NationStates Jolt Archive

Pretty sure this has been asked before but say if the Indians and Pakistanis (did I spell that right?) were to have an all out full blown conventional war who would be the victor and by how much?

Also give me a reason why you think they would win (who ever you think would).

Me I don't know, something tells me to go with India but there isn't really any fact behind that, just a feeling.

Pretty sure this has been asked before but say if the Indians and Pakistanis (did I spell that right?) were to have an all out full blown conventional war who would be the victor and by how much?

Also give me a reason why you think they would win (who ever you think would).

Me I don't know, something tells me to go with India but there isn't really any fact behind that, just a feeling.

China wins.

India. They have a population advantage of almost 10:1, a stronger and more techologically advanced economy overall, and significantly stronger an alliance with the world powers.

In a full blown war, Pakistan wouldn't have a chance.

China wins.

Why?

Why?

China has no interest in seeing either Pakistan or India win, my guess is that it would therefore mass troops on the Indian border as a warning as well as provide support to Pakistan because, as Neo Art says, India have an overwhelming advantage against Pakistan.

Ultimately, I'd further guess that India would back down, neither side [as in India and Pakistan] would win the war but China would come out of it strengthened, if only in diplomatic terms.

A full blown war India would win. Sheer size vs Pakistan coupled with military strength. Also I believe the strong government structure of India gives an edge on Pakistan in the long run. This is provided that it does not go nuclear. A nuclear confrontation would produce two losers.

China has no interest in seeing either Pakistan or India win, my guess is that it would therefore mass troops on the Indian border as a warning as well as provide support to Pakistan because, as Neo Art says, India have an overwhelming advantage against Pakistan.

Ultimately, I'd further guess that India would back down, neither side [as in India and Pakistan] would win the war but China would come out of it strengthened, if only in diplomatic terms.


You think the US would sit by and not put pressure on China to stay out?

This is provided that it does not go nuclear. A nuclear confrontation would produce two losers.

While it's true that pakistan does have nuclear capabilities, keep in mind that plutonium based fission bombs are, quite literally, 60 year old technology, and a nuke without a delivery system is about as useful as a grenade in the lap of a man without any arms.

Pakistan has no real long range launch capabilities, nor an air force to deliver a bomb with, leaving their only method of delivery to quite literally drive the thing into India, and India has men enough to spare to make sure every highway, dirt road, and mountain path leading into the country is sufficiently defended so as to blow up anything that gets within 50 miles of the border.

Pakistan might have nuclear weapons, but they have not the means to use them.

You think the US would sit by and not put pressure on China to stay out?

I'm sure they would, but then I'm not sure China would play it as trying to gain advantage but more as trying to be a peacekeeper - they'd be doing both, Sun Tzu's multiple gains from any action theory is closely followed.

I strongly doubt the US would do any more than make noise, I also doubt China would actually invade - arms support for Pakistan, troops on the border and I'd bet India would think twice.

It's not a great comparison but I'd guess it would would have a similar result as the Korean War, a kind of stalemate.

While it's true that pakistan does have nuclear capabilities, keep in mind that plutonium based fission bombs are, quite literally, 60 year old technology, and a nuke without a delivery system is about as useful as a grenade in the lap of a man without any arms.

Pakistan has no real long range launch capabilities, nor an air force to deliver a bomb with, leaving their only method of delivery to quite literally drive the thing into India, and India has men enough to spare to make sure every highway, dirt road, and mountain path leading into the country is sufficiently defended so as to blow up anything that gets within 50 miles of the border.

Pakistan might have nuclear weapons, but they have not the means to use them.


Buh? If anything, Pakistan's deployment capability is in advance of India's. At the moment they have a pretty serious chance of penetrating Indian airspace to a significant depth with nuclear-armed strike aircraft. The Pakistanis also have several dozen ballistic and cruise missiles capable of reaching hundreds, and in some cases thousands, of kilometres into India.

In a war where both sides have nukes, nobody wins.

I'm sure they would, but then I'm not sure China would play it as trying to gain advantage but more as trying to be a peacekeeper - they'd be doing both, Sun Tzu's multiple gains from any action theory is closely followed.

I strongly doubt the US would do any more than make noise, I also doubt China would actually invade - arms support for Pakistan, troops on the border and I'd bet India would think twice.

It's not a great comparison but I'd guess it would would have a similar result as the Korean War, a kind of stalemate.

last time India and china fought the Us sent a carrier and was preparing to give arms to India. not to mention by and large it is not considered peace keeping when the conflict is between two states, and such action would not be support by the UN.

not to mention if India felt threatened by both Pakistan and china they would likely turn to a nuclear strike.

