# Assuming India and Pakistan light each other up, what are the real world effects? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 26, 2002, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914 "2002-05-26T14:51:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2002, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914/21 "2002-05-28T13:58:38Z")
Well, since people are doing a good job covering this from the macro side, I’ll take it a bit more personally. I think a lot of people would start sleeping more poorly. I was an anxiety case about nuclear doomsday scenarios in my early teens; I’ll bet that would start up all over again for some people. And I’d become the kind of peace activist that even I find annoying. ---
**Author:** ![catdog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@catdog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catdog)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2002, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914/22 "2002-05-28T15:03:17Z")
I found these links at [Fark](http://www.fark.com) the past week and they seem relevant to this discussion. Click [here](http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992326) for an article from [NewScientist.com](http://NewScientist.com) that gave some numbers of what might happen. Also, click [here](http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A6820-2002Jan19¬Found=true) for a series of wargames that were role played at various American military colleges. Here’s some tidbits from the latter link: > [@](#): > > Since then, these war games have unfolded in much more lethal ways. An initial attack by Pakistan generally cuts the Indian link to Kashmir. India responds against the Pakistani units in India, but rushes its main forces toward Lahore – Pakistan’s second-largest city, and the country’s cultural and intellectual center. The Indian teams assume, probably correctly, that, as they advance, Pakistan would be forced to withdraw from its forward positions. > > As Indian units advance toward Lahore, which lies just 18 miles from the border post, Pakistan realizes the war is reaching a critical point. If the Indians take the city, they will split Pakistan in two and the Pakistani nuclear weapons will be of little or nouse. The Indians must be stopped and must be stopped quickly. > > In our scenarios, the only way for Pakistan to do that is by using nuclear weapons on India’s forces inside Pakistan. Strange as that sounds, using nuclear weapons on your own territory has some political advantages, and bears some similarities to NATO strategic options in place during the Cold War. The world would see it as a defensive measure. India would be seen as the aggressor. > > It takes three or four nuclear weapons to stop the massive Indian attack. Pakistani forces also suffer heavy casualties from the blasts and radiation, but the Indian advance is halted. also: > [@](#): > > The casualties from this exchange vary depending on the exact targets and the winds, but they would be measured in the millions. If Pakistan drops a relatively primitive nuclear weapon of 20 kilotons, 50 percent of the people living within a one-mile radius of the blast would die immediately. Fires would ignite as far away as two miles, and blast damage would extend to buildings three miles from the point of impact. People 3 1/2 miles away would suffer skin burns and radiation could extend hundreds of miles, depending on the weather. Kinda offtopic but if you want to see what kind of damage a nuke will do to any city in the US, click [here.](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb/sfeature/mapablast.html) ---
**Author:** ![jsleek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8dc957/32.png) [@jsleek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsleek)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2002, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914/23 "2002-05-28T17:44:39Z")
Doghouse says, “Pakistan is no longer of any use as an ally in the Afghanistan …” I am biased toward Pakistan. In Somalia the US was in a jam and Pakistan got our guys out. They didn’t want to do it. It had nothing to do with them, and they saved our butt. I feel the same way toward Canada, who saved a few from the US embassy in Iran. The US is like a clumsy giant who shows up at your wedding and falls on the cake. A couple of people will help the damn fool and bring a towel. The giant isn’t too bright, be he remembers his friends. ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2002, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914/24 "2002-05-28T18:17:11Z")
[sub]Forgive me, I can’t help myself[/sub] > [@](#): > > So, things that happen in India and Pakistan aren’t “Real World” This is the true story… of seven world leaders… picked to live in a house… to find out what happens… when people stop being polite… and start getting real. **The Real World!** On today’s episode, Chirac helps Blair confront his parents about his sexuality and Putin struggles with alcoholism during a wild night on the town in which an extasy-addled Bush must bail Jiang out of jail for indecent exposure. Also, the household is torn apart by a thermonuclear blast when Musharraf catches Vaypayee tampering with his toothbrush. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2002, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914/25 "2002-05-28T18:50:24Z")
> [@](#): > > Kabbes: A directly affected population 2-3 times the combined size of the EU and the US and he wants to know what the “real world” effects. God give me strength. > > barefoot: So, things that happen in India and Pakistan aren’t “Real World” ? Just so we’re clear, and I apologize if my phrasing is/was clumsy, or non- OED. The phrase “real world” used in the context of the OP means “concrete” manifestations (ie things we know will happen with a very high degree of probability) as opposed to more speculative projections. “Real world” used in this context is common (and possibly imprecise) US (and British I think) lingo speak when discussing or requesting information about said “concrete mainfestations”, and I can understand that other nationalities might possibly see it as some sort of ontological diss of their “reality”. This is not the intent. The phrase “real world” in this context is not mean to lessen or diminish the “reality” of a nuclear bomb exploding in your back yard. In the OP I’m simply asking for a list or discussion of highly probable, concrete things that will likely happen in _the rest of the world_ after the event occurs. I apologize if there was a misunderstanding. ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2002, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914/26 "2002-05-28T20:04:51Z")
