, repeatedly urged Nehru to annex NWFP and Waziristan to India, because they had anyway voted against the Muslim League, and they had not had Partition violence, allowing the population to stay un-radical. However, Nehru was a fool, didn't listen.
Same with Kashmir, we should have gone ahead and taken the whole thing in 48, but Nehru wanted to look good on international arena (he did become leader of Non-Aligned Movement), and took the thing to UN before we fulfilled the conditions of the Accession.
Thank God we took Hyderabad, the right-wing got its way at least once.

Damn, now that I think of it, having the Pashtuns on the side of India would have been fabulous for India. Hell, Abdul Ghaffar Khan was the biggest leader amongst the Pathans, and he was part of the INC.

UK was pissed because they were being made to leave without a fight. They partitioned India out of malice. Why did they draw the line of Pakistan through Punjab and stuff, when democratically, the only people wanting a Pakistan were Sindhis and Bengal. They catered to the interests of a few, like the Muslim fundamentalists and Hindu fundamentalists, to strike a blow at the secular movement that was being led by Gandhi, Nehru, Bose, etc.

Actually, at the time of 1947, India made a lot of mistakes. One of our founding fathers, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, repeatedly urged Nehru to annex NWFP and Waziristan to India, because they had anyway voted against the Muslim League, and they had not had Partition violence, allowing the population to stay un-radical. However, Nehru was a fool, didn't listen.
Same with Kashmir, we should have gone ahead and taken the whole thing in 48, but Nehru wanted to look good on international arena (he did become leader of Non-Aligned Movement), and took the thing to UN before we fulfilled the conditions of the Accession.
Thank God we took Hyderabad, the right-wing got its way at least once.

Damn, now that I think of it, having the Pashtuns on the side of India would have been fabulous for India. Hell, Abdul Ghaffar Khan was the biggest leader amongst the Pathans, and he was part of the INC.


WEll, Jinna did a pretty good job of bringing the nation(even the unwillingly members) together.

Problem is, after Jinna died, the Punjabi Military took over. Result=BIG BOOBOOS!(such as the first India-Pakistan war.)

I think Nehru did a pretty good job too. The British actually had devised a plan called India Balkanization. By this, they were going to break up India into a Pakhtoonistan, a Baluchistan, a Sindh, a Punjab, a Kashmir, a Hindusthan, a Gujarat, a Bengal, an Assam, a Nagaland, an Orissa, a Karnataka, a Kerala, an Andhra, a Tamil Eelam, etc, etc. At least we averted that.

I Believe that the only way the us would get involved is in weapon sales. to both sides. its not like we havent done it before, the iran iraq confilct portrays it perfectly. sell 5000 machine guns to 1 side, 4500 to the stronger side. thats capitalism for ya.

Hmmmm, this is developing more into WWIII....

Yep. Here's another scenario with an Indo-Pakistan war leading to a global nuclear exchange:
http://www.carolmoore.net/nuclearwar/alternatescenarios.html#scenario4

And from the same set of scenarios, an Israel-Iran escalation involving an Indo-Pakistan exchange:
http://www.carolmoore.net/nuclearwar/alternatescenarios.html#scenario3

1. The Indians blew up Musharrafs plane with SAM's. BIG boom.

Ouch. I think this might be too obvious and irrationally counterproductive. But stranger things have happened.

2. If you read the info on secondary characters post, Iran has 4 nukes.

Ah. Missed that. Is that speculation or is there a reliable source for that?

3 To get the U.S. Pissed off. If you havent noticed, Putin is a BIG anti-U.S. person.

Putin may be anti-US, but I really don't see him supporting a radicam Islamic state, when he's already got a war going on with one in Chechenya. And I sure don't see him sending 20,000 troops to do so (or was that a mis-reading - that point wasn't so clear).

4. Well, im guessing Japan will support the U.S., as will S. Korea. N. Korea will prolly support the Chinese, if only to piss off the U.S.

That's how the chips will fall, but the question here is what will they do? Would (could) the PRC push the DPRK to invade ROK, siphoning off US forces?

Oh, and just to put my two cents in.

Im guessing Pakistan(with the combined might of the Muslim world behind its back) will make initial victories(like in the three other wars) and then get bogged down. It seems the Pakistani Army is best at attacking, not defending. Once the Indians send in their army, the Pakistanis will eventually use nukes. Pakistan would be facing a threat to it national integrety, and if you knew anything about the region you know that it would probably go to Nuclear war(seeing how both peoples utterly despise each other.)