Korean war would be different, the Chinese population can completely over whelm the korean population. While India is comparable to size to China.

back to original post in a conventional war India would cream Pakistan.
India is like to be the next super power with the decline of the US.

last time India and china fought the Us sent a carrier and was preparing to give arms to India. not to mention by and large it is not considered peace keeping when the conflict is between two states, and such action would not be support by the UN.

not to mention if India felt threatened by both Pakistan and china they would likely turn to a nuclear strike.

Korean war would be different, the Chinese population can completely over whelm the korean population. While India is comparable to size to China.

back to original post in a conventional war India would cream Pakistan.
India is like to be the next super power with the decline of the US.

Sure, but we're talking slightly different situations and, even in that case, China still gained the ground it wanted.

As to Korea, I'm more seeing Pakistan as the Korea in this case, where India can come in from one side and China supports from the other. In the Korean War, the Chinese did not overwhelm the Koreans, they overwhelmed the Americans, pushing them back a long way until the stalemate over the 38th parallel was reached.

Times have changed, my point is that if India moved to attack Pakistan, which I doubt anyway, China would certainly move to support Pakistan to stop India gaining undue influence.

I strongly doubt any outright fighting between India and China would happen, I'd expect the situation to remain roughly as it is now with the difference that India would have backed down, hence diplomatic strength.

I also strongly disagree that India will be the next superpower, I'm there a lot and a huge amount needs to change before India can even think about taking on that role. The enormous corruption is crippling.

Pakistan. Something about a Hindu country attacking a Muslim country makes me think of Iraq +1

Pakistan. Something about a Hindu country attacking a Muslim country makes me think of Iraq +1

indeed... I'd think that India would win the war itself, but later on shall be driven back by the resistance/terrorist/freedom fighters and the cost of the campain.

Pakistan. Something about a Hindu country attacking a Muslim country makes me think of Iraq +1

thats why India wont occupy anything other then Kashmir. pretty much how the other wars went kick Pakistan's ass advance in Kashmir or a few other conflicted spots then suggest peace.

In an all out war they would go in destroy the Pakistani goverment then leave.

Well since both countries have a nuclear arsenal then a simple conventional war is probably out of the question (unless they keep it at an incident level)

If they have a total war (nukes involved) then the likely winner is China (has many territorial disputes with India) and there is nothing the US could do about it (nor would they be willing).
As China is a security member of the UN nothing would pass against her, and something in the 1.2 billion people with nuclear capabilities equation of China,makes me feel that they will not risk an open war against her...

In a conventional war with 10:1 odds at human recourses, 2 (maybe 3) aircraft carriers, strategic depth (parts of India are inaccessible by Pakistani air forces and not vice versa) and the general numbers of tanks airplanes as well as military infrastructure e.t.c. make it certain that India would win.

That is also the reason behind Pakistan nuclear arms. They were loosing at all the conventional scenarios...

Just a question,

If Pakistan loosed nuclear armaments on India, would that not lead to an military escalation?

Looking on the social side, the conflict in Kashmir is primarily a religious dispute.
Militant Muslims have begun to gain in number and support in Kashmir because of the conflict between the primarily Hindu population of India and the Muslim majority in the Kashmir region. So if Pakistan used nukes, would the next logical reasoning be India retaliates? From that point, can we reason that Militant Muslims all over the globe will increase their activity?

Also, looking from a global standpoint, wouldn't all the Nuclear Powers act to prevent such a thing from occurring, possibly to the point of challenging the sovereignty of India or Pakistan? (i.e. stationing troops to put pressure on the gov't to back down) Or something along those lines?:confused::confused:

Just a question,

If Pakistan loosed nuclear armaments on India, would that not lead to an military escalation?

Looking on the social side, the conflict in Kashmir is primarily a religious dispute.
Militant Muslims have begun to gain in number and support in Kashmir because of the conflict between the primarily Hindu population of India and the Muslim majority in the Kashmir region. So if Pakistan used nukes, would the next logical reasoning be India retaliates? From that point, can we reason that Militant Muslims all over the globe will increase their activity?

Also, looking from a global standpoint, wouldn't all the Nuclear Powers act to prevent such a thing from occurring, possibly to the point of challenging the sovereignty of India or Pakistan? (i.e. stationing troops to put pressure on the gov't to back down) Or something along those lines?:confused::confused:


If Pakistan used nukes India would use nukes. So it is unlikely that they would use nukes. There is simply to much to lose either side. If there were a nuclear exchange militant Muslims would not increase in the near aftermath of a nuclear exchange. The world would be focused on clean up including the Muslim Middle Eastern countries having to focus on the health of their own populations due to the radiation exposure from a dozen or more simultaneous nuclear detonations in Pakistan and India.