**jsleek** : It could be argued that Pakistan’s government would hardly deserve such a betrayal–though the current government was installed after a bloodless coup that occurred after the Somalia incident. But keep in mind that preemptory action to take out Pakistan’s nukes and allowing India to pursue its goals through conventional means would save the lives of literally millions of peoples, a large proportion of them Pakistanis. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2002, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914/27 "2002-05-28T21:57:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Doghouse Reilly \* > But keep in mind that preemptory action to take out Pakistan’s nukes and allowing India to pursue its goals through conventional means would save the lives of literally millions of peoples, a large proportion of them Pakistanis. Conjecture. At any rate, though I tend to lean strongly in India’s direction, I’m not convinced that India’s motives are purely noble. There has always been, unfortunately, a strong element of aggressive nationalism in India’s approach to the Kashmir problem ( and of course the same goes and then some for Pakistan ). Further I strongly disagree that Pakistan is now superfluous to the United States’ campaign in Afghanistan, including the issue of nation-building there. A U.S. intervention before the fact would almost surely give tremendous street cred to Islamists and endanger Musharraf’s government. You may very well create the doomday scenario you are trying to avoid. Here are a couple of links on battlefield scenarios for a modern Indo-Pakistani war that I’ve posted before ( sadly that thread was lost during the “Time of Troubles” ). They are a few years old and don’t posit the current state of massive build-up ( which in my opinion make battlefield stasis even more likely ), but they are interesting none the less. Pakistani first-strike: [http://www.alphalink.com.au/~bjordan/INDvsPAK-2.html](http://www.alphalink.com.au/~bjordan/INDvsPAK-2.html) Indian first-strike: [http://www.alphalink.com.au/~bjordan/INDvsPAK.htm](http://www.alphalink.com.au/~bjordan/INDvsPAK.htm) IMO the U.S. needs to take an active role in diplomacy, but should maintain a strict neutrality militarily, unless something drastic happens ( and perhaps not even then, depending on the situation ). - Tamerlane ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914/28 "2002-05-30T02:21:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tamerlane \* > Conjecture. > > . . . . > Further I strongly disagree that Pakistan is now superfluous to the United States’ campaign in Afghanistan, including the issue of nation-building there. A U.S. intervention before the fact would almost surely give tremendous street cred to Islamists and endanger Musharraf’s government. You may very well create the doomday scenario you are trying to avoid. We may already be past that point, and Pakistan might not only be superfluous but positive threat to our mission. Doomsday? Well on its way. According to USA Today, [the present round of tensions between Pakistan and India are directly attributable to Al Qaeda](http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/05/29/taliban-kashmir.htm), with the goal of forcing Islamabad to remove troops hunting al Qaeda terrorists in western Pakistan and send them to fight India, and to undermine the government of Pakistan’s military dictator, Gen. Pervez Musharraf. The [New York Times](http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/29/international/asia/29STAN.html) also reports extensive Al Qaeda infiltration in Pakistan. And as for the US taking preemptive action to take out Pakistan’s nukes, today’s [OpinionJournal/Best of the Web Today](http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110001772) notes: > [@](#): > > Perhaps the most disturbing possibility is that of Musharraf being overthrown and replaced by a fundamentalist government openly sympathetic with al Qaeda–and armed with nukes. Last fall, The New Yorker’s [Seymour Hersh](http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?011105fa_FACT) reported that America has an “élite unit, operating under Pentagon control with C.I.A. assistance, whose mission it is to destroy nuclear facilities,” and which may be called into service in Pakistan. Admit Tamerlane, and everyone else, I’ve been on the right track all along, dating back to last October. We’re way past the point of conjecture, and my position is strongly supported by the evidence that is now emerging. ---
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914/29 "2002-05-30T03:11:10Z")
Well, **DR** , I missed that thread, but if you’ve ever heard of [www.stratfor.com](http://www.stratfor.com) (the stratfor is short for Strategic Forecasting), they speculated that the exact same scenario that you posted was the most likely outcome in that area. I’ve rarely read anything that sent actual chills up my spine; that article on that website did. It’s long gone from there now, but I copied it out and have it saved on my hard drive. I suppose I can’t repost the entire thing because it’s copyrighted material, but I’ll quote a few, um, strategic words: > [@](#): > > But it seems extremely likely that he [Bin Laden] would have tried to make his way into Pakistan, and if he personally didn’t go there, it seems certain that other members of the command cell, as well as less senior al Qaeda operatives, did make their way into the country. > There has been a great deal of speculation as to where they will go from Pakistan, although it is not even clear they would wish to leave the country at all. There are important sectors of the government, especially in the ISI, who are prepared to actively protect them and provide them with infrastructure for movement, communications and even training… > One indication of the true status of Pakistan policymaking occurred last week when Islamic operatives attacked India’s Parliament. It is difficult, from Musharraf’s point of view, to imagine a worse development right now. The last thing he wants is to give the Indians an excuse to attack in Kashmir… > The core of the problem is this: The next country the United States has to deal with if it wants to break al Qaeda is not