- Joined
- Jul 1, 2024
- Messages
- 4,135
- Likes
- 19,917
Destroying all of Pakistan’s nuclear bases would severely harm the country for generations. While it may not be as devastating as a direct nuclear strike, the consequences would still be extremely deadly. Pakistan is effectively sitting on a nuclear bomb—one that India can target.
For those 4 days for targetting ground targets only 7 our of the 8 points you gave are there.RoE on the first night was very, very restrictive. We did not target their AD, did not target their radar, very little EW, mostly defensive instead of offensive, which would have increased the chances of survivability, also, we did not engage until missiles were being fired at us. Since we could not conduct SEAD/DEAD, that increased the chances of us getting shot by the PAF, and almost all the victories they scored happened on the first day.
But things turned around on the last day, and Aatank macha diya because the RoE was to shoot anything that poses any level of threat.
But you are right, we did underestimate them in some areas, which I cannot disclose now. IAF had speculated that they had some capabilities, but overlooked them until the missiles rained down.
Rafale did its job very, very well. It breached their AD and EW very well, but it is not an indestructible aircraft; every aircraft is vulnerable to some threat, same goes for the F-35 and the F-22.
I can probably write 10 paragraphs on what the IAF should do in the short, medium, and long term, but Rafale or for that matter, any aircraft or any purchase that seems very expensive, is probably worth the cost. We have half a generation's worth of edge over Pakistan and near parity with China, at least in qualitative terms. But lessons need to be learned.
Our Air offensive on the last day was a textbook definition of a high-tempo air campaign, and all thanks go to the previous air chiefs and one exercise in particular, where we tested our ability to conduct long, drawn-out air operations for a longer period. Exercise Gaganshakti. Some squadrons flew over 40 combat sorties with A2G and A2A weaponry and some even shot down the paki aircraft but we cannot acknowledge them for the sake of the ceasefire and an offramp. We possibly flew over 200 combat missions just on the last day and over 600 in the 4 day long campaign. Some engagements saw over 100 aircraft taking potshots at each other with BVRAAMs. Pakis would shoot 2-4 BVR missile at one target at D-max while we would try to get them much deeper into the engagement cone.
I will discuss this in detail some other day when I have a much clearer picture, but all in all, in my view, the air op was an 8/10, had it not been stopped, it would have been a 9/10.
For all you know we may have struck them when they were busy transferring or mating those warheads or even filling up propellants onto the missiles already mated with warheads or and this is a good one, those warheads may not have been stored deep within the mountains for we're talking Paxtanis here .fake american+pakistani narrative against us .
nuclear warheads will be kept deep in the tunnels .
China is a different sort of beast, and we are not unprepared; it is just that we are underprepared. Can we take them on? Yes. But if they start throwing everything and the kitchen sink at us, then it will be very, very difficult to stop them.For those 4 days for targetting ground targets only 7 our of the 8 points you gave are there.
But there are bonus points which are technology loots the Pakis have gifted us.
Against China we will be better prepared after those missiles are researched upon.
Guys, listen to this, very informative. Will clear all doubts about the nuclear impact
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMp0tZUJU10
Honestly, this is too optimistic. I would love to believe this and it's definitely possible with how well the military tackled everything till government shackled them again but it's a bit too much.We destroyed majority of their nuclear arsenal. The last hit was on Chaghai which is their largest nuclear bomb storage facility. Now, it makes sense why we agreed to ceasefire. In reality though, there is no ceasefire. Operation Sindhoor is continuing. It looks like we have destroyed 80% of their nuclear arsenal.
@crazywithmath @niks_12 just finished watching the video and it was extremely informative. While it does answer some of my questions there is something that i just cannot understand.
By the generals own admission we have pretty much buried most of the pakistani nuclear warheads under the hills and its close to impossible to retrieve them now which begs the question why is the ceasefire so lopsided.
One one hand we have information that pakistan called up the Americans and explained that we would not be able to defend our nuclear assets due to current hostilities in with India and thus Americans intervened and hence the ceasefire.
That makes no sense if you have no assets to protect.
On the other hand we have video proof that we did strike their nuclear base.
It seems to me that the generals claim was extremely exaggerated in the sense that if we actually took out about 95% of their warheads we would simply not stop and the American would have nothing to be blackmailed with it.
View: https://x.com/kesaridhwaj/status/1921442191940997164?s=46
I find this analysis more in line with what happened and that brings me back to the question on how are we supposed to deal with pakistan on a permanent basis.
That is according to Major General Rajiv Narayanan.Honestly, this is too optimistic. I would love to believe this and it's definitely possible with how well the military tackled everything till government shackled them again but it's a bit too much.
What are you going off of here to reach the 80% figure?
@crazywithmath @niks_12 just finished watching the video and it was extremely informative. While it does answer some of my questions there is something that i just cannot understand.
By the generals own admission we have pretty much buried most of the pakistani nuclear warheads under the hills and its close to impossible to retrieve them now which begs the question why is the ceasefire so lopsided.
One one hand we have information that pakistan called up the Americans and explained that we would not be able to defend our nuclear assets due to current hostilities in with India and thus Americans intervened and hence the ceasefire.
That makes no sense if you have no assets to protect.
On the other hand we have video proof that we did strike their nuclear base.
It seems to me that the generals claim was extremely exaggerated in the sense that if we actually took out about 95% of their warheads we would simply not stop and the American would have nothing to be blackmailed with it.
View: https://x.com/kesaridhwaj/status/1921442191940997164?s=46
I find this analysis more in line with what happened and that brings me back to the question on how are we supposed to deal with pakistan on a permanent basis.
That is according to Major General Rajiv Narayanan.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMp0tZUJU10&t=1624s
@crazywithmath @niks_12 just finished watching the video and it was extremely informative. While it does answer some of my questions there is something that i just cannot understand.
By the generals own admission we have pretty much buried most of the pakistani nuclear warheads under the hills and its close to impossible to retrieve them now which begs the question why is the ceasefire so lopsided.