Just a question,

If Pakistan loosed nuclear armaments on India, would that not lead to an military escalation?

It's the MAD dogma (Mutual Assured Destruction) that the US had at the start of the Cold War in a smaller version. (It was believed then that the Russian Troops would break the Western European defenses in 48 hours without the use of nuclear weapons).

In simple terms if you start this both of us loose.

We are talking here about total war (not the Clausewitz scenarios), as there are territorial and religious disputes, and many unfinished conflicts and incidents that have fueled the hatred of both countries. If this ever starts this will not simply stop. As for the use of troops how many countries do you know that will be willing to send their troops in the middle of a possible nuclear holocaust?

Well since both countries have a nuclear arsenal then a simple conventional war is probably out of the question (unless they keep it at an incident level)

If they have a total war (nukes involved) then the likely winner is China (has many territorial disputes with India) and there is nothing the US could do about it (nor would they be willing).
As China is a security member of the UN nothing would pass against her, and something in the 1.2 billion people with nuclear capabilities equation of China,makes me feel that they will not risk an open war against her...

In a conventional war with 10:1 odds at human recourses, 2 (maybe 3) aircraft carriers, strategic depth (parts of India are inaccessible by Pakistani air forces and not vice versa) and the general numbers of tanks airplanes as well as military infrastructure e.t.c. make it certain that India would win.

That is also the reason behind Pakistan nuclear arms. They were loosing at all the conventional scenarios...

china and India are comparable in nuclear power. china has 160ish war heads India has 120ish. Also India has the advantage in that it has an aircraft carrier, and a over all better blue water navy.

china and India are comparable in nuclear power. china has 160ish war heads India has 120ish. Also India has the advantage in that it has an aircraft carrier, and a over all better blue water navy.

Where did you get that info? From the local newspaper or from the Chinese or Indian government homepage?
Unless your dad is some CIA superior and he is stupid enough to tell you about the firepower of Chinese and India, please don't talk uneccesary bullsh*t.

Where did you get that info? From the local newspaper or from the Chinese or Indian government homepage?
Unless your dad is some CIA superior and he is stupid enough to tell you about the firepower of Chinese and India, please don't talk uneccesary bullsh*t.

published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. though China being a member of the NPT is subject to inspection by International Atomic Energy Agency of the United Nations, so their numbers are pretty accurate.

India is not part of the NPT however and may have more then the 120 listed.

though to be honest the entire point of having nuclear weapons is so everyone knows you have them. do some searches on goggle I bet similar numbers with in 5 minutes.

no one wins a two sided nuclear war

India no questio jst to sheer army size and nukes oh and money

The only winners would be the people who had the sense to move far, far away.

And maybe the people who make bullets.

china and India are comparable in nuclear power. china has 160ish war heads India has 120ish. Also India has the advantage in that it has an aircraft carrier, and a over all better blue water navy.

True but we are talking about a scenario where India would be exhausted from a war against Pakistan, army s already engaged at a full scale war against Pakistan and the Nukes used by both sides. (apocalypse scenario)

Yes she does have an aircraft carrier but the Indian ocean is nowhere near any battle front... (The Russians used similar tactics at their war against Japan in 1905. They sent a fleet from their harbors in Europe to the far east to help save Vladivostok but until it reached Japan the war was already decided)

Also all these facts greed and death uses are public knowledge.
Usually 90% of the military secrets are secrets only in paper.
For example in my country we are not allowed to take pictures from inside our military installations but even with Google earth anybody can have an extremely accurate picture of them!)

China wins.

China will fight India to the last Pakistani.

Pakistan. Something about a Hindu country attacking a Muslim country makes me think of Iraq +1

You forget that India has the second largest Muslim population in the world... even larger than Pakistan's.

Buh? If anything, Pakistan's deployment capability is in advance of India's. At the moment they have a pretty serious chance of penetrating Indian airspace to a significant depth with nuclear-armed strike aircraft. The Pakistanis also have several dozen ballistic and cruise missiles capable of reaching hundreds, and in some cases thousands, of kilometres into India.

You are wrong.

The Pakistanis did not even have BVR until a few years back. They have a few F-16s (not sure how many are working after years of attrition and spares problems) that the IAF's Sukhois can take care of. Reason why their airforce sat out the Kargil war giving a unchallenged free hand to the Indian airforce.