Yep, a nuclear escalation without someone stepping in to stop it.

India, they actually have carriers and more troops.

I tend to think that India would be pushing into Pakastani territory with alot of casualties of course, but then when they got to close to a major Pakastani city they would launch their nukes at the Indians. This is coming from a liberal in the USA.
P.S. Shonar Bangla though you do seem to be a bit of a blind patriot, though in the end India would almost definitly win, and also please dont call me a terrorist, commie or anything else.

bumpz0rz!!

pakistan may be small, but it's got a lot of rage

pakistan may be small, but it's got a lot of rage

Unfortunately (or fortunately) rage doesn't win wars.

What's so great about kashmir anyway? Why do both countries want a piece? Do they have oil or something? I thought it was just an agricultural region.

Kashmir is a scam. Its a way for both country's politicians to rally the voters. Politicians do this in the middle east(israel), US(terrorism), Europe(us) ect.. The Kashmir issue always flairs during election cycles.

The logic is simple, distract the people and they wont notice the inefficiencies/corruption of those in power. An old game, and one that works well.

Kashmir is a scam. Its a way for both country's politicians to rally the voters. Politicians do this in the middle east(israel), US(terrorism), Europe(us) ect.. The Kashmir issue always flairs during election cycles.

The logic is simple, distract the people and they wont notice the inefficiencies/corruption of those in power. An old game, and one that works well.

Except now Pakistan has to focus more on an unsettled Afghanistan & the border and the muslim charities of the Gulf have other battles to fight closer to home. So Kashmir could be coming into peace?

Few factors to consider:

When Pakistan's troops 'surrounded' Al-Qaeda suspects including reportedly, the number two to Bin Laden, near the border with Afghanistan, the large part of the Al-Qaeda suspects got away, inflicting heavy casualties on Pakistan's soldiers.

Secondly, in the scenario described, someone said China would back Pakistan.

I say this is unlikely, especially in the case that it is taken over by Jihadists.

In some of China's provinces, there are Islamic extremists gaining support amongst the populace, and I don't think China would stand for a regional neighbour who would be a hotbed to fund these groups within it's borders.

I would say it would back India. I think Russia would too, because of Chechnya's Islamic extremists. America may well try to be neutral rather than risk another war on a muslim country, but then again it may not. It depends.

Musharraff in charge: US backs Pakistan to stop Jihadist coup
Jihadists in charge: US backs India.

I don't know if that would be militarily though.

India vs Pakistan: India. I have heard they are better trained and have high morale.


Pakistan has all uncertainties, assassination attempts on Musharraff.

Now if you add nukes, I think Pakistan would use them if India's tanks reached their capital.

Vice versa.

Except now Pakistan has to focus more on an unsettled Afghanistan & the border and the muslim charities of the Gulf have other battles to fight closer to home. So Kashmir could be coming into peace?


Till a politician needs to drum up some voter support.
Thankfully, since the India decided to join the modern world(1990) the free market has had a corrective effect upon politicians behaviour. Now if Musharef can manage to stay alive for another decade or so maybe we can get some stuff done.. I never though I would be cheering for a Muslim General who overthrew a "democratic" government.

I have always wondered that if we were to weigh all the good that religions has done vs all the bad that they have done, which way the scale would tilt.

I was just saying, you take me out of context. America won't commit suicide for Israel's activities. Didn't America FORCE Israel to do shiit during GW1, because America didn't want the issue to expand into an Arab-Israeli war? They'll do the same thing.

I meant not to take you out of context, sorry. Yes the US forced Isreal to sit on there hands while Saddham was bombarding them (not much) with SCUD missiles in GW1 as the US would be forced (due to the jews controlling most US big business, no offence again to the jews) to fight the Isreali corner and so US would fight Iraq and Iran and this would cause an Arab coalition to form AGAINST the US and her coalition forces (Britain to i might add :( ) and then there'd be an absoloute shit storm kicked up and muslim "jihad" would most likely be declared. Hope all that made sense :D

Few factors to consider:

When Pakistan's troops 'surrounded' Al-Qaeda suspects including reportedly, the number two to Bin Laden, near the border with Afghanistan, the large part of the Al-Qaeda suspects got away, inflicting heavy casualties on Pakistan's soldiers.