Iraq or Somalia. It is Pakistan. The United States cannot begin the process of shutting down al Qaeda globally until their organization inside Pakistan is broken… > This means that unless the Pakistani government acts directly against al Qaeda, the United States must either begin to treat Pakistan as a hostile power or must abandon its strategic goals. The latter is impossible. It is also impossible to imagine a circumstance under which Musharraf will be able to act effectively to destroy al Qaeda’s presence in Pakistan. There are too many in Pakistan who would have to cooperate with this process who are unwilling and incapable of doing so… > The United States will need regional strategic support. India is ready and waiting…The United States will not abandon its fight, nor can it unilaterally act in Pakistan, although it can manipulate internal affairs as it did in Afghanistan. However, Pakistan is not Afghanistan, and such manipulation could have explosive results. And for India, this is the historical opportunity it has waited for since its founding. In another article they speculated that the U.S. would cooperate with India in a strike against Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. These ideas are out there; they constitute the worst case scenario that is being thought about even now as we debate this. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914/30 "2002-05-30T06:04:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Doghouse Reilly \* > We may already be past that point, Maybe. Maybe not. I see nothing definite here, myself. Last I checked Musharaff was still officially a U.S. ally and no fundamentalists have taken power. > [@](#): > > and Pakistan might not only be superfluous but positive threat to our mission. As above. “Might be”, not “is”. I’d substitute “may eventually be”, myself. > [@](#): > > Doomsday? Well on its way. Your humble opinion :). Not mine. My opinion is that _I don’t know_ what’s going to happen, so I’m not going to make any unqualified statements. > [@](#): > > According to USA Today, [the present round of tensions between Pakistan and India are directly attributable to Al Qaeda](http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/05/29/taliban-kashmir.htm), with the goal of forcing Islamabad to remove troops hunting al Qaeda terrorists in western Pakistan and send them to fight India, and to undermine the government of Pakistan’s military dictator, Gen. Pervez Musharraf. The [New York Times](http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/29/international/asia/29STAN.html) also reports extensive Al Qaeda infiltration in Pakistan. Quite possible. > [@](#): > > And as for the US taking preemptive action to take out Pakistan’s nukes, today’s [OpinionJournal/Best of the Web Today](http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110001772) notes: Don’t doubt this either. It’s a prudent precaution. Though whether any such action will occur remains to be seen. > [@](#): > > Admit Tamerlane, and everyone else, I’ve been on the right track all along, dating back to last October. I will admit nothing of the sort :). Your scenario of India and the United States allying to crush Pakistan and bring it to heel has yet to occur. I still consider it unlikely. Not _impossible_ mind you, but unlikely. If and when it occurs, I will concede you were prescient ;). > [@](#): > > We’re way past the point of conjecture, and my position is strongly supported by the evidence that is now emerging. Sorry, but no. We are still at the point of active conjecture and will be until this issue resolves itself, one way or another. I still think the _most likely_ scenarios, are, in order: 1.) Diplomatic solution, probably an uneasy one. Pressure is intense on all sides to reach one. 2.) Escalating border clashes continue, until a regular conventional war breaks out. Doesn’t last long, results are inconclusive ( but with Pakistan getting the worst of it ), diplomatic pressure ends it quickly. Little is resolved. 3.) Conventional war that drags on for many months. Same ultimate resolution as number #2, but with more destruction. 4.) Conventional war and someone ( almost certainly India ) makes a major breakthrough and compels a cessation of the war in their interest. 5.) Conventional war and someone makes a major breakthrough and/or someone flips out and a limited nuclear exchange occurs. Massive destruction and quick end to the war as threats poor in from the U.S. and Europe and both sides step back in horror. 6.) Limited nuclear exchange threatened by Pakistan and the U.S. decides to pull the plug by blowing the nukes. ( Note if India starts the missle-slinging, elite team or no, the U.S. is up shit-creek ). 6b.) Fundamentalist coup - U.S. blows Pakistani nukes, then pulls out. 7.) Fundamentalist coup removes Musharaff and your scenario is triggered. 8.) Nuclear exchange threatened, your scenario is triggered, while Musharaff is still in power. And down the line. I can also think of all sorts of other scenarios, including non-fundamentalist coups of various temperments occurring in Pakistan with varying results. The above list could be easily expanded to a 100 options and a thousand permutations, with many ties. But regardless, I still think your “India and U.S.( by proxy ) occupy Pakistan” scenario to be one of the less likely. Opinions, only opinions. I have been wrong once or twice ;). - Tamerlane ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2002, 8:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914/31 "2002-05-30T08:22:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tamerlane \* > But regardless, I still think your “India and U.S.( by proxy ) occupy Pakistan” scenario to be one of the less likely. I don’t think I ever predicted India would occupy Pakistan–just that it would take strong action to remove a potentially hostile regime next door and probably grab the rest of Kashmir (except for the Chinese-occupied bit) while the opportunity presented itself. Needless to say, I _hope_ that your predictions are correct, that a more peaceful (or at least less belligerent) solution is attained. But after seeing the WTC fall and the US successfully invade Afghanistan, I don’t know what lies outside the realm of probability any more. I do have a bad feeling regarding this business of Al Qaeda being active in Pakistan. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assuming-india-and-pakistan-light-each-other-up-what-are-the-real-world-effects/110914.md?page=1)