Pakistan has a range of decent ballistic missiles. The cruise missile ("Babur") is an imported paintjob and I don't think they have numbers on it. India did a successful technology demonstrator on a missile defence network which they are working for deployment. With a reasonable success rate, it imposes Pakistan to maintain far more number of warheads for deterrence - which they don't have and can't sustain in the long run, even if they procure it from China.

Yes she does have an aircraft carrier but the Indian ocean is nowhere near any battle front...

The Karachi port handles a large volume of imports to Pakistan. I think they are making Gwadar as an alternate, but Karachi still handles, I think, like 70+%.

A blockade of Karachi will leave Pakistan without supplies. It was done before in the previous wars too.

In a world without nuclear weapons, of course India would win. But because Pakistan knows that, and we live in a world with nuclear weapons, no one wins. Regardless of what each nations "missile capabilities" and "missile defense" systems are, both would be seriously f**ked up with even one nuclear weapon hitting each side. There are regions in both states where the population is extremely dense, and a nuclear war would literally kills millions upon millions of people. So everyone loses.

But of course, this is one of the reasons we haven't seen a war for awhile.

In a world without nuclear weapons, of course India would win. But because Pakistan knows that, and we live in a world with nuclear weapons, no one wins. Regardless of what each nations "missile capabilities" and "missile defense" systems are, both would be seriously f**ked up with even one nuclear weapon hitting each side.

Luckily the paperwork involved, having to go through multiple departments for approval, on both sides to get a nuclear missile off means it would take weeks before it could happen, by which time a really good cricket match would be on and everyone would forget about the war.

True but we are talking about a scenario where India would be exhausted from a war against Pakistan, army s already engaged at a full scale war against Pakistan and the Nukes used by both sides. (apocalypse scenario)

Yes she does have an aircraft carrier but the Indian ocean is nowhere near any battle front... (The Russians used similar tactics at their war against Japan in 1905. They sent a fleet from their harbors in Europe to the far east to help save Vladivostok but until it reached Japan the war was already decided)

Also all these facts greed and death uses are public knowledge.
Usually 90% of the military secrets are secrets only in paper.
For example in my country we are not allowed to take pictures from inside our military installations but even with Google earth anybody can have an extremely accurate picture of them!)


In a conventional war Pakistan has shown it is incapable of even making the Indian army break a sweat. I doubt China would get involved if things went nuclear too little benefit since all the land they would want would glow green.

the Indian ocean is near the strait of Malacca, Indian navy cut that off for all vessels bound for China or under Chinese ownership and pretty much China has lost 70-90 % of its oil. It would become difficult for China to mount an offensive with out oil.

Also the difference from Indian ocean to south China sea is much smaller then from Baltic Sea to Sea of Japan. even more so with better propulsion today.

You are wrong.

The Pakistanis did not even have BVR until a few years back. They have a few F-16s (not sure how many are working after years of attrition and spares problems) that the IAF's Sukhois can take care of. Reason why their airforce sat out the Kargil war giving a unchallenged free hand to the Indian airforce.

Pakistan has a range of decent ballistic missiles. The cruise missile ("Babur") is an imported paintjob and I don't think they have numbers on it. India did a successful technology demonstrator on a missile defence network which they are working for deployment. With a reasonable success rate, it imposes Pakistan to maintain far more number of warheads for deterrence - which they don't have and can't sustain in the long run, even if they procure it from China.

Not that a lack of BVR capability would prevent Pakistani deployment of nuclear weapons...

For what it may matter, though, Pakistan has already received its first JF-17s, and is only going to get more. They received a couple more F-16s not long ago, and still expect to get more that they've been waiting a long time for. It's not just a matter of India having jets capable of beating F-16 in a fight, they only have to get one nuclear-armed aircraft within range of a given target on one occassion for a big fricking explosion to be the result.

I don't see what's wrong with Babur. As far as I'm aware it's broadly as capable as some versions of Tomahawk, and would be a pretty serious threat to India.

I was never disputing India's strength, but questioning the notion that Pakistan has essentially no deployment capability for its nuclear warheads. Clearly it has a pretty significant capability.

India, because that's where millions of Sikhs live an you don't want to get into a fight with them.:D

The Australian cricket team.

India, because that's where millions of Sikhs live an you don't want to get into a fight with them.:D

given any religion that dictates you must carry a weapon at all times and sue that weapon to defend others is bound to be full of some bad asses.