Secondly, in the scenario described, someone said China would back Pakistan.

I say this is unlikely, especially in the case that it is taken over by Jihadists.

In some of China's provinces, there are Islamic extremists gaining support amongst the populace, and I don't think China would stand for a regional neighbour who would be a hotbed to fund these groups within it's borders.

I would say it would back India. I think Russia would too, because of Chechnya's Islamic extremists. America may well try to be neutral rather than risk another war on a muslim country, but then again it may not. It depends.

Musharraff in charge: US backs Pakistan to stop Jihadist coup
Jihadists in charge: US backs India.

I don't know if that would be militarily though.

India vs Pakistan: India. I have heard they are better trained and have high morale.


Pakistan has all uncertainties, assassination attempts on Musharraff.

Now if you add nukes, I think Pakistan would use them if India's tanks reached their capital.

Vice versa.


Pakista is better trained and they both have as high morale. The advantage the Pakistanis have is that alot of their soldiers are veterans of fighting uppity warlords all the freakin time!

I do agree though, that if it came down to it the nukz0rz would fly. Expecially if Indian tanks were spotted near ISlamabad(or Pakistani tanks near New Delhi.)

BTW, Pakistan still has the capability to do something major like take Srinagar, and Delhi isn't far. It's still upto military planning and a war against time--UN interference.

BTW, Pakistan still has the capability to do something major like take Srinagar, and Delhi isn't far. It's still upto military planning and a war against time--UN interference.

Ohh boyo....

Im guessing that means a nuclear war would happen pretty quickly then :D

No, India has adopted No-First Use policy for nuclear warfare. Look, you taking Srinagar and holding it till UN ceasefire is not an indication of you winning the war, because if you give it a whole year, India will come back with attack after attack until you are worn out. However, given the way the world works nowadays, nobody will tolerate a war for a whole year.

For you, taking Srinagar is possible if the Chinese actively back you guys, because bulk of our forces will be busy on the eastern front, and a pre-emptive invasion from Pakistani forces then, means a relatively easy way till you reach Srinagar.


China is key here. IMHO, in case of a war, there is 80% certainty that the only parties will be India and Pakistan. In that 20% of external involvement, I would say 7-8% is Chinese involvement, and the rest is UN involvement.

I just pray that India and China really develop strong ties over the future. Hell, we should offer to buy Chinese Occupied Kashmir, and allow them to keep their military bases and Aksai Chin highway. I dunno if that will happen, but Indo-Chinese relations are definitely going to get boosted, to the levels of strategic alliance. It is just a matter of time till Jihad spreads its fearsome tentacles towards China.

You know what made my opinion of Pakistani troops go down? Previously, I had a lot of respect for Pakistani armed forces, because they work in the similar terrain in Kashmir, just as we do. However, the fiasco you had when you entered your own territory in Waziristan was just bad. Like 200 Pakistani soldiers died for like 100 or so Pashtuns, half of whom were civilians. And you captured none of Al Qaeda, or some low level operatives, nothing major.

It would be very hard to develop stronger india-china ties. In Pakistan, there are alot of signs about how "China is our FRIEND!" and theres a big sign in Downtown Islamabad with two hands grasping each other, one has the crescent and moon the other has the stars. Besides, China doesnt really like India, so i dont think it would be probable. Its POSSIBLE, just not PROBABLE.

China will go wherever there is economic benefit. Trade that involves 2 billion+ is lucrative, and it is predicted to become the biggest trade in the world. In terms of PPP, we are the two largest in the world. China has long taken the path of pragmatism, and given up on idealism. They are more capitalist than Taiwan, lol, surely more than India. Their ideology may dictate them to go against India, but in real-world scenario, they'd have a friendly India that enriches them, than have India giving US airbases against China (US asked India for them earlier this year).

China will go wherever there is economic benefit. Trade that involves 2 billion+ is lucrative, and it is predicted to become the biggest trade in the world. In terms of PPP, we are the two largest in the world. China has long taken the path of pragmatism, and given up on idealism. They are more capitalist than Taiwan, lol, surely more than India. Their ideology may dictate them to go against India, but in real-world scenario, they'd have a friendly India that enriches them, than have India giving US airbases against China (US asked India for them earlier this year).


What im thinking is that China will do what evil dictatorships do all the time.

Work for both sides.

Im guessing it will sell arms to both and give both materials. Secretly, of course, so that whoever wins they can claim they supported.