All countries in a war situation will threaten to use full capability to defend themselves - I can guarantee that Saddam will be warned of similar devastating consequences if he uses chemical weapons on US troops.
India's withdrawal of the troops from the border pretty much points to the fact that nuclear threat helped avoid a war.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Mr Xtreme: *
All countries in a war situation will threaten to use full capability to defend themselves - I can guarantee that Saddam will be warned of similar devastating consequences if he uses chemical weapons on US troops.
India's withdrawal of the troops from the border pretty much points to the fact that nuclear threat helped avoid a war.
[/QUOTE]
india dose not have invade stop inflitration or attacks on civilians
or temples . shelling from loc will be enough and the damage to pakistan should not exceed what you do to us.
Mr.Extreme.
"India's withdrawal of the troops from the border pretty much points to the fact that nuclear threat helped avoid a war. "
Nuclear threats are very real, but I need to ask this simple question,
will the fat generals, getting fatter on public money, be ready to sacrifice their good lives for some Kashmiri ??
I mean, look at the Fauji foundation, most of the top generals have
1. Prime property.
2. Plum postings.
3. Kids studying in Western countries.
Will they throw away the good life for some stupid nuke war ??
Curios.
here is another view about pakistan’s reaction to troop deployment
India made a big show of being ready for war. Gen. Musharraf was sufficiently impressed by the Indian build-up to announce a crackdown on extremist parties and declare a chocolate war on seminaries (madressahs) imparting religious instruction.
It was that and American pressure. The United States wanted Musharraf to address Indian concerns about ‘cross-border infiltration’ which in a manner of speaking he did. Training camps being run by some of the jihadi parties were shifted or closed. When the Godhra incident took place followed by the Muslim pogrom in Gujarat, Pakistan made no great noise about it. Which was all in line with the prudence and caution Pakistan seemed to have adopted last summer. The danger having passed, Gen. Musharraf is back to talking tough
Pakistan warns its nuclear rival India
MUNIR AHMAD
Associated Press
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - Pakistan on Wednesday said it would teach an unforgettable lesson to nuclear
rival India if it ever launched a nuclear attack, but insisted that Islamabad still had no desire for a conflict in the region.
Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed made the comments in response to a claim by the Indian defense minister that India could absorb a nuclear hit and annihilate Pakistan in return.
“Pakistan is a reality and cannot be wiped out through nuclear weapons … we know how to defend ourselves, and respond to the nefarious designs of the enemy,” Ahmed said.
“India will be taught an unforgettable lesson if they ever launch a nuclear attack on Pakistan,” he added. “Our response will be a historic lesson for them if they used the nuclear option.”
Tension between Pakistan and India rose sharply last year after a Dec. 13, 2001 attack on India’s parliament, which India blamed on Pakistan-based militants. Both counties sent hundreds of thousands of troops to the border before the situation improved amid intense international pressure.
Though they now say they are pulling back, the countries have continued to launch verbal attacks on each other.
On Tuesday, Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes criticized Pakistan for its harsh rhetoric, and issued a chilling prediction of his own on how a bilateral nuclear war would turn out.
“We can take a bomb or two or more … but when we respond there will be no Pakistan,” Fernandes told the Press Trust of India news agency.
India and Pakistan have fought three wars, two over the disputed Himalayan province of Kashmir, since gaining independence from Britain in 1947. They conducted tit-for-tat nuclear tests in 1998.
Both nuclear rivals signed an agreement that bars them from attacking each other’s nuclear facilities, and each has pledged they would not be the first to start a nuclear exchange, a promise reiterated by Ahmed.
“We will not initiate nuclear war, and this is our policy,” Ahmed said. “We want good relations with them … we want to live peacefully with India, but the problem is that they keep making irresponsible and hostile statements.”
The current exchange of hostile words began last month when Pakistan’s President Gen. Pervez Musharraf made a speech in the southern city of Karachi saying he had personally warned the Indian prime minister during last year’s hostilities to “not expect a conventional war from Pakistan” - an apparent reference to a nuclear confrontation.
His spokesman quickly denied that the president was referring to nuclear weapons, and Musharraf said later that he had meant that some 150,000 retired Pakistani military personnel living in Kashmir would have risen up against any Indian aggression.
Source: Miami.com (AP)
"We will not initiate nuclear war, and this is our policy," Ahmed said
Isn't he lying. it is India that has 'no first use' policy, i.e. will not initiate nuclear war whereas Pakistan has always claimed and reserves the right to respond by going nuclear even in response to a conventional warfare.
PT said : Yeah Man, this kinda BS always from The Times of India amuses you, no wonder.
PT, I hope you are keeping tab on various other news sources saying the same thing. Add the one from Bilal tarar in the list. Cheers.
Here is a quote from his post which you were not believing when shown from Time of India and then from The Nation :
His spokesman quickly denied that the president was referring to nuclear weapons, and Musharraf said later that he had meant that some 150,000 retired Pakistani military personnel living in Kashmir would have risen up against any Indian aggression.
They must be oldies from ISI/Jihadis, because military personnel live life comfortably in their plush bungalows after retirement in Pakistan.